nep-net New Economics Papers
on Network Economics
Issue of 2010‒04‒11
five papers chosen by
Yi-Nung Yang
Chung Yuan Christian University

  1. Reciprocal Attention and Norm of Reciprocity in Blogging Networks By Alexia Gaudeul; Chiara Peroni
  2. Groups, Networks, and Hierarchy in Household Private Transfers: Evidence from Fiji By Yoshito Takasaki
  3. Networks, Irreversibility and Knowledge Creation. By Patrick Llerena; Muge Ozman
  4. Ambiguity, Social Opinion and the Use of Common Property Resources By Dimitrios Diamantaras; Robert P. Gilles
  5. The Outcomes of Individual-level Technology Transfer and the Role of Research Collaboration Networks By Tuomo Nikulainen

  1. By: Alexia Gaudeul (Graduate School "Human Behavior in Social and Economic Change", Friedrich Schiller University, Jena); Chiara Peroni (Statec & Centre de Recherche Publique Henri Tudor)
    Abstract: Bloggers devote significant time not only producing content for others to read, watch or listen to, but also paying attention to and engaging in interactions with other bloggers. We hope to throw light not only on the factors that gain bloggers significant readership and lively interactions with their audience, but also on the rules that govern their relations with others. We relate bloggers' activity with the size and structure of their network of fellow bloggers. A blogger's readership increases with his activity, while bloggers who read back proportionally fewer of their readers tend also to be more active. We find evidence that those bloggers who read back proportionally fewer of their readers have less readers than bloggers who reciprocate more, but tend to receive more comments per posts.
    Keywords: Blogs, Bloggers, Community, Friendship, Internet, LiveJournal, Reciprocity, Social Media, Social Networks, Social Norms, Web 2.0, Weblogs
    JEL: D64 D85 H41 L82 L86 Z13
    Date: 2010–03–22
  2. By: Yoshito Takasaki
    Abstract: Although economists have extensively studied private transfers exchanged among households within a network, those exchanged directly with groups to which the household belongs – such as ritual gifts, communal work, and church donations --- have received very limited attention. Using original household survey data gathered in rural Fiji, this paper shows that extant studies on across-household private transfers are incomplete for two reasons. First, group-based transfers are much greater than networkbased transfers because of significant contributions to groups for their provision of local public goods. Second, group-based transfers significantly influence network-based transfers through the social hierarchy: A comparison of various groups (e.g., kin and church groups) and social ranks (e.g., gender, disability, elite kin, and religious elite) indicates that network-based transfers adjust to hierarchy bias in group-based transfers among fixed members depending on the physical and social connections of groups and networks.
    Date: 2010–03
  3. By: Patrick Llerena; Muge Ozman
    Date: 2010
  4. By: Dimitrios Diamantaras (Department of Economics, Temple University); Robert P. Gilles (Management School, Queen’s University)
    Abstract: In this paper we argue that ambiguity, combined with social opinion formation can be represented as part of a game-theoretic equilibrium concept that transcends the standard Nash equilibrium concept, applied to a model of the tragedy of the commons. Our modeling can shed some light on the international environment crisis and the relevant ongoing international negotiations. We conclude that social opinion formation in most cases has a significant impact on equilibrium common property resource usage.
    Keywords: Externalities, environment, ambiguity, ambiguity equilibrium
    JEL: C72 D62 D81
    Date: 2010–04
  5. By: Tuomo Nikulainen
    Abstract: This paper discusses the outcomes of university-industry interaction from the perspective of an individual academic researcher. Two contributions are made to the extant literature. First, in the existing research, the focus has mostly been on outcomes such as university-based patenting, licensing revenues, invention disclosures to technology transfer offices, and academic entrepreneurship. This narrow focus has excluded intangible outcomes, such as the identification of new research ideas and commercial opportunities, from the discussion. Therefore, in this paper, both intangible and tangible outcomes are taken into account, and the empirical analysis identifies unique individual-level factors related to the different types of outcomes. Second, in the extant literature, it is argued that a boundary-spanning position within different types of networks is related to higher performance and the identification of unique ideas. This aspect is analysed by identifying the role of a boundary-spanning position in research collaboration networks with respect to the different outcomes. The empirical results show that the different outcomes are clearly related to different individual-level factors, and that a boundary-spanning position in research collaboration networks is related to both intangible and tangible outcomes.
    Keywords: technology transfer, university-industry interaction, individual researchers, research collaboration, research networks, boundary spanning, nanotechnology
    JEL: O31 O33
    Date: 2010–03–25

This nep-net issue is ©2010 by Yi-Nung Yang. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.