1990
DOI: 10.1016/0166-0462(90)90016-v
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Knowledge and communications infrastructure and regional economic change

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Andersson et al (1990) analyze the relationship between the supply of infrastructure and the productivity of the regions as macroeconomic entities. They conclude that the most important infrastructure factors are related to transportation, information and communication possibilities (accessibility) as well as research and development capacity.…”
Section: The Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Andersson et al (1990) analyze the relationship between the supply of infrastructure and the productivity of the regions as macroeconomic entities. They conclude that the most important infrastructure factors are related to transportation, information and communication possibilities (accessibility) as well as research and development capacity.…”
Section: The Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The forest sector usually benefits from this policy greatly. For example, factors such as transport costs, communications, access to R & D activities and labor skills, have all been regarded as factors influencing development (Andersson et al 1990, Vickerman 1991, although the role of urban development has been the main concern during the recent years. Infrastructural factors such as roads and waterways are crucial for remote resource extraction, and improved telecommunications create new management opportunities.…”
Section: Supply-side Policymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implied by the row-normalization of the weight matrix, a spatial lag term indicates the average level of the lagged variable in the neighboring units of a geographic observation. 17 Literally, this weight matrix specifies the membership of neighborhood sets, which may be defined on the basis of shared boundaries or distance bands within which the geographical centroids of neighbors lie. Because no correlation is specified between the error term and the independent variables, OLS estimators for ( 1 ) retain their desirable properties and are identical to the maximum likelihood (ML) estimators.…”
Section: Spatial Dependence Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%