This article estimates the regional economic effects of public research activities. In order to identify the underlying transmission channels from knowledge creation to the regional environment, the empirical identification strategy goes beyond traditional partial effects analyses and studies the complex linkages between public research, innovativeness, and regional development on the basis of a structural vector autoregressive model. A particular focus is thereby set on assessing whether the effects of local public research activity differ by the type of research actors (universities, technical colleges, and public research institutes). The empirical results indicate that an increase in the volume of (public) third-party funding to technical colleges is associated with a rise in the regional investment and employment rate as well as the human capital stock. Increasing public third-party funding to both universities and technical colleges positively affects the regional patent activity, the employment rate, and per workforce output. In comparison, the empirical results provide limited evidence for regional economic effects stemming from an increase in local knowledge creation measured in terms of scientific publications. Here, only variations in the publication rate of public research institutes can be linked to positive private sector investment and employment effects.
AghionP.HowittP.1992. “A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction.” Econometrica60:323–51. doi: 10.2307/2951599.
2.
ArrowK. J.1962. “The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing.” The Review of Economic Studies29:155–73. doi: 10.2307/2295952.
3.
AudretschD. B.LehmannE. E.. 2005. “Does the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship Hold for Regions?” Research Policy34:1191–202. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.012.
4.
AudretschD. B.LehmannE. E.WarningS.. 2005. “University Spillovers and New Firm Location.” Research Policy34:1113–22. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.009.
5.
AuranenO.NieminenM.. 2010. “University Research Funding and Publication Performance—An International Comparison.” Research Policy39:822–34. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.003.
6.
BarraC.MaiettaO. W.ZottiR.. 2019. “Academic Excellence, Local Knowledge Spillovers and Innovation in Europe.” Regional Studies53:1058–69. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1540865.
BeiseM.StahlH.. 1999. “Public Research and Industrial Innovations in Germany.” Research Policy28:397–422. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00126-7.
9.
BleaneyM. F.BinksM. R.GreenawayD.ReedG. V.WhynesD. K.. 1992. “What Does a University Add to Its Local Economy?” Applied Economics24:305–11. doi: 10.1080/00036849200000143.
10.
BMBF (Federal Ministry of Education and Research). 2016a. “Bundesbericht Forschung und Innovation 2016—Forschungs- und innovationspolitische Ziele und Maßnahmen.” Accessed November 29, 2017. https://www.bmbf.de/pub/Bufi_2016_Hauptband.pdf.
11.
BMBF (Federal Ministry of Education and Research). 2016b. “Daten und Fakten zum deutschen Forschungs- und Innovationssystem—Bundesbericht Forschung und Innovation 2016—Ergänzungsband 1.” Accessed November 29, 2017. https://www.bmbf.de/pub/Bufi_2016_Ergaenzungsband_1.pdf.
12.
BoschmaR.2005. “Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment.” Regional Studies39:61–74. doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320887.
13.
BraczykH.-J.CookeP.HeidenreichM.. 2004. Regional Innovation Systems: The Role of Governances in a Globalized World. London, UK: Routledge.
14.
Di GiacintoV.2010. “On Vector Autoregressive Modelling in Space and Time.” Journal of Geographical Systems12:125–54. doi: 10.1007/s10109-010-0116-6.
15.
DruckerJ.GoldsteinH.. 2007. “Assessing the Regional Economic Development Impacts of Universities: A Review of Current Approaches.” International Regional Science Review30:20–46. doi: 10.1177%2F0160017606296731.
16.
EberleJ.BrennerT.MitzeT.. 2019. “A Look behind the Curtain: Measuring the Complex Economic Effects of Regional Structural Funds in Germany.” Papers in Regional Science98:701–35. doi: 10.1111/pirs.12373.
17.
ElhorstJ. P.2012. “Dynamic Spatial Panels: Models, Methods, and Inferences.” Journal of Geographical Systems14:5–28. doi: 10.1007/s10109-011-0158-4.
18.
EveraertG.PozziL.. 2007. “Bootstrap-based Bias Correction for Dynamic Panels.” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control31:1160–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jedc.2006.04.006.
19.
FaggianA.McCannP.. 2009. “Human Capital, Graduate Migration and Innovation in British Regions.” Cambridge Journal of Economics33:317–33. doi: 10.1093/cje/ben042.
20.
FloraxR.1992. The University: A Regional Booster? Economic Impacts of Academic Knowledge Infrastructure. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.
21.
FloraxR.FolmerH.. 1992. “Knowledge Impacts of Universities on Industry: An Aggregate Simultaneous Investment Model.” Journal of Regional Science32:437–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.1992.tb00199.x.
22.
FritschM.SchwirtenC.. 1999. “Enterprise-University Co-operation and the Role of Public Research Institutions in Regional Innovation Systems.” Industry and Innovation6:69–83. doi: 10.1080/13662719900000005.
23.
FritschM.SlavtchevV.. 2007. “Universities and Innovation in Space.” Industry and Innovation14:201–18. doi: 10.1080/13662710701253466.
24.
Garrido-YserteR.Gallo-RiveraM. T.. 2010. “The Impact of the University upon Local Economy: Three Methods to Estimate Demand-side Effects.” Annals of Regional Science44:39–67. doi: 10.1007/s00168-008-0243-x.
25.
GloriusB.SchultzA.. 2002. “Die Martin-Luther-Universität als regionaler Wirtschaftsfaktor.” In Hallesche Diskussionsbeiträge zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeographie Heft 1, edited by FriedrichK.ThomiW., 1–34. Halle, Germany: Selbstverlag des Instituts für Geographie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg.
26.
GlücklerJ.KönigK.. 2011. “Die regionalwirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Universität Heidelberg.” In Wissenschaftsatlas der Universität Heidelberg: 625 Jahre Ruperto Carola, edited by MeusburgerP.SchuchT., 344–47. Knittlingen, Germany: Bibliotheca Palatina Faksimile Verlag.
27.
GoldsteinH.MaierG.LugerM.. 1995. “The University as an Instrument for Economic and Business Development: U.S. and European Comparisons.” In Emerging Patterns of Social Demand and University Reform: Through a Glass Darkly, edited by DillD.SpornB., 105–33. Oxford: Pergamon.
28.
HooverK. D.2012. “Economic Theory and Causal Inference.” In Handbook on the Philosophy of Science. Philosophy of Economics, edited by MäkiU., vol. 13,89–113. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-51676-3.50004-X.
29.
ImK. S.PesaranM. H.ShinY.. 2003. “Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels.” Journal of Econometrics115:53–74. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7.
30.
JaffeA. B.1989. “Real Effects of Academic Research.” The American Economic Review79:957–70. Accessed August 07, 2019. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1831431.
31.
KeatingJ. W.1992. “Structural Approaches to Vector Autoregressions.” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review74:37–57.
32.
LoveI.ZicchinoL.. 2006. “Financial Development and Dynamic Investment Behavior: Evidence from Panel VAR.” The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance46:190–210. doi: 10.1016/j.qref.2005.11.007.
33.
LucasR. E.1988. “On the Mechanics of Economic Development.” Journal of Monetary Economics22:3–42. doi: 10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7.
34.
LütkepohlH.2005. New Introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
35.
MaiettaO. W.2015. “Determinants of University–Firm R&D Collaboration and Its Impact on Innovation: A Perspective from a Low-tech Industry.” Research Policy44:1341–59. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.03.006.
36.
MaiettaO. W.BarraC.ZottiR.. 2017. “Innovation and University–Firm R&D Collaboration in the European Food and Drink Industry.” Journal of Agricultural Economics68:749–80. doi: 10.1111/1477-9552.12208.
37.
MankiwN. G.RomerD.WeilD. N.. 1992. “A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics107:407–37. doi: 10.2307/2118477.
38.
MitzeT.Dall SchmidtT.RauhutD.KangasharjuA.. 2018. “Ageing Shocks and Short-run Regional Labour Market Dynamics in a Spatial Panel VAR Approach.” Applied Economics50:870–90. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2017.1346360.
39.
MonteiroJ. A.2010. “Pollution Havens: A Spatial Vector Auto-regression Approach.” In Essays on Investments and Environment: A Spatial Econometrics Perspective, edited by MonteiroJ. A.PhD diss., Faculty of Economics at the University of Neuchatel, Neuchatel, Switzerland.
40.
NickellS.1981. “Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects.” Econometrica49:1417–26. doi: 10.2307/1911408.
41.
NiebuhrA.GranatoN.HaasA.HamannS.. 2012. “Does Labour Mobility Reduce Disparities between Regional Labour Markets in Germany?” Regional Studies46:841–58. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2010.532118.
42.
RamajoJ.MárquezM. A.HewingsG. J. D.. 2017. “Spatio-temporal Analysis of Regional Systems: A Multiregional Spatial Vector Autoregressive Model for Spain.” International Regional Science Review40:75–96. doi: 10.1177/0160017615571586.
43.
RickmanD. S.2010. “Modern Macroeconomics and Regional Economic Modeling.” Journal of Regional Science50:23–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00647.x.
44.
Rivera-BatizL. A.RomerP. M.. 1991. “Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics106:531–55. doi: 10.2307/2937946.
45.
RomerP. M.1990. “Endogenous Technological Change.” Journal of Political Economy98:71–102. doi: 10.1086/261725.
46.
SchubertT.KrollH.. 2013. “Endbericht zum Projekt ‘Hochschulen als regionaler Wirtschaftsfaktor’.” Studie im Auftrag von Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft, Fraunhofer ISI, Karlsruhe, Germany.
47.
SolowR. M.1956. “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics70:65–94. doi: 10.2307/1884513.
48.
SpehlH.SauerbornK.SauerM.BensonL.FeserH. D.von MalottkiC.SchulzeP. M.FlohrM.. 2005. Regionalwirtschaftliche Wirkungen der Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen in Rheinland-Pfalz—Phase I—Wertschöpfungs-, Einkommens- und Beschäftigungseffekte durch Bau und Betrieb der Einrichtungen—Langfassung. Trier, Germany.
49.
SpehlH.SauerbornK.SauerM.MaurerJ.FeserH. D.von MalottkiC.SchmittR.SchulzeP. M.FlohrM.. 2007. Regionalwirtschaftliche Wirkungen der Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen in Rheinland-Pfalz—Phase II—Effekte wissenschaftlicher Einrichtungen auf Humankapital, Gründungen, Wissens- und Technologietransfer sowie Wachstum und Innovation (Leistungsabgabe)—Langfassung. Trier, Germany.
50.
SuedekumJ.2005. “Increasing Returns and Spatial Unemployment Disparities.” Papers in Regional Science84:159–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1435-5957.2005.00011.x.
51.
VargaA.2000. “Local Academic Knowledge Transfers and the Concentration of Economic Activity.” Journal of Regional Science40:289–309. doi: 10.1111/0022-4146.00175.
52.
VargaA.HorváthM.. 2015. “Regional Knowledge Production Function Analysis.” In Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Economic Geography, edited by KarlssonC.AnderssonM.NormanT., 513–43. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. doi: 10.4337/9780857932679.
53.
VargaA.2017. “Place-based, Spatially Blind, or Both? Challenges in Estimating the Impacts of Modern Development Policies: The Case of the GMR Policy Impact Modeling Approach.” International Regional Science Review40:12–37. doi: 10.1177/0160017615571587.
54.
WooldridgeJ. M.2012. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 5th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
