New economic geography has become a mantra for many economists, geographers, and regional scientists. Many recent studies have tested the importance of economic geography for production activities and found a significant association between them. Most of these studies, however, have not taken into account that productivity gains from economic geography, if any, are conditional on firm-location choice. This article illustrates a potential bias that can arise when firm-location choice is not considered in estimating the contribution of economic geography to firm performance. An analysis using microdata of Indian manufacturing firms shows that there is an upward bias in the contribution of economic geography to productivity when firm-location choice is not jointly taken into account as part of production decisions.
Beeson, P.1987. Total factor productivity growth and agglomeration economies in manufacturing, 1959-73. Journal of Regional Science27: 183-199.
2.
Christaller, W. 1933. Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. Jena: Gustav Fischer.
3.
Dixit, A. K., and J. E. Stiglitz. 1977. Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. American Economic Review67: 297-308.
4.
Domencich, T., and D. McFadden. 1975. Urban travel demand: A behavioral analysis. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
5.
Doms, M. E. 1992. Essays on capital equipment and energy technology in the manufacturing sector. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin at Madison.
6.
Ellison, G., and E. L. Glaesar. 1997. Geographic concentration in U.S. manufacturing: A dartboard approach. Journal of Political Economy105: 889-927.
7.
Feser, E.2001. A flexible test for agglomeration economies in two US manufacturing industries. Regional Science and Urban Economics31: 1-19.
8.
Fogarty, M., and G. Garofalo. 1988. Urban spatial structure and productivity growth in the manufacturing sector of cities. Journal of Urban Economics23: 60-70.
9.
Fujita, M., P. Krugman, and A. Venables. 1999. The spatial economy: Cities, regions, and international trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
Fujita, M., and H. Ogawa. 1982. Multiple equilibrium and structural transition of non-monocentric urban configurations. Regional Science and Urban Economics12: 161-196.
11.
Heckman, J. J.1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica47: 153-161.
12.
Helsley, R., and W. Strange. 1990. Matching and agglomeration in a system of cities. Regional Science and Urban Economics20: 189-212.
13.
Henderson, V.1986. Efficiency of resource usage and city size. Journal of Urban Economics19: 47-70.
14.
Hoover, E. M.1937. Location theory and the shoe and leather industries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
Krugman, P.1980. Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade. American Economic Review70: 950-959.
16.
Krugman, P.1991a. Geography and trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
Krugman, P.1991b. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy99: 183-199.
18.
Lall, S., Z. Shalizi, and U. Deichmann. 2004. Agglomeration economies and productivity in Indian industry. Journal of Development Economics73: 643-673.
19.
Lee, L. F.1982. Some approaches to the correction of selectivity bias. Review of Economic Studies49: 355-372.
20.
Losch, A.1956. The economics of location. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
Maddala, G. S.1986. Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22.
McCombie, J. S. L.1988. A synoptic view of regional growth and unemployment: I - the neoclassical theory. Urban Studies25: 267-281.
23.
McFadden, D.1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Frontiers in econometrics, edited by P. Zarembka, 105-142. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
24.
Moomaw, R. L.1981. Productivity and city size: A critique of the evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics96: 675-688.
25.
Moomaw, R. L.1988. Agglomeration economies: Localization or urbanization?Urban Studies25: 150-161.
26.
Nakamura, R.1985. Agglomeration economies in urban manufacturing industries, a case of Japanese cities. Journal of Urban Economics17: 108-124.
27.
Pred, A.1966. The spatial dynamics of U.S. urban-industrial growth, 1800-1914: Interpretive and theoretical essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28.
Venables, A.1996. Equilibrium locations of vertically linked industries. International Economic Review49: 341-359.
29.
Thünen, J. H. 1826. Der isolierte staat in beziehung auf landwirtschaft und nationaloekonomie. Hamburg: F. Perthes.
30.
Weber, A.1929. Theory of the location of industries. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
