Location of R&D Abroad—An Analysis on Global Cities

  • Davide CastellaniEmail author
  • Katiuscia Lavoratori


This chapter investigates the determinants of the location of MNEs’ overseas R&D activities, by focusing on two major drivers. On the one hand, external location factors lead the firm to separate its activities along the value chain and geographically disperse these activities in different locations. On the other hand, the R&D location choice may be driven by the existence of internal (intra-firm) linkages that motivate firms to locate their value chain activities in the same location (intra-firm co-location). Using data from the fDi Markets database, the study examines 2580 location decisions of new R&D greenfield investments made by MNEs in 110 global cities worldwide, over the period 2003–2014. Results from Conditional and Mixed Logit econometric models reveal that both external and internal factors matter. Findings confirm the strong role of external agglomeration economies, but also suggest that previous R&D and production activities of the same MNE increase the probability to locate R&D in a given global city.


  1. Adams, J., & Jaffe, A. B. (1996). Bounding the effects of R&D: An investigation using matched establishment-data. The Rand Journal of Economics, 27(4), 700–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcácer, J. (2006). Location choices across the value chain: how activity and capability influence collocation. Management Science, 52(10), 1457–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alcácer, J., & Chung, W. (2007). Location strategies and knowledge spillovers. Management Science, 32(10), 1231–1241.Google Scholar
  4. Alcácer, J., & Delgado, M. (2016). Spatial organization of firms and location choices through the value chain. Management Science, published online in articles in advance, January 27, 2016.
  5. Arauzo-Carod, J. M., Liviano-Solis, D., & Manjón-Antolín, M. (2010). Empirical studies in industrial location: An assessment of their methods and results. Journal of Regional Science, 50(3), 685–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arauzo-Carod, J. M., & Viladecans-Marsal, E. (2013). Industrial location at the intra-metropolitan level: The role of agglomeration economies. Regional Studies, 43(4), 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Basile, R., Castellani, D., & Zanfei, A. (2008). Location choices of multinational firms in Europe: The role of EU cohesion policy. Journal of International Economics, 74, 328–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Basile, R., Castellani, D., & Zanfei, A. (2009). National boundaries and the location of multinational firms in Europe. Regional Science, 88(4), 733–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beaverstock, J. V., Smith, R. G., & Taylor, P. J. (1999). A roster of world cities. Cities, 16(6), 445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belderbos, R., Du, H. S., & Goerzen, A. (2017). Global cities, connectivity, and the location choice of MNC regional headquarters. Journal of Management Studies, 54, 1271–1302. Scholar
  11. Belderbos, R., Leten, B., & Suzuki, S. (2013). How global is R&D? Firm-level determinants of home-country bias in R&D. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(8), 765–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Belderbos, R., Sleuwaegen, L., Somers, D., & De Backer, K. (2016). Where do locate innovative activities in global value chain. Does co-location matter? OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, no 30. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  13. Blanc, H., & Sierra, C. (1999). The internationalisation of R&D by multinationals: A trade-off between external and internal proximity. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(2), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buciuni, G., & Finotto, V. (2016). Innovation in global value chains: Collocation of production and development in Italian low-tech industries. Regional Studies. Scholar
  15. Cantwell, J. A. (1989). Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Cantwell, J. A., & Piscitello, L. (2002). The location of technological activities of MNCs in European regions: The role of spillovers and local competencies. Journal of International Management, 8(1), 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cantwell, J. A., & Piscitello, L. (2005). Recent location of foreign-owned research and development activities by large multinational corporations in the European regions: The role of spillovers and externalities. Regional Studies, 39(1), 1–16.
  18. Castellani, D., Jimenez, A., & Zanfei, A. (2013). How remote are R&D labs? Distance factors and international innovative activities. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(7), 649–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Castellani, D., & Santangelo, G. (2016). Quo vadis? Cities and the location of cross-border activities. In 42nd Annual EIBA Conference, Liabilities of Foreignness vs. the Value of Diversity.Google Scholar
  20. Defever, F. (2012). The spatial organization of multinational firms. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d’économique, 45(2), 672–697.Google Scholar
  21. Du, H., Belderbos, R., & Slangen (2017) Liability of foreignness and multinational firms’ investments location across the value chain: Global cities versus local cities, mimeo.Google Scholar
  22. Duranton, G., & Puga, D. (2004). Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies. In J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (Eds.), Handbook of regional and urban economics (1th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 2063–2117, Chapter 48). Elsevier.Google Scholar
  23. Florida, R. (1997). The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA. Research Policy, 26, 85–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glaeser, E., Kallal, H. D., Scheinkman, J. A., & Shleifer, A. (1992). Growth of cities. Journal of Political Economy, 100(6), 1126–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goerzen, A., Asmussen, C. G., & Nielsen, B. (2013). Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 427–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gray, J. V., Siemsen, E., & Vasudeva, G. (2015). Colocation still matters: Conformance quality and the interdependence of R&D and manufacturing in the pharmaceutical industry. Management Science, 61(11), 2760–2781. Scholar
  27. Hannigan, T. J., Cano-Kollmann, M., & Mudambi, R. (2015). Thriving innovation amidst manufacturing decline: The Detroit auto cluster and the resilience of local knowledge production. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(3), 613–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Henderson, V., & Ono, Y. (2008). Where do manufacturing firms locate their headquarters? Journal of Urban Economics, 63, 431–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Howells, J. (1984). The location of research and development: Come observations and evidence from Britain. Regional Studies, 18(1), 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Iammarino, S., & McCann, P. (2013). Multinationals and economic geography. Location, technology and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Ivarsson, I., Alvstam, G., & Vahlne, J. E. (2016). Global technology development by colocating R&D and manufacturing: The case of Swedish manufacturing MNEs. Industrial and Corporate Change. Advance Access published May 13, 2016.Google Scholar
  32. Jacobs, J. (1970). The economy of cities. New York, NY: Vintage.Google Scholar
  33. Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localisation of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ketokivi, M., & Ali-Yrkkö, J. (2009). Unbundling R&D and manufacturing: Postindustrial myth or economic reality? Review of Policy Research, 26(1–2), 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lall, S. (1979). The international allocation of research activity by US multinationals. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 41(4), 313–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lawson, C., & Lorenz, E. (1999). Collective learning, tacit knowledge and regional innovative capacity. Regional Studies, 33, 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mariani, M. (2002). Next to production or to technological clusters? The economics and management of R&D location. Journal of Management and Governance, 6(2), 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of Economics. London: McMillan.Google Scholar
  39. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In: P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142, Chapter 4). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Nielsen, B. B., Asmussen, C. G., & Weatherall, C. D. (2017). The location choice of foreign direct investments: Empirical evidence and methodological challenges. Journal of World Business, 52, 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. OECD. (2008). The internationalisation of business R&D: Evidence, impacts and implications. Paris, France: OECD.Google Scholar
  42. Paci, R., & Usai, S. (1999). Externalities, knowledge spillovers and the spatial distribution of innovation. GeoJournal, 49, 381–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Papanastassiou, M., & Pearce, R. (2009). The strategic development of multinationals: Subsidiaries and innovation. Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Parr, J. B. (2002). Agglomeration economies: Ambiguities and confusions. Environment and Planning A, 34(4), 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pavitt, K. (2003). Specialization and system integration: Where manufacture and service still meet. In A. Prencipe, A. Davies, & M. Hobday (Eds.), The business of system integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Pearce, R., & Singh, S. (1992). Globalizing research and development. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pisano, G. P., & Shih, W. C. (2009). Restoring American competitiveness. Harvard Business Review, 87(7–8).Google Scholar
  48. Pisano, G. P., & Shih, W. C. (2012). Does America really need manufacturing? Harvard Business Review, 90(3), 94–102.Google Scholar
  49. Rasciute, S., & Downward, P. (2016). Explaining variability in the investment location choices of MNEs: An exploration of country, industry and firm effects. International Business Review.Google Scholar
  50. Rawley, E., & Seamans, R. (2015). Intra-firm spillovers? The stock and flow effects of collocation. Columbia Business School Research Paper no 15–2. Available at SSRN: or
  51. Sassen, S. (1991). The global city: London, New York, Tokyo. Princeton UP: Princeton.Google Scholar
  52. Shaver, J. M., & Flyer, F. (2000). Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 21(12), 1175–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Siedschlag, I., Smith, D., Turcue, C., & Zhang, X. (2013). What determines the location choice of R&D activities by multinational firms? Research Policy, 42(8), 1420–1430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Storper, M., & Venables, A. J. (2004). Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 4(4).Google Scholar
  55. Sturgeon, T. (2002). Modular production networks: A new American model of industrial organization. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 451–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tecu, I. (2013). The location of industrial innovation: Does manufacturing matter? US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies Paper No. CES-WP-13-09. Available at SSRN: or
  57. Train, K. E. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Warrant, F. (1991). Le deploiement mondial de la R&D industrielle: Facteur et garant de la globalisation de la technologie et de l’economie. Bruxelles. Commission of the European Communities, Fast, 4.Google Scholar
  59. WTO. (2008). Trade, the location of production and the industrial organization of firms, World Trade Report 2008—Trade in a globalizing World. Geneva, Switzerland: World Trade Organization (WTO).Google Scholar
  60. Zaheer, S. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 341–363.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Henley Business SchoolUniversity of ReadingReadingUK
  2. 2.University of PerugiaPerugiaItaly

Personalised recommendations