What Qualifies as as Cluster Theory?

OPEN ARCHIVE

Union Jack
Dannebrog

What Qualifies as as Cluster Theory?

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Maskell, Peter en_US
dc.contributor.author Kebir, Laïla en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2009-02-04T10:26:26Z
dc.date.available 2009-02-04T10:26:26Z
dc.date.issued 2005-08-02T00:00:00Z en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10398/7211
dc.description.abstract Abstract: This paper investigates the theoretical backgrounds of the "cluster" and proposes a framework aiming at drawing the contour of cluster theory. The profundity of the notion of ‘clusters’ is arguably conditional on the coherence of four fundamental issues associated with the concept: 1) the economic and social benefits that may accrue to firms when clustering or co-locating (the existence argument); 2) the diseconomies encountered when clustering exceeds certain geographical and sectoral thresholds (the extension argument); 3) the advantages obtained by exploiting intra-cluster synergies rather engaging in external interaction (the exchange argument); and, finally, 4) the possible erosion of economies and onset of diseconomies over the lifecycle of the cluster (the exhaustion argument). Each of these four issues is examined in terms of three relevant major theoretical frameworks that can be brought to bear on the cluster concept. The paper considers approaches based on the idea of externalities (illustrated by the Marshall's work on ‘Industrial district’); on competitiveness issue (illustrated by Michael Porter’s theory of cluster growth); on a territorial perspective (illustrated by the GREMI approach). The analysis acknowledges the general shift in explanatory emphasis from considerations of static cost efficiency towards more dynamic interpretations that highlight the creation and use of knowledge as their pivotal theoretical element. By placing these changes within a common conceptual framework the paper shows how different theoretical solutions provide distinct points of departure for subsequent policy recommendations. Three distinctive groups of solutions are identified focussing respectively on local spillovers, on competitiveness and on the region and its development. The paper concludes by identifying areas of particular ambiguity where further theoretical work is most urgently needed. Key words: Cluster, cluster theory, industrial district, innovative milieu, regional policy JEL Codes: L22, R10, R58 en_US
dc.format.extent 21 s. en_US
dc.language eng en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries DRUID Working paper;2005-009 en_US
dc.title What Qualifies as as Cluster Theory? en_US
dc.type wp en_US
dc.accessionstatus modt01aug05 lano en_US
dc.contributor.corporation Copenhagen Business School. CBS en_US
dc.contributor.department Institut for Industriøkonomi og Virksomhedsstrategi en_US
dc.contributor.departmentshort IVS en_US
dc.contributor.departmentuk Department of Industrial Economics & Strategy en_US
dc.contributor.departmentukshort IES en_US
dc.idnumber x656494556 en_US
dc.publisher.city København en_US
dc.publisher.year 2005 en_US


Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Files Size Format View
maskell05-09.pdf 254.5Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record