Regional Cluster Policy Research Articles

Network dynamics in regional clusters: Evidence from Chile

A wealth of empirical literature shows that one of elements of success for regional clusters is that they facilitate the formation of local inter-organizational networks, which act as conduits of knowledge and innovation. While several studies analyse the benefits and characteristics of regional cluster networks, very little is known about how such networks evolve over time and the extent to which their dynamics can affect development processes. Using longitudinal data on a wine cluster in Chile and Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models (SAOM) to measure network dynamics, this paper examines the microdynamics underpinning the formation of new knowledge ties among wineries. It finds that the coexistence of cohesion effects (reciprocity and transitivity) with the weak knowledge bases of some firms in the cluster contribute to a stable informal hierarchical network structure over time. The empirical results have implications for theories on network dynamics in regional clusters and cluster policies.

A Public Choice Perspective on Regional Cluster and Network Promotion in Germany

Comparatively late by international standards, clusters and networks have now become established concepts in the development strategies of most German states and regions. However, there is a strong impression that policy and practice are running far ahead of our theoretical and empirical understanding of clusters. While conventional cluster theory fails to explain the spread and functions of such policies, this paper develops a Public Choice model that assumes different rationalities for consultants, politicians and practitioners, causing academic research and the practice of cluster development to drift apart. This is confronted with empirical evidence from two independent yet complementary surveys. The first covered 134 practitioners, consultants and observers of regional cluster policy case studies with semi-structured interviews, while the second relied on a postal questionnaire yielding responses from 123 cluster and network managers. Our findings illustrate the self-conception of practitioners and their specific rationality, which can be confronted with the state of scholarly knowledge on clusters and networks. It is found that in the practical action space, conceptual differences between clusters and networks, as well as emergence and growth, hardly matter. Rather than emerging and evolving organically, both are understood as organized phenomena, and there is a strong technocratic belief in the ability to govern their development. The paper aims to shed some light on why the policy tail appears to be wagging the analytical dog by neglecting research findings and proper empirical identification of clusters and networks and what scholarly research could do to regain political and practical relevance.

Canada’s Regional Innovation Support System and Cluster Policy

Canada’s Regional Innovation Support System and Cluster Policy

Mind the Gap: Regionale Clusterpolitik im Spannungsfeld von Wissenschaft, Politik und Praxis aus der Perspektive der Neuen Politischen Ökonomie

Mind the Gap: Regional cluster policies between science, politics and practice from a public choice perspective. Since the 1990s, the cluster concept’s ongoing popularity with politicians and economic development practitioners has largely bypassed scientific research which is still struggling to come to grips with theory and empirics of clusters. Based on an interview survey of ten case studies of regional cluster policies at the state and sub-state level in Western Germany, this paper investigates the contribution of scientific cluster research to the current practice of cluster promotion. It is found that following political and bureaucratic rationalities, conceptualisation and implementation of cluster policies largely ignore theoretical insights and make only incomplete use of scientific methods available for proper cluster identification. This has important implications for both practice and research, and highlights that economic geographers should overcome their reluctance to engage with policy and employ their core competencies to make their voices heard in the arena of policy and practice.

Ansatzpunkte einer relationalen Regionalpolitik und Clusterförderung

Relational aspects of regional economic support and cluster policy. The recent debate about the application and interpretation of cluster concepts is characterized by increasing skepticism. The literature has particularly criticized the fact that policy formulation is often only vaguely related to the academic discussion and evidence regarding clusters. Part of this confusion can be traced back to the fuzziness of the original cluster concept developed by Michael Porter which claims to be applicable to the competitiveness of both national industry bundles and inter-linked regional industry networks. As a consequence, policies which are declared as cluster policies can be quite heterogeneous. In this paper, we argue for a closer link between cluster conception and cluster policy. It is shown that an understanding of clusters as multidimensional industry configurations is advantageous in developing and advancing a relational cluster policy. A multidimensional cluster approach, which highlights the role of agency in economic interaction, focuses on the action space of cluster agents, and goes beyond the regional and national scale. It avoids simplifications and deterministic interpretations that can result from using aggregated data or from treating regions as if they were agents. Instead, the approach recognizes that external relations of cluster actors are core in understanding and explaining the success of clusters. We will emphasize this by laying out elements of a relational cluster policy.

Putting Innovation in Place: Policy Strategies for Industrial Services, Regional Clusters, and Manufacturing SMEs in Japan and the United States 1

Abstract This paper examines the evolving situation of mature manufacturing small and midsize enterprises (SMEs) in Japan and the United States and considers some of the key challenges they now face in an era of globalization and rapid technological change. The rationale and justification for policy intervention to support mature SMEs is considered. A review is offered of illustrative policy initiatives in three areas: framework policies, industrial services, and regional industrial cluster policies. The convergence of manufacturing and regional policies is noted. The relative strengths and weaknesses of Japanese and US strategies are assessed. The paper concludes with a comparison of Japanese and US approaches to retaining manufacturing SMEs, interpreted through the various and at times interactive ways through which each country’s innovation system develops and evolves technology and business support policies.

Regional policy commentary: Regional cluster policy: Choosing for trend or tradition

Regional policy commentary: Regional cluster policy: Choosing for trend or tradition

Cluster Evolution, the Transformation of Old Industrial Regions and the Steel Industry Supply Chain in North East England

Sadler D. (2004) Cluster evolution, the transformation of old industrial regions and the steel industry supply chain in North East England, Reg. Studies 38, 55–66. This paper reports on research carried out in response to the decline of the steel industry in North East England. Drawing on survey evidence, it maps out the consequences of contraction for the industry’s regional supply chain. The issues confronting engineering firms are explored in particular detail. The changing fortunes of the steel industry supply chain are interpreted in terms of the industrial cluster discourse. It is argued that an effective regional cluster policy needs to identify clusters on a number of variables, including knowledge flows, and should recognize the significance of dynamic cluster evolution.

Regional Cluster Policies: Learning by Comparing?

This paper deals with an intriguing paradox that can be observed in today’s regional economic policy making: whereas unique local factors are increasingly seen as the determinants of regional economic success, simultaneously more and more governments try to copy policy experiences that proved to be successful in a particular region. A good example here is the use of ‘best practices’ in the field of regional cluster policy. Cluster programs are becoming like ‘mantras’ for policy makers who want to stimulate regional economic development. Given this paradox, in the present paper we address the question what lessons can be drawn from comparing success stories of regional clustering. To answer this question, we combine insights from regional economics and comparative public policy. To start, we discuss the literature that has led to the popularity of the cluster concept as a learning device among policy makers. After that, we identify the preconditions (‘contingencies’) that affect whether these cluster policy initiatives can be transferred from one place to another. We find that some of the contingent influences, especially those related to the degree of uniqueness of an area’s economic structure and culture, hamper the possibility of ‘learning by comparing’ in regional cluster policy. It may even be argued that exactly those regional specificities explain the success of cluster–based policy efforts. Thus, we have to draw the rather pessimistic conclusion that the possibilities of lesson–drawing in regional cluster policy are limited. In our view, at best ‘best practices’ should be seen as inspiration sources rather than as recipes for successful regional economic development.A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the CURE 3–Conference on Outstanding Regions in Leeuwarden, The Netherlands, November 22–24, 2000. We would like to thank Arnoud Lagendijk, an anonymous referee and the editors for valuable comments.

The Evaluation of Regional Innovation and Cluster Policies: Towards a Participatory Approach

The objective of this article is to provide a reply to the following question: What is the most suitable way of tackling evaluation of new regional policies? Regional development has moved today to new arenas. Here, we are discussing learning communities and regions that are able to adapt themselves to the new competitive conditions. SMEs policies at the regional level have also changed. New regional policies devote much of their attention to networks of inter-firm and inter-institutional cooperation - clusters - and to regional innovation systems. As a consequence, evaluation methodologies are also changing looking for more creative ways of assessing the impact of these new policies. In our opinion, participatory evaluation seems to be more appropriate to the specific characteristics of new regional policies and more suitable for sorting out the problems posed by their evaluation. In addition, under this approach, evaluation can turn into a useful tool to mobilize communities for regional action , empower local agents and enhance learning capacity.