100 likes | 175 Views
Cluster theory evidence: What remains of the concept – some reflections. Session IX – Innovation Systems Research Network Seventh Annual Meeting Toronto, May 5-6, 2005 Bjørn Asheim Lund University and University of Oslo. What’s good with Porter. Path dependency – historical trajectories
E N D
Cluster theory evidence: What remains of the concept – some reflections Session IX – Innovation Systems Research Network Seventh Annual Meeting Toronto, May 5-6, 2005 Bjørn Asheim Lund University and University of Oslo
What’s good with Porter • Path dependency – historical trajectories • Continuous innovation • Competitive advantage based on unique resources, which need not be R&D-based • Focus less on R&D and more on interactive learning • From a firm to a cluster (context) perspective
From ID to cluster in a globalising economy • These characteristics of IDs are disappearing, making IDs turn into regional clusters: • Embeddedness (fusion of economy and community) - FDIs • Value/commodity chain local - outsourcing • Dominance of SMEs – TNCs and regional group formations
Problems with Porter’s cluster • Conceptual problems – DEFINITIONS • Original definition (1990): Economical/functional – national level (industrial/sectoral clusters within nations) • Later definition (1998): Geographical/territorial – regional level (regional clusters)
Problems with Porter’s cluster • Scaling problems – location of factors of the DIAMOND: • From large nations (USA) to small nations (Norway) • From nations to regions • From large regions (in federal states) to small regions (in the Nordic countries)
Problems with Porter’s cluster • Theoretical problems – the inclusiveness of the CLUSTER concept • Porter makes no distinction between cluster and RIS, as clusters contains R&D institutes and universities • Important to make this distinction – cluster is not identical with RIS (a RIS must support more than one local cluster)
Knowledge bases, clusters and RIS: • The relevance of different types of RIS must be placed in a context of the knowledge base of various industries • Innovation processes of firms are strongly shaped by their specific knowledge base • Distinguish between different types of knowledge base: • a) analytical (science based) • b) synthetic (engineering based) • c) symbolic (creativity based)
Cluster-RIS distinction (not identical – RIS supports more than one cluster): • The existence of ’pure’ regional clusters where relations to RIS are established at a later stage of a cluster’s life cycle in order to support localised learning and innovation in the cluster (auxiliary), and • The existence of relations between clusters and RIS from the emergence of the cluster as a necessary input in the development of the cluster (integrated)
Cluster – RIS: • The traditional constellation of industrial clusters surrounded by innovation supporting organisations in a RIS is normally found in contexts of industries with a synthetic knowledge base • The existence of a RIS as a necessary part of the development of an emerging cluster will normally be the case of industries based on an analytical knowledge base
Thus, different historical and emerging technological trajectories co-exist: • In traditional cluster-RIS relations, based on industries with a synthetic knowledge base, the logic behind building RIS is to support and strengthen localised learning of existing industrial specialisations in a cluster, i.e. to promote historical technological trajectories based on ’sticky’ knowledge in the region • In contexts of relations between clusters and RIS as a necessary condition for the emergence and growth of the clusters it is a question of promoting new and emerging economic activity based on industries with an analytical knowlegde base, requiring close and systemic industry-university cooperation and interaction in e.g. science parks, located in proximity of knowledge creating organisations (e.g. (technical) universities)