We show how increasing returns to scale in urban scaling can artificially emerge, systematically and predictably, without any sorting or positive externalities. We employ a model where individual productivities are independent and identically distributed lognormal random variables across all cities. We use extreme value theory to demonstrate analytically the paradoxical emergence of increasing returns to scale when the variance of log-productivity is larger than twice the log-size of the population size of the smallest city in a cross-sectional regression. Our contributions are to derive an analytical prediction for the artificial scaling exponent arising from this mechanism and to develop a simple statistical test to try to tell whether a given estimate is real or an artifact. Our analytical results are validated analyzing simulations and real microdata of wages across municipalities in Colombia. We show how an artificial scaling exponent emerges in the Colombian data when the sizes of random samples of workers per municipality are 1% or less of their total size.
AitchisonJBrownJAC (1957) The Lognormal Distribution with Special Reference to Its Uses in Economics. University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics, Monograph 5.
London:
Cambridge University Press.
2.
AnderssonMKlaessonJLarssonJP (2016)
How local are spatial density externalities? Neighbourhood effects in agglomeration economies. Regional Studies50(6): 1082–1095.
3.
BattyM (2013) The New Science of Cities.
Cambridge:
MIT Press.
4.
BehrensKDurantonGRobert-NicoudF (2014)
Productive cities: Sorting, selection, and agglomeration. Journal of Political Economy122(3): 507–553.
5.
BehrensKRobert-NicoudF (2015) Chapter 4 – Agglomeration theory with heterogeneous agents. In: Gilles DurantonJVHStrangeWC (eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Vol.
5.
Amsterdam:
Elsevier, pp.171–245.
6.
BettencourtLWestG (2010)
A unified theory of urban living. Nature467(7318): 912.
7.
BettencourtLMA (2013)
The origins of scaling in cities. Science340: 1438.
8.
BettencourtLMALoboJHelbingD, et al. (2007)
Growth, innovation, scaling, and the pace of life in cities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA104(17): 7301–7306.
9.
ClausetA, ShaliziCR and NewmanMEJ. (2009)
Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data. SIAM Review51(4): 661–703.
10.
CloggCCPetkovaEHaritouA (1995)
Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology100(5): 1261–1293.
CombesPPDurantonGGobillonL, et al. (2012)
The productivity advantages of large cities: Distinguishing agglomeration from firm selection. Econometrica80(6): 2543–2594.
13.
CombesPPGobillonL (2015) Chapter 5 – The empirics of agglomeration economies. In: Gilles DurantonJVHStrangeWC (eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Vol.
5.
Amsterdam:
Elsevier, pp.247–348.
14.
DurantonGPugaD (2004) Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies. In: Henderson JV and Thisse JF (eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Vol.
4. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp.2063–2117.
15.
EeckhoutJKircherP (2018)
Assortative matching with large firms. Econometrica86(1): 85–132.
16.
EeckhoutJPinheiroRSchmidheinyK (2014)
Spatial sorting. Journal of Political Economy122(3): 554–620.
17.
EmbrechtsPKlüppelbergCMikoschT (2013) Modelling Extremal Events: For Insurance and Finance. Vol.
33.
Berlin:
Springer Science & Business Media.
18.
GabaixX (2009)
Power laws in economics and finance. Annual Review of Economics1: 255–293.
19.
GlaeserELMaréDC (2001)
Cities and skills. Journal of Labor Economics19(2): 316–342.
20.
Gomez-LievanoAPatterson-LombaOHausmannR (2016)
Explaining the prevalence, scaling and variance of urban phenomena. Nature Human Behaviour1: 6.
21.
Gomez-LievanoAYounHBettencourtLMA (2012)
The statistics of urban scaling and their connection to Zipf’s law. PLoS One7(7): e40393.
22.
GouldSJ (1996) Full House: The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
23.
HollisterMN (2004)
Does firm size matter anymore? The new economy and firm size wage effects. American Sociological Review69(5): 659–679.
24.
KeuschniggM (2019) Scaling trajectories of cities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 116(28): 13759–13761.
25.
KeuschniggMMutganSHedströmP (2019)
Urban scaling and the regional divide. Science Advances5(1): eaav0042.
26.
KleiberCKotzS (2003) Statistical Size Distributions in Economics and Actuarial Sciences. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
27.
LeadbetterMRLindgrenGRootzénH (1983) Extremes and Related Properties of Random Sequences and Processes.
Berlin:
Springer.
28.
LehmerFMöllerJ (2010)
Interrelations between the urban wage premium and firm-size wage differentials: A microdata cohort analysis for Germany. The Annals of Regional Science45(1): 31–53.
29.
LeitãoJCMiottoJMGerlachM, et al. (2016)
Is this scaling nonlinear?Royal Society Open Science3(7): 150649.
30.
MantovaniMCRibeiroHVMoroMV, et al. (2011)
Scaling laws and universality in the choice of election candidates. EPL (Europhysics Letters)96(4): 48001.
31.
MartinezF (2016)
Cities power laws: The stochastic scaling factor. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design43(2): 257–275.
32.
MeloPCGrahamDJNolandRB (2009)
A meta-analysis of estimates of urban agglomeration economies. Regional Science and Urban Economics39(3): 332–342.
33.
MincerJ (1970)
The distribution of labor incomes: A survey with special reference to the human capital approach. Journal of Economic Literature8(1): 1–26.
34.
OiWYIdsonTL (1999) Firm size and wages. In: Ashenfelter O and Card D (eds) Handbook of Labor Economics. Vol.
3, Chapter 33. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp.2165–2214.
35.
PaternosterRBrameRMazerolleP, et al. (1998)
Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology36(4): 859–866.
36.
PumainDPaulusFVacchiani-MarcuzzoC, et al. (2006) An evolutionary theory for interpreting urban scaling laws. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography [Online], Systems, Modelling, Geostatistics, 343, pp.1–20. Available at: http://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/2519.
37.
RicePVenablesAJPatacchiniE (2006)
Spatial determinants of productivity: Analysis for the regions of Great Britain. Regional Science and Urban Economics36(6): 727–752.
38.
RosenthalSSStrangeWC (2004) Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies. In: Henderson JV and Thisse JF (eds) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Vol. 4. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp.2119–2171.
39.
RoyAD (1950)
The distribution of earnings and of individual output. The Economic Journal60(239): 489–505.
40.
SaichevAIMalevergneYSornetteD (2009) Theory of Zipf’s Law and Beyond. Vol.
632.
Berlin:
Springer Science & Business Media.
41.
ShockleyW (1957)
On the statistics of individual variations of productivity in research laboratories. Proceedings of the IRE45: 279–290.
42.
StrumskyDLoboJMellanderC (2019) As different as night and day: Scaling analysis of Swedish urban areas and regional labor markets. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. Epub ahead of print July 12, 2019. DOI: 10.1177/2399808319861974.
43.
SveikauskasL (1975)
The productivity of cities. The Quarterly Journal of Economics89(3): 393–413.
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.
