M.P. Feldman

Science and technology have long been regarded as important determinants of economic growth. Edwin Mansfield (1971, pp. 1- 2), a pioneer in the economics of technological change, noted: Technological change is an important, if not the most important, factor responsible for economic growth . . . without question, [it] is one of the most important determinants of the shape and evolution of the American economy. Science and technology are even more important in the "new economy," with its greater emphasis on the role of intellectual property and knowledge transfer. Therefore, it is unfortunate that most individuals rarely have the opportunity to explore the economic implications of science and technology. As a result, the antecedents and consequences of technological change are poorly understood by many in the general public. This lack of understanding is reflected in a recent survey conducted by the National Science Board (2000), summarized in Science & Engineering Indicators. ' As shown in Table 1. 1, the findings of the survey indicated that many Americans, despite a high level of interests in such matters, are not as well-informed about technological issues as they are about other policy issues. As shown in the table, individuals self assess, based on a scale from 1 to 100, their interest in science and technology policy issues as being relatively high, yet they self assess their knowledge or informedness about these issues relatively lower.

This book offers a geographic dimension to the study of innovation and product commercialization. Building on the literature in economics and geography, this book demonstrates that product innovation clusters spatially in regions which provide concentrations of the knowledge needed for the commercialization process. The book develops a conceptual model which links the location of new product innovations to the sources of these knowledge inputs. The geographic concentration of this knowledge fonns a technological infrastructure which promotes infonnation transfers, and lowers the risks and the costs of engaging in innovative activity. Empirical estimation confinns that the location of product innovation is related to the underlying technological infrastructure, and that the location of the knowledge inputs are mutually­ reinforcing in defining a region's competitive advantage. The book concludes by considering the policy implications of these fmdings for both private finns and state governments. This work is intended for academics, policy practitioners and students in the fields of innovation and technological change, geography and regional science, and economic development. This work is part of a larger research effort to understand why the location of innovative activity varies spatially, specifically the externalities and increasing returns which accrue to location. xi Acknowledgements This work has benefitted greatly from discussions with friends and colleagues. I wish to specifically note the contribution of Mark Kamlet, Wes Cohen, Richard Florida, Zoltan Acs and David Audretsch. I would like to thank Gail Cohen Shaivitz for her dedication in editing the final manuscript.

Science and technology have long been regarded as important determinants of economic growth. Edwin Mansfield (1971, pp. 1- 2), a pioneer in the economics of technological change, noted: Technological change is an important, if not the most important, factor responsible for economic growth . . . without question, [it] is one of the most important determinants of the shape and evolution of the American economy. Science and technology are even more important in the "new economy," with its greater emphasis on the role of intellectual property and knowledge transfer. Therefore, it is unfortunate that most individuals rarely have the opportunity to explore the economic implications of science and technology. As a result, the antecedents and consequences of technological change are poorly understood by many in the general public. This lack of understanding is reflected in a recent survey conducted by the National Science Board (2000), summarized in Science & Engineering Indicators. ' As shown in Table 1. 1, the findings of the survey indicated that many Americans, despite a high level of interests in such matters, are not as well-informed about technological issues as they are about other policy issues. As shown in the table, individuals self assess, based on a scale from 1 to 100, their interest in science and technology policy issues as being relatively high, yet they self assess their knowledge or informedness about these issues relatively lower.

This book offers a geographic dimension to the study of innovation and product commercialization. Building on the literature in economics and geography, this book demonstrates that product innovation clusters spatially in regions which provide concentrations of the knowledge needed for the commercialization process. The book develops a conceptual model which links the location of new product innovations to the sources of these knowledge inputs. The geographic concentration of this knowledge fonns a technological infrastructure which promotes infonnation transfers, and lowers the risks and the costs of engaging in innovative activity. Empirical estimation confinns that the location of product innovation is related to the underlying technological infrastructure, and that the location of the knowledge inputs are mutually­ reinforcing in defining a region's competitive advantage. The book concludes by considering the policy implications of these fmdings for both private finns and state governments. This work is intended for academics, policy practitioners and students in the fields of innovation and technological change, geography and regional science, and economic development. This work is part of a larger research effort to understand why the location of innovative activity varies spatially, specifically the externalities and increasing returns which accrue to location. xi Acknowledgements This work has benefitted greatly from discussions with friends and colleagues. I wish to specifically note the contribution of Mark Kamlet, Wes Cohen, Richard Florida, Zoltan Acs and David Audretsch. I would like to thank Gail Cohen Shaivitz for her dedication in editing the final manuscript.