Local Clusters in a Global Economy
LOCATION, COMPETITION, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: LOCAL CLUSTERS IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY
By: Porter, Michael E.; Economic Development Quarterly, Feb2000, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p15, 20p, 4 diagrams
Economic geography during an era of global competition involves a paradox. It is widely recognized that changes in technology and competition have diminished many of the traditional roles of location. Yet clusters, or geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, are a striking feature of virtually every national, regional, state, and even metropolitan economy, especially in more advanced nations. The prevalence of clusters reveals important insights about the microeconomics of competition and the role of location in competitive advantage. Even as old reasons for clustering have diminished in importance with globalization, new influences of clusters on competition have taken on growing importance in an increasingly complex, knowledge-based, and dynamic economy. Clusters represent a new way of thinking about national, state, and local economies, and they necessitate new roles for companies, government, and other institutions in enhancing competitiveness. Resources, capital, technology, and other inputs can be efficiently sourced in global markets. Firms can access immobile inputs via corporate networks. It no longer is necessary to locate near large markets to serve them. Governments are widely seen as losing their influence over competition to global forces. It is easy to conclude, then, that location is diminishing in importance.(n1)
This perspective, although widespread, is hard to reconcile with competitive reality. In The Competitive Advantage of Nations (Porter, 1990), I put forward a microeconomically based theory of national, state, and local competitiveness in the global economy. In this theory, clusters have a prominent role. Clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related
By: Porter, Michael E.; Economic Development Quarterly, Feb2000, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p15, 20p, 4 diagrams
Economic geography during an era of global competition involves a paradox. It is widely recognized that changes in technology and competition have diminished many of the traditional roles of location. Yet clusters, or geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, are a striking feature of virtually every national, regional, state, and even metropolitan economy, especially in more advanced nations. The prevalence of clusters reveals important insights about the microeconomics of competition and the role of location in competitive advantage. Even as old reasons for clustering have diminished in importance with globalization, new influences of clusters on competition have taken on growing importance in an increasingly complex, knowledge-based, and dynamic economy. Clusters represent a new way of thinking about national, state, and local economies, and they necessitate new roles for companies, government, and other institutions in enhancing competitiveness. Resources, capital, technology, and other inputs can be efficiently sourced in global markets. Firms can access immobile inputs via corporate networks. It no longer is necessary to locate near large markets to serve them. Governments are widely seen as losing their influence over competition to global forces. It is easy to conclude, then, that location is diminishing in importance.(n1)
This perspective, although widespread, is hard to reconcile with competitive reality. In The Competitive Advantage of Nations (Porter, 1990), I put forward a microeconomically based theory of national, state, and local competitiveness in the global economy. In this theory, clusters have a prominent role. Clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related
References: Adams, J., & Jaffe, A. (1996). Bounding the effects of R&D: An investigation using matched establishment-firm data. Rand Journal of Economics, 27, 700-721. Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86, 630-640. Brandenburger, A., & Nalebuff, B. (1996). Co-opetition. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Cairncross, F. (1997). The death of distance: How the communications revolution will change our lives. Boston: Harvard Business School. Caves, R., & Porter, M. (1977). From entry barriers to mobility barriers: Conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91, 241-261. Enright, M. (1990). Geographical concentration and industrial organization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard Business School. Enright, M. (1993). The geographic scope of competitive advantage. In E. Dirven, J. Groenewegen, & S. van Hoof (Eds.), Stuck in the region? Changing scales of regional identity (pp. 87-102). Utrecht: Netherlands Geographical Studies. Glasmeier, A. (1991). Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the world watch industry. Research Policy, 20, 469-485. Govern d 'Andorra. (1993). Andorra pla estrategic, la Vella, Andorra: Author. Harrison, B., Kelley, M., & Gant, J. (1996). Innovative firm behavior and local milieu: Exploring the intersection of agglomeration, firm effects, industrial organization, and technological change. Economic Geography, 72, 233-258. Jacobs, D., & de Man, A. P. (1996). Clusters, industrial policy, and firm strategy: A menu approach. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 8, 425-437. Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 577-598. Krugman, P. (1986). Strategic trade policy and the new international economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Krugman, P. (1993). The current case for industrial policy. In D. Salvatore (Ed.), Protectionism and worm welfare (pp. 160-179). New York: Cambridge University Press. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics (8th ed.). London: Macmillan. (Original work published 1890) Porter, M Porter, M. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61-78. Porter, M. (1998a). Clusters and competition: New agendas for companies, governments, and institutions. In M. Porter, On competition (pp. 197-287). Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Porter, M. (1998b). The microeconomic foundations of economic development [parts I and II]. In The global competitiveness report 1998 (pp. 38-63). Geneva: World Economic Forum. Suarez-Villa, L., & Walrod, W. (1997). Operational strategy, R&D, and intra-metropolitan clustering in a polycentric structure: The advanced electronics industries of the Los Angeles basin. Urban Studies, 34, 1343-1380. Tyson, L. (1992). Who 's bashing whom? Trade conflicts in high-technology industries. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics. Waits, M. J. (1996). State of cluster-based economic development in Arizona. In R. Breault (Ed.), Global networking of regional optics clusters (pp. 1-10). Denver, CO: International Society for Optical Engineering.