<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Michael Wiebe | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/michael-wiebe/</link><description>Michael Wiebe</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/michael-wiebe/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Effect of High-Tech Clusters on the Productivity of Top Inventors: Comment</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/the-effect-of-high-tech-clusters-on-the-productivity-of-top-inventors-comment/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/the-effect-of-high-tech-clusters-on-the-productivity-of-top-inventors-comment/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This paper is a comment on Moretti (2021b), which studied agglomeration effects for innovation by testing whether the size of technology clusters causes patenting. The original paper (M21) used US patent data from 1971 to 2007 (Zucker and Darby, 2014) and reported a baseline elasticity of patenting with respect to cluster size of 0.0676, along with event study and instrumental variables (IV) evidence supporting a causal interpretation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Wiebe identifies two major methodological problems that undermine M21&amp;rsquo;s causal claims.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>