Biography
Kirk Doran is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Notre Dame. Doran received his B.A. in Physics from Harvard University in 2002, his S.M. in Applied Mathematics from Harvard University in 2002, and his Ph.D. in Economics from Princeton University in 2008, where his dissertation won Princeton's labor economics dissertation award. Doran's research focuses on issues in labor economics, innovation economics, and international migration, with a particular focus on human capital complementarities. His work has examined the implications of large migrations of top scientists on the productivity and knowledge generation of their peers. Recent work has focused on the role of externalities, collaboration, and geographic distance in knowledge production, the impact of top prizes on the intellectual content of their recipient's work, and the impact of highly skilled immigrants on firms which randomly receive them. Professor Doran's research has been published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, the Journal of Political Economy, the Review of Economics and Statistics, the Journal of Labor Economics, and the Journal of Human Resources, among others, and has been funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Upjohn Institute, and the Kauffman Foundation.
Interview with Professor Doran
How does it feel to be AWARDED the Panmure House Prize?
I feel honoured and privileged to win the Panmure House Prize. Adam Smith has been an inspiration to me since the first time I began studying social structures and the economy as an undergraduate. Last year’s winner, Joseph Henrich, is an intellectual hero of mine as well. I am particularly inspired by the Prize’s aim to explore the relationship between long-term thinking and radical innovation. This is exactly what our current incentive structures both within and outside academia under-incentivize, and that is why Panmure House’s work is so essential here.
How did you find out about the Panmure House Prize and what was it that attracted you to apply?
I found out about the Panmure House Prize thanks to the wonderful team at the University of Notre Dame that seeks out new opportunities for faculty research support. Reading about past winners and the aims of the prize made me even more excited to apply.
Could you give us a brief introduction to your research for people who might not be from an academic background, could you explain what is the problem you are trying to solve?
My research demonstrates that the key to all economic growth is deep collaboration among innovators. I use empirical and theoretical work to show that, in the absence of this collaboration, the activity and migration of innovative people becomes a zero-sum game, making long term economic growth impossible. Since the work of 2018 Nobel Laureate Paul Romer, economists have known that long term economic growth occurs due to the non-rivalness of knowledge. What has been left unknown is how this knowledge is produced, and whether there is anything intrinsic to all knowledge production that has implications for all economic growth. What my research demonstrates is that, while knowledge itself is non-rival, knowledge is only produced by individuals who themselves are rival, and this rivalness of knowledge producers does have universal implications for economic growth. It implies that a race between increasing and decreasing returns is inevitable. The infinite potential sharing of non-rival knowledge makes increasing returns possible, but the congestion of the rival producers of that knowledge makes decreasing returns inevitable. It turns out that there is only one way for this race to be won by increasing returns: for rival innovators to collaborate deeply with each other. In the absence of this collaboration, innovators merely displace each other – knowledge cannot truly grow.
How do you conduct your research?
My research exemplifies the interdisciplinary approach which Adam Smith employed to understand growth; he described growth as a process which depends on increasing returns, and increasing returns as dependent on innovators whose motivations could only be described through moral philosophy. In my case, I use techniques from the sociology of teams and the history of science in my ongoing economics research to study the effects of collaboration and interaction on innovation. Through constructing new combinations of bibliometric, census, tax, migration, and historical data, I further discover when deep collaboration is more likely, and when policy makers must demand more knowledge as a public good.
How do you envision your work will advance long-term thinking and innovation in your field and beyond?
I think my research will help to refocus our policy efforts regarding long term economic growth to the encouragement of deep collaboration among innovative people. It is not enough to better educate our workforce or even produce more entrepreneurs, scientists, and inventors; such efforts could not possibly produce long run economic growth unless these individuals enter periods of deep collaboration with each other in the joint production of knowledge. There are three specific policy implications of these results: (1) A country that produces or attracts greater numbers of innovative people will predictably create large displacement effects in the absence of an increase in the demand for knowledge; (2) policy makers should increase the demand for knowledge through incentivizing sustainable teams among innovators in entrepreneurship, invention, and academia; (3) policy makers must increase incentives for collaboration across disciplines, and incentivize the creation of the common languages across disciplines that are a prerequisite for synthesis.
What are you working on next?
I am working on better understanding which social structures and incentives lead to the kinds of teams whose collaboration can lead to long term economic growth. This involves empirical techniques for mapping specific innovations onto economic growth, as well as continued work on understanding how specific shocks such as migration, policy changes, and incentive changes lead to changes in collaboration and innovation. This work will involve continued collaboration through interdisciplinary partnerships and teams.
