We document the geographic concentration patterns of Russian manufacturing using detailed microgeographic data. About 80% of three‐digit industries are significantly agglomerated, and a similar share of three‐digit industry pairs is significantly coagglomerated. Industry pairs with stronger buyer–supplier links—as measured using Russian input–output tables—tend to be slightly more coagglomerated. This result is robust to instrumental variable estimation using either Canadian or US instruments. Using Canadian ad valorem transport costs as a proxy for transport costs in Russia, we further find that industries with higher transport costs are more dispersed, and industry pairs with higher transport costs are less coagglomerated.
We study how technological progress in manufacturing and transportation to-gether with migration costs interact to shape the space-economy. Rising labor productivity in the manufacturing sector fosters the agglomeration of activities, whereas falling transport costs associated with technological and organizational in-novations fosters their dispersion. Since these two forces have been at work for a long time, the final outcome must depend on how drops in the costs of producing and trading goods interact with the various costs borne by migrants. Finally, when labor is heterogeneous, the most efficient workers of the less productive region are the first to move to the more productive region.
We develop a monopolistic competition model with heterogeneous agents who self-select into occupations (entrepreneurs and workers) depending on innate ability. The effect of market size on the equilibrium occupational structure crucially hinges on properties of the lower tier utility function—its scale elasticity and relative love for-variety.When combined with the underlying ability distribution, the share of entrepreneurs and income inequality can increase or decrease with market size. When extended to allow for the endogenous sorting of mobile agents between cities, numerical examples suggest that sorting may increase inequality within and between cities.
Standard measures of competitive toughness fail to capture the fact that, as consumers optimize intertemporally, firms operating today compete with (yet non-existent) businesses which will be started tomorrow. We develop a two-tier CES model of dynamic monopolistic competition in which the impact of product differentiation on the market outcome depends crucially on the elasticity of intertemporal substitution (EIS). The degree of product differentiation per se fails to serve as a meaningful indicator of competitive toughness: what matters is its cross-effect with EIS. We also extend the model to the case of non-CES preferences to capture variable markups.