regions and between knowledge intensive industries and non-knowledge intensive
industries within the two sectors.
Table 4.5. Point elasticities based on estimations of Equation (13a) and (13b)19.
|
Elasticity of M w.r.t Pa |
Elasticity of P w.r.t Ma________ | |
|
Aggregated data | ||
|
Urban regions |
0.50 |
0.63 |
|
Non-urban regions |
0.54 |
0.00 |
|
Knowledge intensive | ||
|
Urban regions |
0.67 |
0.92 |
|
Non-urban regions |
0.39 |
0.00 |
|
Non-knowledge intensive | ||
|
Urban regions |
0.61 |
0.56 |
|
Non-urban regions______________ |
0.70 |
0.79 |
*) Elasticity values are based on the estimates in Table 4.2-4.4 and are calculated according to
Equation (15).
**) Urban regions are defined as regions with more than 100 000 inhabitants (non-urban regions as
regions with less than 100 000 inhabitants).
The elasticity values reveal that the accessibility to manufacturing employment has a
greater impact on the manufacturing employment in urban regions, than the accessibility
to producer services on the manufacturing employment in the same type of regions. This
holds for the aggregated data and for the knowledge intensive industries within the two
sectors. On the other hand, the reverse is true for the non-knowledge intensive industries.
Here, the impact of accessibility to manufacturing on producer service employment is less
than that of the accessibility to producer services on the manufacturing employment in
urban regions. However, the opposite pattern holds for these industries in non-urban
regions.
The main findings in this section can be summarized in the following way: (i) Co-
location tendencies of manufacturing and producer services can be found in urban regions
for the aggregated employment in the sectors and for the knowledge intensive as well as
non-knowledge intensive industries in the same type of regions. Thus, the employment in
one sector depends on the accessibility to the other sector. (ii) Except for non-knowledge
intensive producer services, producer service industries locate in non-urban regions
because of reasons other than high accessibility to manufacturing. However, the
manufacturing employment can be coupled to the existence of good accessibility to
producer services. (iii) In urban regions, except for non-knowledge intensive industries in
the sectors, accessibility to manufacturing has a greater impact on producer service
employment than the other way around.
19 To clarify, the non-significant parameter-estimates in Table 4.2-4.4 were treated as being equal to zero in the
construction of the elasticities.
18
More intriguing information
1. Dynamiques des Entreprises Agroalimentaires (EAA) du Languedoc-Roussillon : évolutions 1998-2003. Programme de recherche PSDR 2001-2006 financé par l'Inra et la Région Languedoc-Roussillon2. New urban settlements in Belarus: some trends and changes
3. The name is absent
4. Target Acquisition in Multiscale Electronic Worlds
5. The name is absent
6. Assessing Economic Complexity with Input-Output Based Measures
7. The name is absent
8. An alternative way to model merit good arguments
9. Integration, Regional Specialization and Growth Differentials in EU Acceding Countries: Evidence from Hungary
10. PROPOSED IMMIGRATION POLICY REFORM & FARM LABOR MARKET OUTCOMES