The Development of High-Tech Clusters

Theoretical Insights and Policy Implications
  • Mario A. Maggioni
Part of the Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation book series (ESTI, volume 25)

Abstract

This need for the emergence of “growing points” or “growth poles” in the course of the development process means that international and interregional inequality of growth is an inevitable concomitant and condition of growth itself. Thus in the geographic sense, growth is necessarily unbalanced.

Keywords

Europe Transportation Income Explosive Expense 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acs, Z. J., D. B. Audretsch, and M. P. Feldman. (1992). “Real Effects of Academic Research: Comment.” American Economic Review 82(1): 363 - 367.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, R. D., and K. McCormick. (1987). “Private Goods, Club Goods, and Public Goods as a Continuum.” Review of Social Economy 45(2): 192 - 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arthur, W. B. (1988). “Urban System and Historical Path Dependency.” In J. H. Ausubel and R. Herman, eds., Cities and Their Vital Systems (pp. 85 - 97) Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  4. Arthur W. B. (1990). “Silicon Valley Locational Clusters: When Do Increasing Returns Imply Monopoly?” Mathematical Social Sciences 19: 235 - 251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blakely E. J. (1989). Planning Local Economic Development. Theory and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Coleman, W. D., and H. J. Jacek, eds. (1989). Regionalism,Business Interests and Public Policy. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Delors, J. (1993). White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness, and Employment. The Challenges and Ways Forward into the Twenty-first Century, Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  8. Dendrinos, D. S., and H. Mullally. (1985). Urban Evolution. Studies in the Mathematical Ecology of Cities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dollar, D., and E. N. Wolff. (1993). Competitiveness,Convergence and International Specialisation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Doz, Y. (1987). “International Industries: Fragmentation versus Globalization.” In B. Guile and H. Brooks, eds., Technology and Global Industry (pp. 96 - 118) New York: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Edquist, C. (1995). “The Role of Governments and Markets in Science and Technology Innovation Policies.” Paper presented at the workshop Role and Impact of Science and Technology in Innovation and Regional Economic Development, University of British Columbia, Victoria, August 23 - 25.Google Scholar
  12. Feldman, M. P. (1994). The Geography of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. Fujita, M. (1986). “Optimal Location of Public Facilities: Area Dominance Approach.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 16: 241–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fujita, M. (1990). “Spatial Interactions and Agglomeration in Urban Economics.” In M. Chatterji and R. E. Kuenne, eds., New Frontiers of Regional Science (pp. 184–221) London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Gambarotto, F., and M. A. Maggioni. (1998). “Regional Development Strategies in Changing Environments: an Ecological Approach.” Regional Studies 32: 49 - 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gibb, J. M. (1985). Science Parks and Innovation Centres: Their Economic and Social Impact. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  17. Gibson, D.V., G. Kometsky, and R. W. Smilor. (1992). The Technopolis Phenomenon: Smart Cities, Fast Systems,Global Networks. Lanham: Rowman.Google Scholar
  18. Henderson, J. V. (1977). Economic Theory and the Cities. New York: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hilpert, U., ed. (1991). Regional Innovation and Decentralization: High Tech Industry and Government Policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Isard, W. (1956). Location and Space-Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kaldor, N. (1970). “The Case for Regional Policies.” Scottish Journal of Political Economy 3: 337 - 348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krugman, P. (1991a). Geography and Trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Krugman, P. (1991b). “Increasing Returns and Economic Geography.” Journal of Political Economy 99(3): 483 - 499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krugman, P. (1995). Development,Geography and Economic Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  25. Longhi, C., and M. Queré. (1991). “La technopôle comme système industriel localisé: eléments d’analyse et d’enseignements empiriques.” Economies et Societés 25(8): 21 - 41.Google Scholar
  26. Lotka, A. J. (1925). Elements of Physical Biology. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  27. Luger, M. I., and H. A. Goldstein. (1991). Technology in the Garden: Research Parks and Regional Economic Development. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  28. Maggioni, M. A. (1990). “Sostegno reale all’innovazione: lo strumento degli Science Parks. Un confronto internazionale per l’analisi della realtà italiana.” Dynamis-Quaderni IDSE, 10/90, IDSE-CNR, Milano.Google Scholar
  29. Maggioni, M. A. (1993). “Ecological Dynamics and Critical Mass Processes in the Location of High Tech Firms.” Paper presented at the Fortieth RSAI (Regional Sciences Association International) Conference, North American Section, Houston, November 11 - 14.Google Scholar
  30. Maggioni, M. A. (1994). “Modelli ecologici per l’analisi della dinamica industriale regionale.” In F. Pasquini, T. Pompili, and P. Secondini, eds., Modelli d’analisi e d ’intervento per un nuovo regionalismo (pp. 79 - 105). Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
  31. Maggioni, M. A. (1995). “The Economic Analysis of Science and Technology Parks: Theoretical Suggestions and the Italian Experience.” Sviluppo Economico 1(1–2): 149–177.Google Scholar
  32. Maggioni, M. A. (1999). “Clustering Dynamics and the Location of High-Tech Firms.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Warwick, Coventry, July.Google Scholar
  33. Maggioni, M. A. (2000). Structure and Dynamics of High-Tech Clusters: An Econometric Exercise. Quaderno 12/2000, Dipartimento di Economia, Istituzioni e Territorio, Università degli Studi di Ferrara, Ferrara, Luglio.Google Scholar
  34. Maggioni, M. A., and G. Porro. (1994). “Dinamiche di crescita regionale: it ruolo delle aspettative in modelli di tipo ecologico.” Quaderno della ricerca di base “Modelli di sviluppo e regional competition, 6, Università Bocconi, Milano.Google Scholar
  35. Markusen, A. R. (1987). Regions:The Economics and Politics of Territor. Ottowa: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
  36. Markusen, A. R., P. Hall, and A. Glassmeier. (1986). High-Tech America. Boston: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  37. Marshall, A. (1921). Industry and Trade. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  38. Marshall, M. (1987). Long Waves of Regional Development. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  39. Maskell, P. (1997). “Apprendimento localizzato e competitività industriale.” in A. Bramanti and M. A. Maggioni, eds., La dinamica dei sistemi produttivi territoriali: teorie,tecniche, politiche (pp. 112 - 133) Milano: FrancoAngeli..Google Scholar
  40. Miyao, T., and Y. Kanemoto. (1987). Urban Dynamics and Urban Externalities, London: Harwood.Google Scholar
  41. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1984). Technology,Innovation, and Regional Economic Development. Washington, DC: OTA.Google Scholar
  42. Padmore, T., and H. Gibson. (1998). “Modelling Systems of Innovation: II. A Framework for Industrial Cluster Analysis in Regions.” Research Policy 26: 625 - 641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Papageorgiou, Y. Y. (1979). “Agglomerations.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 9: 41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pascal, A. H., and J. J. McCall. (1980). “Agglomeration Economies, Search Costs and Industrial Location.” Journal of Urban Economics 8: 383 - 388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pearl, R., and L. J. Reed. (1920). “Skew-Growth Curves.” Proceeding of the National Academy of Natural Sciences of the USA 11: 16 - 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Perroux, F. (1955). “Note sur la notion de pôle de croissance.” Economie Appliquée, 8: 307–320.Google Scholar
  47. Preer, R. W. (1992). The Emergence of Technopolis, Knowedge-Intensive Technologies and Regional Development. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  48. Premus, R. (1982). Location of High-Technology Firms and Regional Economic Development: A Staff Study. Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  49. Rees, J., and H. Stafford. (1983). Theories of Regional Growth and Industrial Location: Their Relevance for High Technology Industry in the United States. Washington, DC: OTA.Google Scholar
  50. Regional Studies .(1994). “Special Issue on New Firms Formation.” 28(4) January.Google Scholar
  51. Richardson, H. W. (1978). Regional and Urban Economics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  52. Roughgarden, J. (1979). Theory of Population Genetics and Evolutionary Ecology: An Introduction. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  53. Rowe, D. (1988). “Science Parks: The UK Experience.” In S. Campodall’Orto and C. Roveda, eds. Parchi scientifici come strumenti di politica industriale. pp. 35 - 57 Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
  54. Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional Advantage, Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Scott, A. J. (1993). Technopolis: High-Technology Industry and Regional Development in Southern California. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  56. Smilor, R. W., G. Kozmetsky, and D. V. Gibson, eds. (1988). Creating the Technopolys: Linking Technology,Commercialization and Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  57. Sternberg, R. (1997). “Does Location Matter? On the Impact of Innovation Centres on the Development of Innovation Oriented Start-ups.” Paper presented at the workshop “Firms Dynamics in High-Technology Industries,” ZEW, Mannheim, June 9 - 10.Google Scholar
  58. Storey, D. J., and B. S. Tether. (1998a). “New Technology-Based Firms in the European Union: An Introduction.” Research Policy 26: 933 - 946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Storey, D. J., and B. S. Tether. (1998b). “Public Policy Measures to Support New Technology-Based Firms in the European Union.” Research Policy 26: 1307 - 1357.Google Scholar
  60. Storper, M. (1997). The Regional Word: Territorial Development in a Global Economy. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  61. Storper, M., and R. Walker. (1989). The Capitalist Imperative. Territory, Technology and Industrial Growth. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  62. Swann, G. M. P. (1998). “Towards a Model of Clustering in High-Technology Industries.” In G. M. P. Swann, M. Prevezer, and D. Stout, eds., The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering (pp. 52 - 76) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Swann, G. M. P., M. Prevezer, and D. Stout, eds. (1998). The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Tauchen, H., and A. D. Witte. (1983). “An Equilibrium Model of Office Location and Contact Patterns.” Environment and Planning A 15: 1311–1326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Temple, P. (1998). “Cluster and Competitiveness, A Policy Perspective.” In M. P. Swann, M. Prevezer, and D. Stout, eds., The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering (pp. 257–297) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Verhulst, P. F. (1845). “Recherches mathématique sur la loi d’accroissement de la population.” Nouveaux Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences et Belles-Lettres de Bruxelles 18 (2): 3 - 38.Google Scholar
  67. Weber, A. (1929). Theory of the Location of Industry. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Westhead, P., and D. J. Storey. (1994). An Assessment of Firms Located On and Off Science Parks in the United Kingdom. London: HMSO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mario A. Maggioni
    • 1
  1. 1.Catholic University of MilanMilan

Personalised recommendations