Abstract
The recent literature concerning globalizing regional development has placed significant emphasis on the Global Production Network (GPN 2.0). GPN 2.0 in economic geography emphasizes that regional growth is caused by a shift in the strategic coupling mode from a low to high level. In addition, GPN 2.0 regards firm-level value capture trajectories as key analytical object, rather than the interactive relationships among scalar and divergent actors in GPN 1.0. To provide a better understanding of causal linkages between the GPNs and uneven regional development in the background of globalization and to test the applicability of GPN 2.0 analysis framework, the paper analyzed 62 Korean-invested automotive firms in Jiangsu Province, China. In order to explore the value capture trajectories of lead firms in the GPNs, the authors applied K-means clustering method to quantitatively analyze the local supply networks of lead firms from organizational and spatial dimensions. Then, comparisons were made between strategic coupling modes of GPNs and regional development in North and South Jiangsu. This study found obvious similarities within these two regions but obvious differences between them in terms of value capture trajectories. We observed that North Jiangsu is currently in the stage of “structural coupling”, whereas South Jiangsu is in the stage of “functional coupling.” Thus, this article argues that spatial settings such as regional assets and autonomy are key factors influencing uneven economic development. This research may provide a crucial reference for the regional development of Jiangsu, China.
Highlights
Since the early 1990s, economic activity dominated by transnational corporations (TNCs) has become more fragmented and spatially dispersed on a global scale; this phenomenon is associated with economic globalization
Based on the study results of Coe, Yueng, Dicken, Henderson, and their colleagues, who have been the main contributors to the theoretical global production networks (GPNs) framework, the present study focused on the evolution and differences between the various stages of the framework
GPN 2.0 holds that strategic coupling is dynamic and undergoes the coupling–decoupling–recoupling process, and that only through the realization of strategic coupling from a low to high level can a regional economy thrive
Summary
Since the early 1990s, economic activity dominated by transnational corporations (TNCs) has become more fragmented and spatially dispersed on a global scale; this phenomenon is associated with economic globalization. Sunley [6] argues that the most substantial problems are the lack of accuracy and issue orientation Against this backdrop, Coe and Yueng [1,7] put forward the GPN 2.0 analysis framework in 2015. Unlike GPN 1.0, GPN 2.0 considers that strategic couplings are dynamic processes, and to realize the strategic coupling from a low level to a high level can bring out positive regional development outcomes. Another difference between GPN 1.0 and GPN 2.0 is in the analysis schema.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
