Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth
Our respondents—Cortright and Mayer (2004 [this issue]), Gottlieb (2004 [this issue]), and Mathur (2004 [this issue])—greatly enrich the debate over high-tech rankings, relationship to growth, and specialization. We are grateful to them both for the questions they raise about our work and for the de...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Economic development quarterly 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.44-49 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 49 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 44 |
| container_title | Economic development quarterly |
| container_volume | 18 |
| creator | Chapple, Karen Markusen, Ann Schrock, Greg Yamamoto, Daisaku Yu, Pingkang |
| description | Our respondents—Cortright and Mayer (2004 [this issue]), Gottlieb (2004 [this issue]), and Mathur (2004 [this issue])—greatly enrich the debate over high-tech rankings, relationship to growth, and specialization. We are grateful to them both for the questions they raise about our work and for the depth of critique they bring to thediscussion. All three responses, in particular Gottlieb’s, continue our methodological debate, providing valuable insights for both theory and practice. Mathur inspires us to look more deeply at the relationship between high tech and job growth as well as our definition of human capital. We find Cortright and Mayer’s views on specialization particularly provocative and Gottlieb’s framing of that issue in terms of urbanization and localization economies very useful. The following response takes up these three issues in turn. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0891242403260598 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37866204</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0891242403260598</sage_id><sourcerecordid>37866204</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-d8f0cbb3104c2f9e35aa429f90d502c94a452d150d6f5f21b15e0de591479b6c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM9LwzAcxYMoOKd3jzl5WvWbX23jTYZug4FQ57mkabpmdklNOkT_ejfnSfD0-PI-7wvvIXRN4JaQLLuDXBLKKQdGUxAyP0EjIgRNmODsFI0OdnLwz9FFjBsAIJTKEVoUZuOtq024x3O7bpOV0S0ulHuzbh0n-KU32qrOfqnBejfBytW4MN3PFVvb48HjWfAfQ3uJzhrVRXP1q2P0-vS4ms6T5fNsMX1YJppxMiR13oCuKkaAa9pIw4RSnMpGQi2AaskVF7QmAuq0EQ0lFREGaiMk4ZmsUs3G6Ob4tw_-fWfiUG5t1KbrlDN-F0uW5WlKge9BOII6-BiDaco-2K0KnyWB8rBZ-XezfSQ5RqJam3Ljd8Htq_zPfwPFH2qw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>37866204</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth</title><source>SAGE Journals Online</source><creator>Chapple, Karen ; Markusen, Ann ; Schrock, Greg ; Yamamoto, Daisaku ; Yu, Pingkang</creator><creatorcontrib>Chapple, Karen ; Markusen, Ann ; Schrock, Greg ; Yamamoto, Daisaku ; Yu, Pingkang</creatorcontrib><description>Our respondents—Cortright and Mayer (2004 [this issue]), Gottlieb (2004 [this issue]), and Mathur (2004 [this issue])—greatly enrich the debate over high-tech rankings, relationship to growth, and specialization. We are grateful to them both for the questions they raise about our work and for the depth of critique they bring to thediscussion. All three responses, in particular Gottlieb’s, continue our methodological debate, providing valuable insights for both theory and practice. Mathur inspires us to look more deeply at the relationship between high tech and job growth as well as our definition of human capital. We find Cortright and Mayer’s views on specialization particularly provocative and Gottlieb’s framing of that issue in terms of urbanization and localization economies very useful. The following response takes up these three issues in turn.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0891-2424</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3543</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0891242403260598</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Development studies ; Economic development ; Economics ; High technology ; Metropolitan areas ; Occupations ; Technological change ; Urban development</subject><ispartof>Economic development quarterly, 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.44-49</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-d8f0cbb3104c2f9e35aa429f90d502c94a452d150d6f5f21b15e0de591479b6c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-d8f0cbb3104c2f9e35aa429f90d502c94a452d150d6f5f21b15e0de591479b6c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0891242403260598$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0891242403260598$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21818,27923,27924,43620,43621</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chapple, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Markusen, Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schrock, Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Daisaku</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Pingkang</creatorcontrib><title>Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth</title><title>Economic development quarterly</title><description>Our respondents—Cortright and Mayer (2004 [this issue]), Gottlieb (2004 [this issue]), and Mathur (2004 [this issue])—greatly enrich the debate over high-tech rankings, relationship to growth, and specialization. We are grateful to them both for the questions they raise about our work and for the depth of critique they bring to thediscussion. All three responses, in particular Gottlieb’s, continue our methodological debate, providing valuable insights for both theory and practice. Mathur inspires us to look more deeply at the relationship between high tech and job growth as well as our definition of human capital. We find Cortright and Mayer’s views on specialization particularly provocative and Gottlieb’s framing of that issue in terms of urbanization and localization economies very useful. The following response takes up these three issues in turn.</description><subject>Development studies</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>High technology</subject><subject>Metropolitan areas</subject><subject>Occupations</subject><subject>Technological change</subject><subject>Urban development</subject><issn>0891-2424</issn><issn>1552-3543</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kM9LwzAcxYMoOKd3jzl5WvWbX23jTYZug4FQ57mkabpmdklNOkT_ejfnSfD0-PI-7wvvIXRN4JaQLLuDXBLKKQdGUxAyP0EjIgRNmODsFI0OdnLwz9FFjBsAIJTKEVoUZuOtq024x3O7bpOV0S0ulHuzbh0n-KU32qrOfqnBejfBytW4MN3PFVvb48HjWfAfQ3uJzhrVRXP1q2P0-vS4ms6T5fNsMX1YJppxMiR13oCuKkaAa9pIw4RSnMpGQi2AaskVF7QmAuq0EQ0lFREGaiMk4ZmsUs3G6Ob4tw_-fWfiUG5t1KbrlDN-F0uW5WlKge9BOII6-BiDaco-2K0KnyWB8rBZ-XezfSQ5RqJam3Ljd8Htq_zPfwPFH2qw</recordid><startdate>20040201</startdate><enddate>20040201</enddate><creator>Chapple, Karen</creator><creator>Markusen, Ann</creator><creator>Schrock, Greg</creator><creator>Yamamoto, Daisaku</creator><creator>Yu, Pingkang</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040201</creationdate><title>Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth</title><author>Chapple, Karen ; Markusen, Ann ; Schrock, Greg ; Yamamoto, Daisaku ; Yu, Pingkang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-d8f0cbb3104c2f9e35aa429f90d502c94a452d150d6f5f21b15e0de591479b6c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Development studies</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>High technology</topic><topic>Metropolitan areas</topic><topic>Occupations</topic><topic>Technological change</topic><topic>Urban development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chapple, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Markusen, Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schrock, Greg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Daisaku</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Pingkang</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Economic development quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chapple, Karen</au><au>Markusen, Ann</au><au>Schrock, Greg</au><au>Yamamoto, Daisaku</au><au>Yu, Pingkang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth</atitle><jtitle>Economic development quarterly</jtitle><date>2004-02-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>44</spage><epage>49</epage><pages>44-49</pages><issn>0891-2424</issn><eissn>1552-3543</eissn><abstract>Our respondents—Cortright and Mayer (2004 [this issue]), Gottlieb (2004 [this issue]), and Mathur (2004 [this issue])—greatly enrich the debate over high-tech rankings, relationship to growth, and specialization. We are grateful to them both for the questions they raise about our work and for the depth of critique they bring to thediscussion. All three responses, in particular Gottlieb’s, continue our methodological debate, providing valuable insights for both theory and practice. Mathur inspires us to look more deeply at the relationship between high tech and job growth as well as our definition of human capital. We find Cortright and Mayer’s views on specialization particularly provocative and Gottlieb’s framing of that issue in terms of urbanization and localization economies very useful. The following response takes up these three issues in turn.</abstract><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0891242403260598</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0891-2424 |
| ispartof | Economic development quarterly, 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.44-49 |
| issn | 0891-2424 1552-3543 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37866204 |
| source | SAGE Journals Online |
| subjects | Development studies Economic development Economics High technology Metropolitan areas Occupations Technological change Urban development |
| title | Rejoinder: High-Tech Rankings, Specialization, and Relationship to Growth |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T19%3A33%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rejoinder:%20High-Tech%20Rankings,%20Specialization,%20and%20Relationship%20to%20Growth&rft.jtitle=Economic%20development%20quarterly&rft.au=Chapple,%20Karen&rft.date=2004-02-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=44&rft.epage=49&rft.pages=44-49&rft.issn=0891-2424&rft.eissn=1552-3543&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0891242403260598&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E37866204%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=37866204&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0891242403260598&rfr_iscdi=true |