Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences

, Volume 1, Issue 2–3, pp 77–97 | Cite as

Concentration, congestion, and the dynamics: spatial re-modeling of the Murphy, Shleifer, and Vishny model

ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

Based on spatial dimension to agglomeration, this paper investigates economic concentration and congestion. Departing from the Murphy, Shleifer, and Vishny model, where the two equilibria of the poverty trap and full industrialization are discussed, this paper suggests the possibility of partial industrialization. Unlike the original model in which fixed cost F and productivity α are assumed to be constant, the author argues that both F and α are non-monotonic functions of n (number of entering monopolist firms), and that an economy stays in a partial industrialization state when congestion effects and external diseconomies are dominant. However, some situations are dynamic in the sense that they may reach the status of full industrialization as long as an economy overcomes congestion problems.

Keywords

Agglomeration Congestion Partial industrialization Multiplicity Mexico Poland Korea 

JEL Classification

D24 O14 O18 R11 R12 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basu, K.: The Less Developed Economy: A Critique of Contemporary Theory. Blackwell, Oxford (1984) Google Scholar
  2. Basu, K.: Analytical Development Economics: The Less Developed Economy Revisited. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000) Google Scholar
  3. Basu, K.: Globalization, poverty, and inequality: What is the relationship? What can be done? World Dev. 34, 1361–1373 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dobb, M.: Second thoughts on capital-intensity of investment. Rev. Econ. Stud. 24, 33–42 (1956) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dixit, A.K., Stiglitz, J.E.: Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Am. Econ. Rev. 67, 297–308 (1977) Google Scholar
  6. Duranton, G., Overman, H.G.: Testing for localisation using micro-geographic data. London School of Economics Working Paper, Department of Geography and Environment, London (2002) Google Scholar
  7. Ellison, G., Glaeser, E.L.: Geographic concentration in US manufacturing industries: a dartboard approach. J. Polit. Econ. 105, 889–927 (1997) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fujita, M., Krugman, P., Venable, A.J.: The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions and International Trade. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000) Google Scholar
  9. Garza, G., Schteingart, M.: Mexico City: The emerging metropolis. Lat. Am. Urban Res. 6, 51–86 (1978) Google Scholar
  10. Gorzelak, G.: The spatial aspects of the Polish Crisis. GeoJournal 12(1), 81–88 (1986) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guro District Office: http://english.guro.go.kr/
  12. Helpman, E., Krugman, P.R.: Market Structure and Foreign Trade. MIT Press, Cambridge (1985) Google Scholar
  13. Kim, S.K.: Industrialization process, employment, and income distribution in Mexico: Issues and strategies. University of Notre Dame Working Paper, Kellogg Institute for International Studies, Notre Dame, IN (1990) Google Scholar
  14. Korea Land Corporation: http://world.lplus.or.kr/
  15. Korea Statistical Information Service: http://kosis.kr
  16. Krugman, P.R.: Increasing returns and economic geography. J. Polit. Econ. 99, 483–499 (1991) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krugman, P.R.: Development, Geography, and Economic Theory. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997) Google Scholar
  18. Krugman, P.R.: The role of geography in development. In: 10th Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics. World Bank, Washington (1998) Google Scholar
  19. Lall, S.V., Shalizi, Z., Deichmann, U.: Agglomeration economies and productivity in Indian industry. J. Dev. Econ. 73, 643–673 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lustig, N.: Life is not easy: Mexico’s quest for stability and growth. J. Econ. Perspect. 15, 88–106 (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Murphy, K.M., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.: Industrialization and the big push. J. Polit. Econ. 97, 1003–1026 (1989) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nurkse, R.: Problems of Capital Formulation in Underdeveloped Countries. Oxford University Press, New York (1953) Google Scholar
  23. Oh, J.: Multiple equilibria: Is Big Push possible?—Evidence from the Kaesong Industrial Complex in North Korea. Global Business and Finance Review (2008a) Google Scholar
  24. Oh, J.: Title not decided yet. Ph.D. Dissertation. Chap. 1 (2008b) Google Scholar
  25. O’Sullivan, A.: Urban Economics, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2003) Google Scholar
  26. Paternostro, S.: The poverty trap: The dual externality model and its policy implications. World Dev. 25, 2071–2081 (1997) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Penn World Table: http://www.pwt.econ.upenn.edu
  28. Rosenstein-Rodan, P.N.: Problems of industrialization in eastern and south eastern Europe. Econ. J. 53, 202–211 (1943) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rowland, A., Gordon, P.: Mexico City: No longer a leviathan? In: Mega-City in Latin America. United Nations University Press, Tokyo (1996) Google Scholar
  30. Samsung Economic Research Institute (SERI): Gurogongdan buhwal ui uimi (The meaning of the resurrection of the Guro Industrial Complex). Seoul, Korea (written in Korean) (2007) Google Scholar
  31. Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency: http://www.smpa.go.kr/smpa2007/pds/stat_2005_01.asp
  32. Shukla, V., Stark, O.: On agglomeration economies and optimal migration. Econ. Lett. 18, 297–300 (1985) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations