Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evolving localization patterns of company foundationsEvidence from the German MST-industry

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Journal of Evolutionary Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate company foundations in the German micro technology industry by means of a spatial-temporal micro-geographic analysis. In order to deal with our unusually detailed data, we develop a new distance-based framework for a logistic regression that is able to present results in a continuous space. Locations of company foundations are investigated with respect to their spatial proximity to similar firms, patent owners, related industries and research institutions and are benchmarked with the overall distribution of company foundations in Germany. We demonstrate that spatial proximity has a clear influence on where new companies are founded. Furthermore, the influence of proximity to different agents is not constant over times but evolves with the industry’s life cycle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Concerning our empirical investigation, we restrict the analysis to 199 research institutions, identified by IVAM-Research as being relevant actors in the German MST industry. For more details, refer to section 4.

  2. For an exhaustive review, see Boschma (2005).

  3. For a detailed analysis of the MAUP, see Openshaw, S. (1984)

  4. By the term “test-statistics” we refer to statistical methods that are in first line index based tests (for instance, Student’s t-test).

  5. For other industrial sectors, teleworking and home-office may play a more important role. However, this is less pronounced in high-tech manufacturing (e.g Hotopp 2002, Pérez et al. 2004).

  6. Firms founded before 1991

  7. The mentioned industries were selected due to their technology overlap with the MST industry.

  8. We tested a 0 km, 5 km and 10 km threshold

References

  • Acs ZJ, Anselin L, Varga A (2002) Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Res Policy 31:1069–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M, Hellerstedt K (2009) Location attributes and start-ups in knowledge-intensive business services. Ind Innov 16(1):103–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (2010) Thirty years of spatial econometrics. Pap Reg Sci 89(1):3–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armington C, Acs ZJ (2002) The determinants of regional variation in new firm formation. Reg Stud 36(1):33–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch DB, Lehmann EE, Warning S (2005) University spillovers and new firm location. Res Policy 34(7):1113–1122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1996) Innovative clusters and the industry life cycle. Rev Ind Organ 11:253–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boschma RA, Lambooy JG (1999) Evolutionary economics and economic geography. J Evol Econ 9:411–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boschma R (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg Stud 39(1):61–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner T (2004) Local industrial clusters: existence, emergence, and evolution. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner T, Fornahl D (2008) Regional path-dependence in start-up activity. Papers Evol Econ Geograp 8:12

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner T, Mühlig A (2012) Factors and mechanisms causing the emergence of local industrial clusters- a meta-study of 159 cases. In: Regional Studies, electronic pre-publication

  • BMBF (2004) Rahmenprogramm zur Förderung 2004-2009 Mikrosysteme. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. URL: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/mikrosysteme.pdf

  • Caniëls MCJ (2000) Knowledge spillovers and economic growth: regional growth differentials across Europe. Northhampton, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Delgado M, Porter ME, Stern S (2010) Clusters and entrepeneurship. J Econ Geogr 10:495–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumais G, Ellison G, Glaeser EL (2002) Geographic concentration as a dynamic process. Rev Econ Stat 84:193–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duranton G, Overman HG (2005) Testing for localization using micro-geographic data. Rev Econ Stud 72:1077–1106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egeln J, Gottschalk S, Rammer C, Spielkamp A (2003) Spinoff-Gründungen aus der öffentlichen Forschung in Deutschland. Nomos-Verlag-Gesellschaft

  • Fritsch M, Falck O (2007) New business formation by industry over space and time: a multidimensional analysis. Reg Stud 41(2):157–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gort M, Klepper S (1982) Time paths in the diffusion of product innovations. Econ J 92(367):630–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotopp U (2002) Teleworking in the UK. In: Labour Market Trends 18 (2002)

  • IVAM-Research (2005) MST-Atlas Deutschland 2005. Mikrosystemtechnik-Cluster in Deutschland (in German)

  • IVAM-Research (2006) Gründungsmonitor Mikro-/Nanotechnik 2006. Erfolgsfaktoren für Mikro- und Nanotechnik Start-ups in Deutschland (in German)

  • Jonas M, Berner M, Bromberg T, Kolassa A, Sözen S (2002) Clusterbildung im Feld der Mikrosystemtechnik-das Beispiel Dortmund. Universität Dortmund, Lehrstuhl Technik und Gesellschaft (in German)

  • Klepper S (1996) Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. Am Econ Rev 86(03):562–583

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper S (2006) The evolution of geographic structure in new industries. Revue de L’OFCE 97:135–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper S, Buenstorf G (2009) Heritage and agglomeration: the Akron Tyre cluster revisited. Econ J 119:705–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klier T, McMillen DP (2008) Evolving agglomeration in the U.S. auto supplier industry. J Reg Sci 48(1):245–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klodt H (2000) Industrial policy and the East German productivity puzzle. Ger Econ Rev 1(3):315–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosfeld R, Eckey H-F, Lauridsen J (2011) Spatial point pattern analysis and industry concentration. Ann Reg Sci 47:311–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasch F, Robert F, Le Roy F (2013) Regional determinants of ICT new firm formation. Small Bus Econ 40:671–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann E, Neuberger D, Räthke S (2004) Lending to small and medium-sized firms: is there an East-West gap in Germany? Small Bus Econ 23(1):23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcon E, Puech F (2010) Measures of the geographic concentration of industries: improving distance-based methods. J Econ Geogr 10(5):745–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller HJ (2010) The data avalanche is here. shouldn’t we be digging? J Region Sci 50(1):181–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neffke F, Henning MS, Boschma R, Lundquist K-J, Olander L-O (2008) Who needs agglomeration? varying agglomeration externalities and the industry life cycle. Papers Evol Econ Geograp 08(08):1–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Openshaw S (1984) The modifiable areal unit problem. Concepts Tech Modern Geography 38

  • Pérez Pérez M, Martínez Sánchez A, de Luis Carnicer P, José Vela Jiménez M (2004) A technology acceptance model of innovation adoption: the case of teleworking. Eur J Innov Manag 7(4):280–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter M (1998) Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Rev: 77–90

  • Schmude J (2003) Standortwahl und Netzwerke von Unternehmensgründern. Dowling M, Drumm HJ (Hrsg.):Gründungsmanagement: Vom erfolgreichen Unternehmensstart zu dauerhaftem Wachstum: 291–304 (in German)

  • Scholl T, Brenner T (2014) Detecting spatial clustering using a firm-level cluster index. Reg Stud: 1–15

  • Sorenson O, Audia PG (2000) The social structure of entrepreneurial activity: geographic concentration of footwear production in the United States, 1940–1989. Am J Sociol 106(2):424–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson O (2003) Social networks and industrial geography. J Evol Econ 13(5):513–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam E (2010) Entrepreneurship, evolution and geography. In: Boschma R, Martin RL (eds) The handbook of evolutionary economic geography. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 307–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart T, Sorenson O (2003) The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms. Res Policy 32:229–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varga A (1998) University research and regional innovation: a spatial econometric analysis of academic technology transfers. vol. 13. Springer Science & Business Media

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Philipps University of Marburg, Deutschhausstr. 10, D-35032,, Marburg, Germany

    Tobias Scholl & Thomas Brenner

  2. Department of Geography, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 21, D-55099,, Mainz, Germany

    Martin Wendel

Authors
  1. Tobias Scholl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Brenner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Wendel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Scholl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scholl, T., Brenner, T. & Wendel, M. Evolving localization patterns of company foundationsEvidence from the German MST-industry. J Evol Econ 26, 1067–1087 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-016-0475-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-016-0475-3

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation