Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:19:17.220Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of knowledge spillovers and vineyard proximity on winery clustering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2022

Eric Stuen Open the ORCID record for Eric Stuen [Opens in a new window] ,
Haifeng Liao  and
Jon Miller
Eric Stuen*
Affiliation:
Department of Business, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Dr., MS 3161, Moscow, ID, 83844
Haifeng Liao
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Geological Sciences, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Dr., MS 3021, Moscow, ID, 83843
Jon Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Business, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Dr., MS 3161, Moscow, ID, 83844
*
Corresponding author: Eric Stuen, email: estuen@uidaho.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We study the effect of proximity to other wineries on the formation of new wineries and how this effect depends on winemaking history in a location. Clustering is common in the wine industry, but it also depends on other factors, such as proximity to vineyards and high-reputation wineries. Using panel data with annual observations from 1994 to 2014 on 598 zip codes within Washington State, we estimate empirical models that control for proximity to wineries, proximity to vines, proximity to income, and the presence of star wineries. We find that the elasticity of the number of wineries with respect to proximity to wineries outside the zip code hinges on the length of local winemaking history. For locations with 11 or more winery years prior to our sample, the elasticity is at least 0.44. The presence of elite wineries is also found to have an effect, with about 0.5 additional wineries per year starting in a zip code per star winery. The effect of history suggests that policies to seed winery start-ups will help cluster formation, but only with a substantial critical mass of winemaking activity.

Keywords

clustersknowledge networkknowledge spilloverswine industryO1O18O33R11
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , August 2022 , pp. 241 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of American Association of Wine Economists

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In Nelson, R. (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, 609–634. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audretsch, D., and Feldman, M. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630–640.Google Scholar
Bloom, N., Schankerman, M., and Van Reenen, J. (2013). Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry. Econometrica, 81(4), 1347–1393.Google Scholar
Breschi, S., and Lissoni, F. (2001). Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: A critical survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 975–1005.Google Scholar
Choi, H., and Gu, C. (2020). Geospatial response for innovation in the wine industry: Knowledge creation through institutional mobility in China. Agronomy, 10(4), 495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanigro, M., Bond, C., and McCluskey, J. (2012). Reputation leaders, quality laggards: Incentive structure in markets with both private and collective reputations. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63(2), 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, G., and Glaeser, E. L. (1999). The geographic concentration of industry: Does natural advantage explain agglomeration? American Economic Review, 89(2), 311–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farias, C., and Tatsch, A. (2014). The Brazilian wine industry: A case study on geographical proximity and innovation dynamics. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 52, 515–532.Google Scholar
Galbreath, J. (2016). Exploratory study of climate change innovations in wine regions in Australia. Regional Studies, 50(11), 1903–1918.Google Scholar
Giuliani, E. (2007). The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: Evidence from the wine industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(2), 139–168.Google Scholar
Giuliani, E., and Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: Evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenstone, M., Hornbeck, R., and Moretti, E. (2010). Identifying agglomeration spillovers: Evidence from winners and losers of large plant openings. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 536–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hervas-Oliver, J.-L., Gonzalez, G., Caja, P., and Sempere-Ripoll, F. (2015). Clusters and industrial districts: Where is the literature going? Identifying emerging sub-fields of research. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1827–1872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, T. J. (1999). Localization of industry and vertical disintegration. Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(2), 314–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huglin, P. (1978). Nouveau mode d’évaluation des possibilités héliothermique d'un milieu viti-cole. C. R. Académie d'Agriculture (Acad. Agric.), 64, 1117–1126.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. (2014). Wine Science: Principles and Applications. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79(5), 957–970.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., and Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krugman, P. (1991). Geography and Trade. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
MacNeil, K. (2001). The Wine Bible. New York: Workman Publishing.Google Scholar
Maghssudipour, A., Lazzeretti, L., and Capone, F. (2020). The role of multiple ties in knowledge networks: Complementarity in the Montefalco wine cluster. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, 667–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of Economics. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Morrison, A., and Rabellotti, R. (2005). Knowledge and Information Networks: Evidence from an Italian Wine Local System. Milan, Italy: Università commerciale Luigi Bocconi.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77–90.Google ScholarPubMed
Rigby, D., and Essletzbichler, J. (2002). Agglomeration economies and productivity differences in U.S. cities. Journal of Economic Geography, 2(4), 407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, P. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71–S102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, S., and Strange, W. (2004). Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies. In Henderson, V. and Thisse, J. (eds.), Handbook of regional and urban economics, 4th ed., 2119–2171. North Holland: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Stuen, E., Miller, J., and Stone, R. (2015). An analysis of wine critic consensus: A study of Washington and California wines. Journal of Wine Economics, 10(1), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tirole, J. (1996). A theory of collective reputations (with applications to the persistence of corruption and to firm quality). Review of Economic Studies, 63(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington Field Office (2011). Washington Vineyard Acreage Report 2011. Available at https://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Washington/Publications/Fruit/GrapesFinalwithCounty.pdf.Google Scholar
Yang, N., McCluskey, J., and Brady, M. (2012). The value of good neighbors: A spatial analysis of the California and Washington State wine industries. Land Economics, 88(4), 674–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar