Improved competitiveness, as we all know, is the path to economic nirvana. Plainly, it is a sought-after property of any economy: the term is frequently used by politicians and commentators on economic and business matters. As cities increasingly engage in competition with one another at different levels, the determinants of competitive advantage are coming under intense scrutiny. Many an economic development strategyÐ whether at national, regional or urban levelÐ starts from the premise that `something can be done’ to make an economy more competitive. There is a high-powered Competitiveness Advisory Group which reports to the European Commission (Jacquemin and Pench, 1997); the US has a special commission for competitiveness and the UK government produced a succession of White Papers on the subject in the 1990s. In the latest, the new Labour government highlights the need for the `right local environment for business success’ (Department of Trade and Industry, 1998). The OECD (1996, 1997a, 1997b) too has published a series of reports on the subject, looking particularly at new industries. But there is precious little agreement either on what the term `competitiveness’ means or on how policy should aim to enhance it. Yet most people have an instinctive understanding that some economies function better than others and that there are systematic reasons for this. We know one when we see one, but it is dif® cult to de® ne an elephant. It tends to be taken for granted that some cities have lost their competitive edge, although it is less obvious what variables demonstrate this. In many parts of the world, major cities that were the powerhouses of their respective economies have lost ground substantially. The decline of traditional manufacturing or mining lies behind the relative decline of many of the `rustbelt’ cities of the North and East of the US or the old industrial cities of northern Europe. The poor economic performance and growing social problems of many British cities, especially over the past three decades, have prompted searching questions about their competitiveness and whether or not they specialise in the `right’ sorts of activities. It can also be argued that globalisation, advances in information technology and farreaching structural change have altered the terms of competition between cities (JensenButler et al., 1997). Jockeying for position between the large ® nancial centres such as London, New York and Tokyo has been recognised for some time (Sassen, 1991; Frost and Spence, 1993). European integration impels cities to be more alert to the
Read full abstract