Abstract
City-regions have become a core unit of analysis for spatial economy, providing an explicit link between bounded administrative units and more networked spaces of production. Too often, however, such analysis is focused on the core of the city-region, applying presumptions of gravity-based agglomeration. This paper examines these networked spaces of production from the city-region periphery, using a firm-based approach as critical determinants of spatial economy via their key interactions. Focused on the Greater Birmingham city-region, UK, the paper explores the integration of city-regional geography with firm-based networked economy. In doing so, it applies a set of networks of practice, focused on firms’ factored, transactional, and transitional dependencies. Using these networks of practice, it critically analyses the spaces of production formed through firm-based interactions, and their concomitance with city-regional designations. It makes two key contributions. First, it enhances the call for greater understanding of the relationship between core and periphery in the context of city-regions. Second, it argues that network-based approaches, which form spatial economy around firm interactions over administrative configurations, offer useful insight into understanding firm–place relationships which more conventional place-based approaches cannot.
Highlights
Recent academic and policy debates have focused overtly on the economies of cities and their capability and role in forming spaces of production (Glaeser, 2013; Storper, 2013)
This paper addresses the gap in existing analysis, focusing on the networkbased dependencies and embeddedness of firms situated in a city-region periphery
This paper examines the networked economy of firms in city-region peripheries
Summary
Recent academic and policy debates have focused overtly on the economies of cities and their capability and role in forming spaces of production (Glaeser, 2013; Storper, 2013). Production systems and their forward and backward linkages have become more dispersed, shifting from spatially bound relations to distinctive and individualistic iterations such as industrial archipelagos (Veltz, 2000), trans-local spaces (Sassen, 2004), and variegated networks (Indraprahasta and Derudder, 2019) Such tendencies display their own set of adaptations with notable sectoral variations; this includes counteracting such fragmentation through reshoring to form time-sensitive clusters or address issues of quality management (Vanchan et al, 2018). Embeddedness can be interpreted through three specific networks of practice: a factored network defined through physical and structural inputs occurring at firm, state or industry level; a transactional network constituting direct forward and backward trade linkages; and a transitional network, involving knowledge transfer and assimilation via broader industrial relations and specialism acquisition Such practice sees embedding a dynamic process in which these networks interact and respond to similar dynamism in both local and extra-local inputs and environment (Figure 1). In doing so it makes two specific contributions: first constructing spatial economy from a periphery-first approach, and second exploring the resultant networks through places and industries regionally peripheral to the agglomeration benefits of a city-region
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
