Skip Navigation


Journal of Economic Geography Advance Access originally published online on April 21, 2006
Journal of Economic Geography 2006 6(5):679-699; doi:10.1093/jeg/lbl007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
6/5/679    most recent
lbl007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ketelhöhn, N. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow D83 - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief
Right arrow L10 - General
Right arrow L63 - Microelectronics; Computers; Communications Equipment
Right arrow O30 - General
Right arrow O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
Right arrow O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
Right arrow O34 - Intellectual Property Rights
Right arrow R10 - General
Right arrow R30 - General
Right arrow R32 - Other Production and Pricing Analysis
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author (2006). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The role of clusters as sources of dynamic externalities in the US semiconductor industry

Niels W. Ketelhöhn*

* INCAE Business School, Km. 15.5 c. Sur, Managua, Nicaragua. email <Niels.Ketelhohn{at}incae.edu>

This article investigates the effect of proximity to buyers and suppliers on the local output of cited patents in the US semiconductor industry. Consistent with Michael Porter's cluster theory (1990 and 1998), I find that co-location with important buyers is associated with higher levels of industry innovation. The evidence also suggests important effects of local diversity and specialization in the industry. The article also examines the evolution of the geographic concentration of the US semiconductor industry from the early 1960s to 1997, and reviews the most important sources of knowledge spillovers for the industry.

Keywords: clusters, knowledge spillovers, dynamic externalities, geographic concentration,
JEL classifications: L1, O3, R1, R3
Date submitted: 24 January 2005     Date accepted: 13 March 2006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ind Corp ChangeHome page
M.-P. Menzel and D. Fornahl
Cluster life cycles--dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution
Ind. Corp. Change, July 22, 2009; (2009) dtp036v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.