Marshall's Scale Economies
December 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-17
Abstract
In this paper, using panel data, I estimate plant level production functions that include variables that allow for two types of scale externalities which plants experie nce in their local industrial environments. First are externalities from other plants in the same industry locally, usually called localization economies or, in a dynamic context, Marshall, Arrow, Romer [MAR] economies. Second are externalities from the scale or diversity of local economic activity outside the own industry involving some type of cross- fertilization, usually called urbanization economies or, in a dynamic context, Jacobs economies. Estimating production functions for plants in high tech industries and in capital goods, or machinery industries, I find that local own industry scale externalities, as measured specifically by the count of other own industry plants locally, have strong productivity effects in high tech but not machinery industries. I find evidence that single plant firms both benefit more from and generate greater external benefits than corporate plants. On timing, I find evidence that high tech single plant firms benefit from the scale of past own industry activity, as well as current activity. I find no evidence of urbanization economies from the diversity of local economic activity outside the own industry and limited evidence of urbanization economies from the overall scale of local economic activity.
Document Tags and Keywords
Keywords
Keywords are automatically generated using KeyBERT, a powerful and innovative
keyword extraction tool that utilizes BERT embeddings to ensure high-quality and contextually relevant
keywords.
By analyzing the content of working papers, KeyBERT identifies terms and phrases that capture the essence of the
text, highlighting the most significant topics and trends. This approach not only enhances searchability but
provides connections that go beyond potentially domain-specific author-defined keywords.
:
production,
manufacturing,
industrial,
sector,
regional,
diversification,
specialization,
metropolitan,
area,
geographically,
industry concentration,
locality,
textile,
urbanization,
city,
externality,
outsourcing,
amenity,
outsourced
Tags
Tags are automatically generated using a pretrained language model from spaCy, which excels at
several tasks, including entity tagging.
The model is able to label words and phrases by part-of-speech,
including "organizations." By filtering for frequent words and phrases labeled as "organizations", papers are
identified to contain references to specific institutions, datasets, and other organizations.
:
Metropolitan Statistical Area,
Annual Survey of Manufactures,
Standard Industrial Classification,
Longitudinal Research Database,
Center for Economic Studies,
Ordinary Least Squares,
Total Factor Productivity,
Bureau of Economic Analysis,
County Business Patterns,
Retirement History Survey,
Generalized Method of Moments,
Research Data Center
Similar Working Papers
Similarity between working papers are determined by an unsupervised neural
network model
know as Doc2Vec.
Doc2Vec is a model that represents entire documents as fixed-length vectors, allowing for the
capture of semantic meaning in a way that relates to the context of words within the document. The model learns to
associate a unique vector with each document while simultaneously learning word vectors, enabling tasks such as
document classification, clustering, and similarity detection by preserving the order and structure of words. The
document vectors are compared using cosine similarity/distance to determine the most similar working papers.
Papers identified with 🔥 are in the top 20% of similarity.
The 10 most similar working papers to the working paper 'Marshall's Scale Economies' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperWhere Do Manufacturing Firms Locate Their Headquarters?
October 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-17
Firms' headquarters [HQ] support their production activity, by gathering information and outsourcing business services, as well as, managing, evaluating, and coordinating internal firm activities. In search of locations for these functions, firms often separate the HQ function physically from their production facilities and construct stand-alone HQs. By locating its HQ in a large, service oriented metro area away from its production facilities, a firm may be better able to out-source service functions in that local metro market and also to gather information about market conditions for their products. However if the firm locates the HQ away from its production activity, that increases the coordination costs in managing plant activities. In this paper we empirically analyze the trade-off of these two considerations.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Agglomeration of Headquarters
February 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-02
This paper uses a micro data set on auxiliary establishments from 1977 to 1997 in order to investigate the determinants of headquarter agglomerations and the underlying economic base of many larger metro areas. The significance of headquarters in large urban settings is their ability to facilitate the spatial separation of their white collar activities from remote production plants. The results show that separation benefits headquarters in two main ways: the availability of di?erentiated local service input suppliers and the scale of other headquarter activity nearby. A wide diversity of local service options allows the headquarters to better match their various needs with specific experts producing service inputs from whom they learn, which improves their productivity. Headquarters also benefit from other headquarter neighbors, although such marginal scale benefits seem to diminish as local scale rises.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Spatial Extent of Agglomeration Economies: Evidence from Three U.S. Manufacturing Industries
January 2012
Working Paper Number:
CES-12-01
The spatial extent of localized agglomeration economies constitutes one of the central current questions in regional science. It is crucial for understanding firm location decisions and for assessing the influence of proximity in shaping spatial patterns of economic activity, yet clear-cut answers are difficult to come by. Theoretical work often fails to define or specify the spatial dimension of agglomeration phenomena. Existing empirical evidence is far from consistent. Most sources of data on economic performance do not supply micro-level information containing usable geographic locations. This paper provides evidence of the distances across which distinct sources of agglomeration economies generate benefits for plants belonging to three manufacturing industries in the United States. Confidential data from the Longitudinal Research Database of the United States Census Bureau are used to estimate cross-sectional production function systems at the establishment level for three contrasting industries in three different years. Along with relevant establishment, industry, and regional characteristics, the production functions include variables that indicate the local availability of potential labor and supply pools and knowledge spillovers. Information on individual plant locations at the county scale permits spatial differentiation of the agglomeration variables within geographic regions. Multiple distance decay profiles are investigated in order to explore how modifying the operationalization of proximity affects indicated patterns of agglomeration externalities and interfirm interactions. The results imply that industry characteristics are at least as important as the type of externality mechanism in determining the spatial pattern of agglomeration benefits. The research methods borrow from earlier work by the author that examines the relationships between regional industrial structure and manufacturing production.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperSpatial Organization of Firms: The Decision to Split Production and Administration
February 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-03
A firm's production activities are often supported by non-production activities. Among these activities are administrative units including headquarters, which process information both within and between firms. Often firms physically separate such administrative units from their production activities and create stand alone Central Administrative Offices (CAO). However, having its activities in multiple locations potentially imposes significant internal firm face-to-face communication costs. What types of firms are more likely to separate out such functions? If firms do separate administration and production, where do they place CAOs and why? How often do firms open and close, or relocate CAOs? This paper documents such firms' decisions on their spatial organization by using micro-level data from the U.S. Census Bureau.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperA Flexible Test for Agglomeration Economies in Two U.S. Manufacturing Industries
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-14
This paper uses the inverse input demand function framework of Kim (1992) to test for economies of industry and urban size in two U.S. manufacturing sectors of differing technology intensity: farm and garden machinery (SIC 352) and measuring and controlling devices (SIC 382). The inverse input demand framework permits the estimation of the production function jointly with a set of cost shares without the imposition of prior economic restrictions. Tests using plant-level data suggest the presence of population scale (urbanization) economies in the moderate- to low-technology farm and garden machinery sector and industry scale (localization) economies in the higher technology measuring and controlling devices sector. The efficiency and generality of the inverse input demand approach are particularly appropriate for micro-level studies of agglomeration economies where prior assumptions regarding homogeneity and homotheticity are less appropriate.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTracing the Sources of Local External Economies
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-13
In a cross-sectional establishment-level analysis using confidential secondary data, I evaluate the influence of commonly postulated sources of localized external economies'supplier access, labor pools, and knowledge spillovers'on the productivity of two U.S. manufacturing sectors (farm and garden machinery and measuring and controlling devices). Measures incorporating different distance decay specifications provide evidence of the spatial extent of the various externality sources. Chinitz's (1961) hypothesis of the link between local industrial organization and agglomeration economies is also investigated. The results show evidence of labor pooling economies and university-linked knowledge spillovers in the case of the higher technology measuring and controlling devices sector, while access to input supplies and location near centers of applied innovation positively influence efficiency in the farm and garden machinery industry. Both sectors benefit from proximity to producer services, though primarily at a regional rather than highly localized scale.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperClusters, Convergence, and Economic Performance
October 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-34
This paper evaluates the role of regional cluster composition in the economic performance of industries, clusters and regions. On the one hand, diminishing returns to specialization in a location can result in a convergence effect: the growth rate of an industry within a region may be declining in the level of activity of that industry. At the same time, positive spillovers across complementary economic activities provide an impetus for agglomeration: the growth rate of an industry within a region may be increasing in the size and strength (i.e., relative presence) of related economic sectors. Building on Porter (1998, 2003), we develop a systematic empirical framework to identify the role of regional clusters ' groups of closely related and complementary industries operating within a particular region in regional economic performance. We exploit newly available data from the US Cluster Mapping Project to disentangle the impact of convergence at the region-industry level from agglomeration within clusters. We find that, after controlling for the impact of convergence at the narrowest unit of analysis, there is significant evidence for cluster-driven agglomeration. Industries participating in a strong cluster register higher employment growth as well as higher growth of wages, number of establishments, and patenting. Industry and cluster level growth also increases with the strength of related clusters in the region and with the strength of similar clusters in adjacent regions. Importantly, we find evidence that new industries emerge where there is a strong cluster environment. Our analysis also suggests that the presence of strong clusters in a region enhances growth opportunities in other industries and clusters. Overall, these findings highlight the important role of cluster-based agglomeration in regional economic performance.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperAgglomeration, Enterprise Size, and Productivity
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-15
Much research on agglomeration economies, and particularly recent work that builds on Marshall's concept of the industrial district, postulates that benefits derived from proximity between businesses are strongest for small enterprises (Humphrey 1995, Sweeney and Feser 1998). With internal economies a function of the shape of the average cost curve and level of production, and external economies in shifts of that curve, a small firm enjoying external economies characteristic of industrial districts (or complexes or simply urbanized areas) may face the same average costs as the larger firm producing a higher volume of output (Oughton and Whittam 1997; Carlsson 1996; Humphrey 1995). Thus we observe the seeming paradox of large firms that enjoy internal economies of scale co-existing with smaller enterprises that should, by all accounts, be operating below minimum efficient scale. With the Birch-inspired debate on the relative job- and innovation-generating capacity of small and large firms abating (Ettlinger 1997), research on the small firm sector has shifted to an examination of the business strategies and sources of competitiveness of small enterprises (e.g., Pratten 1991, Nooteboom 1993). Technological external scale economies are a key feature of this research (Oughton and Whittam 1997).View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperClusters and Entrepreneurship
September 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-31
This paper examines the role of regional clusters in regional entrepreneurship. We focus on the distinct influences of convergence and agglomeration on growth in the number of start-up firms as well as in employment in these new firms in a given region-industry. While reversion to the mean and diminishing returns to entrepreneurship at the region-industry level can result in a convergence effect, the presence of complementary economic activity creates externalities that enhance incentives and reduce barriers for new business creation. Clusters are a particularly important way through which location-based complementarities are realized. The empirical analysis uses a novel panel dataset from the Longitudinal Business Database of the Census Bureau and the U.S. Cluster Mapping Project (Porter, 2003). Using this dataset, there is significant evidence of the positive impact of clusters on entrepreneurship. After controlling for convergence in start-up activity at the region-industry level, industries located in regions with strong clusters (i.e. a large presence of other related industries) experience higher growth in new business formation and start-up employment. Strong clusters are also associated with the formation of new establishments of existing firms, thus influencing the location decision of multiestablishment firms. Finally, strong clusters contribute to start-up firm survival.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperScience, R&D, And Invention Potential Recharge: U.S. Evidence
January 1993
Working Paper Number:
CES-93-02
The influence of academic science on industrial R&D seems to have increased in recent years compared with the pre-World War II period. This paper outlines an approach to tracing this influence using a panel of 14 R&D performing industries from 1961-1986. The results indicate an elasticity between real R&D and indicators of stocks of academic science of about 0.6. This elasticity is significant controlling for industry effects. However, the elasticity declines from its level during the 1961-1973 subperiod, when it was 2.2, to 0.5 during the 1974-1986 subperiod. Reasons for the decline include exogenous and endogenous exhaustion of invention potential, and declining incentives to do R&D stemming from a weakening of intellectual property rights. The growth of R&D since the mid-1980s suggests a restoration of R&D incentives in still more recent times.View Full Paper PDF
