| SITE MAP | SEARCH! | E & B GEOG | RESOURCES | A-Z INDEX |
Economic Agglomeration & Localization: Clusters, Growth Poles and
Industrial Districts
Literature
(http://faculty.washington.edu/krumme/450/localization.html)
| . | Internal Economies/Diseconomies | External Economies/Diseconomies |
|---|---|---|
| General References to Untraded Interdependencies, Spillovers & Complementarities | Externalities Coupling Constraints (Hagerstrand, 1970) |
|
| Scale Effects | Economies of Scale |
|
| Scale & Diversity and/or "Place" Effects | Economies of Scope
(including the complementarity expressed in concave transformation curves)
Economies of Massed Reserves/Resources (Robinson) |
Diversity, Complementaries and other Interdependencies in
"Agglomeration Economies"
"Place" and "Locality" Effects
"Business Climate" & "Milieu" Effects |
| Supporting Pages: | Definitions: |
Internet Sites:
Literature:
Amin, Ash. "Industrial Districts," in: Sheppard, Eric and Trevor J. Barnes, eds., A companion to economic geography. Oxford, UK ; Malden, Mass. : Blackwell Publishers, 2000 [Chapter 10, pp.149ff.] [Suzzallo/Allen Stacks HF1025 .C66 2000]
Appold, S.J. Labor-market imperfections and the agglomeration of firms: evidence from the emergent period of the US semiconductor industry. Environment & Planning A, vol.30(3), 1998.
Arthur, B. 1990. 'Silicon valley' locational clusters: When do increasing returns imply monopoly. J. Mathematical Social Sciences. 19: 235-251.
Asheim, Bjorn T., Industrial Districts: The Contributions of Marshall and Beyond, in: The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, Edited by GORDON L. CLARK, MARYANN P. FELDMAN, and MERIC S. GERTLER, Oxford (U.K.): Oxford University Press, 2000, Ch.21, pp.413ff. [HF1025.O94.2000 (Suzzallo)]
Baily, M., Hulten, C. & Campbell, D. 1992. Productivity dynamics in manufacturing plants. In Brookings Papers: Microeconomics 1992.
Bergman, Edward M. and Edward J. Feser Industrial and Regional Clusters: Concepts and Comparative Applications {Regional Science Institute Web Book]
Berstein, J. & Nadiri, M. 1988. Interindustry R&D spillovers, rates of return, and production in high- tech industries. AER. 78: 429-434.
Bernstein, J. & Nadiri, M. 1989. Research & development and intra-industry spillovers: An empirical application of dynamic duality. Rev. Economic Studies. 56: 249-269.
Best, Michael H., "Cluster Dynamics," Ch.3 in: The New Competitive Advantage: The Renewal of American Industry. Oxford University Press, 2001. [HD41 B382 2001]
Carlton, D. 1983. The location and employment choices of new firms: An econometric model with discrete and continuous endogenous variables. Rev. Econ. & Stat. 65(3): 440-449.
Castania, R. & Helfat, C. 1991. Managerial resources and rents. J. of Management. 17: 155-171.
Catin, Maurice. Productivity, Agglomeration Economies and Metropolitan Concentration. Revue d'Economie Regionale et Urbaine, 1995, 4, pp. 663ff.
Clark, G. 1989. U.S. regional transformation in the context of international economic competition. In Rodwin, L. & Sazanami, H. (eds.) Deindustrialization and Regional Economic Transformation: The experience of the United States. Boston, Mass: Unwin. pp. 198- 220.
Ciccone, A. and R.E.Hall, Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity, American Econ. Rev. 86(1), 1996, pp.54ff.
David, P. & Rosenbloom, J. 1990. Marshallian factor market externalities and the dynamics of industrial localization. J. Urban Economics. 28: 349-370.
Davis, S. & Haltiwanger, J. 1992. Gross job creation, gross job destruction, and employment reallocation. QJE. 107(3): 819-863.
DeBresson, C. & Amesse, F. 1990. Networks of innovators: A review and introduction to the issue. Research Policy. 20: 363- 379.
Faini, R., 1984. Increasing returns, non-traded inputs and regional developments. Economic Journal. 94: 308- 323.
Farrell, J. & Saloner, G. 1986. Installed base and compatibility innovation, product preannouncements and predation. Amer.Econ.Rev. 76(5): 940-955.
Digiovanna, Sean. Industrial Districts and Regional Economic Development: A Regulation Approach. Regional Studies, July 1996, 30(4), p. 373.
Foray, D. 1990. The secrets of industry are in the air: Industrial cooperation and the organizational dynamics of the innovative firm. Research Policy. 20: 393- 405.
DeBresson, C. & Amesse, F. 1991. Networks of innovators: A review and introduction to the issue. Research Policy. 20: 363-379.
ETTLINGER N., THE LOCALIZATION OF DEVELOPMENT IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE, ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY 70: (2) 144-166 APR 1994
Fujita, M., P.Krugman and Anthony J. Venables, "Industrial Clustering," Ch.16 in: The Spatial Economy. 1999, pp.283ff. [HF1025.F973.1999]
Fujita, M. and J. Thisse, "Economics of Agglomeration," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, (1996). (A survey of recent literature on agglomeration.)
Glaeser, E., Kallal, H., Scheinkman, J., & Shleifer, A.
1992. Growth in cities. JPE. 100: 1126-1152.
Gray, M., E.Golob & A. Markusen, "Big Firms, Long Arms, Wide Shoulders:
'The Hub-and-Spoke' Industrial District in the Seattle Region," Regional
Studies, 30(7), 1996, 651-66.
Hall, B. 1987. The relationship between firm size and firm
growth in the US manufacturing sector. J. Ind. Econ.
35: 583-606.
Hanson, Gordon H., "Firms, Workers, and the Geographic Concentration of
Economic Activity, in:
The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography,
Edited by GORDON L. CLARK,
MARYANN P. FELDMAN, and MERIC S. GERTLER,
Oxford (U.K.): Oxford University Press, 2000, Ch.24, pp.477ff..
[HF1025.O94.2000 (Suzzallo)]
Harrison, B. 1994. The myth of small firms as the
predominant job generators. Economic Dev. Quar. 8: 3-
18.
Haunschild, P. 1993. Interorganizational imitation: The
impact of interlocks on corporate acquisition activity.
ASQ. 38: 564-592.
Holmes, Thomas J.,
How Industries Migrate When Agglomeration
Economies Are Important,
Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 45, No. 2, March
1999, pp. 240-63
[Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic
Activity; Industrial Migration]
Jaffe, A. 1986. Technological opportunity and spillovers
of R&D: Evidence from firm's patents, profits, and
market value. AER. 76: 984-1001.
Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. 1993.
Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as
evidenced by patent citations. QJE. __:577-598.
Kaufman, A., Gittell, R. Merenda, M, Naumes, W. & Wood, C.
1994. Porter's model for geographic competive
advantage: The case of New Hampshire. Econ. Dev.
Quar. 8(1): 43-66.
Keilbach, Max,
Marshallian Externalities and the
Dynamics of Agglomeration and
Regional Growth (Online) Porter's model for geographic
competive
advantage: The case of New Hampshire. Econ. Dev.
Quar. 8(1): 43-66.
Keilbach, Max,
Marshallian Externalities and the
Dynamics of Agglomeration and
Regional Growth (Online) [NECI Research Index]
Kelley, M. & Harrison, B. 1990. The subcontracting
behavior of single vs. multiplant enterprises in U.S.
manufacturing: Implications for economic development.
World Development. 18(9): 1273-94.
Krugman, P., "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," JPE 99, 483-499,
(1991).
[
JSTORS/Abstract&PDF]
Krugman, P. 1991b. Geography and Trade. MIT Press:
Cambridge, Mass.
Krugman (1993, p.98) sums up the impact of economies of scale by
concluding that "producers have an incentive to
concentrate production of each good or service in a limited number of
locations". He factors in "the costs of transactions
across distance:"
Lang, Robert (Fannie Mae Foundation).
Office Sprawl: The Evolving Geography of Office
Space. Brookings Inst.
October 2000
Lorenzen, Mark, ed., Specialization and Localized Learning: Six Studies
on the European Furniture Industry. Copenhagen Business School Press
1998 [Rev. in: JEL Sept.1999, p.120f]
Mansfield, E. 1977. Social & private rates of return from
industrial innovations. QJE. 77: 22-240
Mariussen, Oge. Cluster policies - cluster development? : a
contribution
to the analysis of the new learning economy. Stockholm : Nordregio,
2001. - (Nordregio report, ISSN 14032503 ; 2001:2)
Markusen A.,
Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts
ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY
72: (3) 293-313 JUL 1996
[Reprinted in:
Marshall, A. 1920. Industry and Trade. London:
MacMillan.
(Marshall 1890, 1920, Book 4, Chaper X)
Martin, S., McHugh, R. & Johnson, S. 1993. The influence
of location on productivity: Manufacturing technology
in rural and urban areas. Growth & Change. 24: 459-
86.
Milgrom, P. & Roberts, J. 1991. Bargaining costs, influence
costs, and the organization of economic activity. In
Alt, J. & Shepsle, K. (eds.) Positive Perspectives on
Political Economy. Cambridge Univ. Press: Cambridge.
Mody, Ashoka. 1993. Learning through alliances. J. Econ.
Behav. & Org. 20: 151-170.
Morrison Paul, C.J. and D. S. Siegel, "Scale Economies and Industry
Agglomeration Externalities: A Dynamic Cost Function Approach," American
Economic Review, 89(1), March 1999, pp.272ff.
Mulligan, James G., The Economies of Massed Reserves, Am Econ Rev
73(4), Sept. 1983, pp.725ff.
Myrdal, Gunnar. Rich Lands and Poor: The Road to World Prosperity.
N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1957.
Nelson, R. 1982. The role of knowledge in R&D efficiency,
Quar.J.Econ. 97: 453-70
Norton, R.D., "Agglomeration and Competitiveness: From Marshall to
Chinitz," Urban Studies 29(2), 1992, 155-70.
Norton, R.D.,
CLUSTER THEORIES (1): SPATIAL EXTERNALITIES
Update to Online Book,
Geography of
the New Economy. Revised 2000.
OECD Proceedings. Boosting Innovation: The Cluster Approach. Paris, 1999.
[HD69.S8.B66.1999, Suz]
OhUallachain, B. & Satterthwaite, M. 1992. Sectoral growth
patterns at the metropolitan level: An evaluation of
economic development incentives. J. Urban Economics.
31: 25-58.
Ottaviano, Gianmarco and Jacques-Francois Thisse,
Agglomeration and Economic Geography
[http://www.core.ucl.ac.be/services/library.html -- Discussion Papers,
2003, #16, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations
Research and Econometrics (CORE)]
Paniccia, Ivana. Industrial Districts: Evolution and Competitiveness in
Italian Firms. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar. 2002.
[HD1393.5 P345. 2002/ Suzz]
Pennings, J. & Harianto, F., 1992. Technological Networking
and Innovation Implementation. SMJ, 13: 29-46.
Phelps, Nicholas A. External Economies, Agglomeration and Flexible
Accumulation. Revue d'Economie Regionale et
Urbaine, 1995, 4, pp. 645ff.
Phillips, Peter W.B.,
New models of agri-food innovation and development
Science, Technology and Innovation Program, Harvard University
(Viewpoints)
[Author: Department of Agricultural Economics
University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada]
Porter, Michael
M. Porter,
Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in
a Global Economy,
Economic Development Quarterly 14, no. 1, February 2000: 15-34.
Rauch, J. 1993a. Does history matter only when it matters
little? The case of city-industry lcoation. Quarterly
J. Economics. 843-867.
Rauch, J. 1993b. Productivity gains from geographical
concentration of human capital: Evidence from the
cities. J. Urban Econ. 34: 380-400.
Robinson, E.A.G., The Structure of Competitive Industry, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1958 (pp.26-7).
Rothenberg, Jerome,
The Economics of Congestion and Pollution: An Integrated View
The American Economic Review, Vol. 60, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings
of the Eighty-second
Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association. (May, 1970), pp.
114-121. [A
HREF="http://www.jstor.org/fcgi-bin/jstor/viewitem.fcg/00028282/di950422/95p0020p/0?config=jstor&frame=frame&userID=8c8eb049@washington.edu/8dd5254c0050227a17&dpi=3">
Paper (JSTOR)
Saxenian, A. 1990. Regional networks and the resurgence of
Silicon Valley. Calif. Management. Rev., 33: 89-112.
Sabel, C. 1989. The resurgence of regional economies. In
Hirst, P. & Zeitlin, J. Reversing industrial decline.
Berg Press: Oxford.
Scott, A. 1988. New Industrial Spaces. Pion Ltd: London.
Scott, A. 1991. The aeropspace-electronics industrial
complex of souther California: The formative years,
1940-1960. Research Policy. 20(5): 439-456.
Suzuki, K. 1993. R&D spillovers and technology transfer
among and within vertical keiretsu groups: Evidence
from the Japanese electrical machinery industry.
Intern. J. Industrial Org. 11: 573-591.
Shelburne, R. & Bednarzik, R. 1993. Geographic
concentration of trade sensitive employment. Monthly
Labor Review. June 1993: 3-13.
Spence, A.M., 1984. Cost reduction, competition and industry
performance. Econometrica, 52: 101-21
Storper, M., Globalization, Localization and Trade; in:
The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography,
Edited by GORDON L. CLARK,
MARYANN P. FELDMAN, and MERIC S. GERTLER,
Oxford (U.K.): Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 146ff..
[HF1025.O94.2000 (Suzzallo)]
Storper, M. 1992. The limits of globalization: Technology
districts and international trade. Econ. Geography.
68(1): 60-93.
Storper, M. & Harrison, B. 1991. Flexibility, hierarchy
and regional development: The changing structure of
industrial production systems and their forms of
governance in the 1990's. Research Policy. 20(5):
407-422.
Thurow, L. 1989. Regional transformation and the service
activities. In Rodwin, L. & Sazanami, H. (eds.)
Deindustrialization and Regional Economic
Transformation: The experience of the United States.
Boston, Mass: Unwin. pp. 179-198.
Ullman, E.L.
"Regional Development and the Geography of Concentration." (1958)
Ullman, E.L.
"Geographic Theory and Underdeveloped Areas." (1960)
Ullman, E.L.
"The Nature of Cities Reconsidered." Papers and Proceedings, Regional
Science
Association 9 (1962): 7-23. (Reprinted in H. W. Eldredge. Taming
Megalopolis, Vol. 1. New York: Anchor, Doubleday, 1967, pp. 71-93;
in Library of Urban Affairs. New York: Praeger, 1967; i W. H. Leahy,
David L. McKee and Robert J. Dean, eds. Urban Economics. New York,
1970, pp. 3-20; and in part in Ekistics (1964), pp. 413-15.)
One variant of industrial districts is the hub-and-spoke form,
where an industry and its suppliers cluster around one or several core
firms. The hub-and-spoke district is distinct from the
flexibly specialized district, its successs a function of dominant firm
market power and strategy rather than networking.
Hub-and-spoke districts may generate high regional growth
rates and good income distributions, but may also be
vulnerable to cyclical and secular decline.
pp.55ff. use of Gini coefficient
Appendix D (pp.129ff.) Locational Gini Coefficients
Suburbs now contain the majority of office space in
many of the country's top metropolitan office
markets, according to this survey. Before 1980,
central cities dominated the office market...
As advances in transportation and information obliterate distance, cities
and regions face a tougher time anchoring
income-generating activities. In probing the conditions under which some
manage to remain ''sticky'' places in ''slippery''
space, this paper rejects the ''new industrial district,'' in either its
Marshallian or more recent Italianate form, as the dominant
paradigmatic solution. I identify three additional types of industrial
districts, with quite disparate firm configurations..
"If, in general, each of the largest cities on the average have been
growing somewhat more, what is the explanation? No pat answer is possible
but the following three factors may be involved:
Clippings:
Location Resources |
Geography 450 Syllabus |
Economic & Business Geography
2005 [krumme@u.washington.edu]