Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Industry Clusters, Intermediary Activities and Sustainable Transitions: A Call for Integration of Multiple Conceptual Frameworks?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rethinking Clusters

Part of the book series: Sustainable Development Goals Series ((SDGS))

Abstract

Sustainability transitions attract researchers interested in rethinking clusters as economic phenomena. Questions arise regarding how embryonic clusters identify new and valid cluster initiatives and take leadership to foster sustainable purposes for all interested parties, and gain recognition as specialist sectoral organisations at the same time. Challenging researchers interested in sustainability transitions is the ongoing need to progress knowledge about how socioeconomic conditions could change and be better understood from a multiple-level perspective, a multidisciplinary approach and/or an integration of multiple paradigms in order to address regional development concerns.

This chapter presents an appreciation of industry clusters, industry districts and related sectoral organisations as intermediary organisations and examines sustainability transitions in terms of multiple contributions made by multiple actors seeking multiple outcomes within multiple industry sectors understood as dynamic systems. A conceptual model is offered where sectoral intermediary organisations may gain recognition using multiple transformation processes to identify specialist intermediary interventions as key sources of competitive advantage. To achieve sustainable competitiveness for client firms, partners, regions, sectors and or other purposes, this model suggests ways in which sectoral intermediary organisations may take leadership and seek higher-level competitiveness outcomes. As this model can be applicable to multiple geographical arenas, it may complement other more established frameworks, such as a multilevel, multi-actor and multi-scalar framework developed by Geels (Research Policy 31(8):1257–1274, 2002).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adner, A. (2017). Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albino, V., Garavelli, A. C., & Schiuma, G. (1998). Knowledge transfer and inter-firm relationships in industrial districts: The role of the leader firm. Technovation, 19(1), 53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37, 1299–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. J., Jr. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27, 625–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belussi, F., Pilotti, L., & Sedita, S. R. (2007). Learning at the boundaries for industrial districts between exploitation of local resources and exploration of global knowledge flows. In R. Leoncini & S. Montresor (Eds.), Dynamic capabilities between firm organization and local systems of production (pp. 181–215). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bygrave, W. D. (2007). The entrepreneurship paradigm (I) revisited. In Handbook of qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship (pp. 17–48). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, R. D., Zuo, J., Soebarto, V., Zhao, Z. Y., Zillante, G., & Gan, X. L. (2017). Discovering the transition pathways toward sustainability for construction enterprises: Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(6), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chhetri, P. N., Mathews, P. K., Chhetri, A., & Lee, P. T. (2018). Global logistics city concept: A cluster-led strategy under the belt and road initiative. Maritime Policy and Management, 45(3), 19–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, I., & Ramirez, M. (2014). Intermediaries and capability building in ‘emerging’ clusters. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(4), 714–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criscuolo, P., & Narula, R. (2008). A novel approach to national technological accumulation and absorptive capacity: Aggregating Cohen and Levinthal. The European Journal of Development Research, 20(1), 56–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalziel, M. (2010). Why do innovation intermediaries exist. DRUID Summer Conference, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Silva, M., Howells, J., & Meyer, M. (2018). Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge-based practices and internal value creation. Research Policy, 47(1), 70–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. P. (2014). The character of innovative places: Entrepreneurial strategy, economic development, and prosperity. Small Business Economics, 43(1), 9–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornahl, D., Henn, S., & Menzel, M. P. (2010). Emerging clusters theoretical, empirical and political perspectives on the initial stage of cluster evolution. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31(8), 1257–1274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6–7), 897–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grisold, T., & Peschl, M. F. (2017). Why a systems-thinking perspective on cognition matters for innovation and knowledge creation: A framework towards leaving behind our projections from the past for creating new futures. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34(3), 335–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, F. (2018). The potential contribution of transition theory to the analysis of bioclusters and their role in the transition to a bioeconomy. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 12(2), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. (2009). Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 849–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivimaa, P., Hyysalo, S., Boon, W., Klerkx, L., Martiskainen, M., & Schot, J. (2019). Passing the baton: How intermediaries advance sustainability transitions in different phases. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 31, 110–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawhon, M., & Murphy, J. T. (2012). Socio-technical regimes and sustainability transitions: Insights from political ecology. Progress in Human Geography, 36(3), 354–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2010). A terminal assessment of stages theory: Introducing a dynamic states approach to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(2), 317–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, J. A. (2003). Competitive dynamics and economic learning: An extended resource-based view. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12, 115–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, T. L., & Walker, G. (2015). Competitive heterogeneity, cohorts, and persistent advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 184–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2011). Conceptualizing cluster evolution: Beyond the life cycle model? Regional Studies: Cluster Life Cycles, 45(10), 1299–1318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2011). The under-exploration issue in territorial networks: The moderating effect of the involvement of supporting organisations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(3), 263–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts: Who they are, how they interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), 817–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mignon, I., & Kanda, W. (2018). A typology of intermediary organizations and their impact on sustainability transition policies. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 29, 100–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, M., Clarke, I., & Klerkx, L. (2018). Analysing intermediary organisations and their influence on upgrading in emerging agricultural clusters. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 50(6), 1314–1335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roundy, P. T., Bradshaw, M., & Brockman, B. K. (2018). The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: A complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Business Research, 86, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., & Stauffacher, M. (2007). Managing transition in clusters: Area development negotiations as a tool for sustaining traditional industries in a swiss prealpine region. Environment and Planning A, 39(10), 2518–2539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. (2010). Neither planned nor by chance: How knowledge-intensive clusters emerge. In Emerging clusters: Theoretical, empirical and political perspectives on the initial stage of cluster evolution (pp. 295–322). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Story, V. M., Raddats, C., Burton, J., Zolkiewski, J., & Bairnes, T. (2017). Capabilities for advanced services: A multi-actor perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 60, 54–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, J. D. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, J. D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornikoski, E. (1999). Entrepreneurship and theory development: The use of the constructivist approach in theorizing process. http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/icsb/1999/20.pdf.

  • Turnheim, B., Berkhout, F., Geels, F., Hof, A., McMeekin, A., Nykvist, B., & van Vuuren, D. (2015). Evaluating sustainability transitions pathways: Bridging analytical approaches to address governance challenges. Global Environmental Change, 35, 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26(9), 1377–1404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S., Just, D., & Zilberman, D. (2001). Between data and decisions: The organization of agricultural economic information systems. Research Policy, 30(1), 121–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribaudo, M., Torrigiani, C., De Cindio, F., & Palumbo, M. (2016). The university in the polis: An emerging role of democratic intermediary in e-participation? In T. Torre, A. Braccini, & R. Spinelli (Eds.), Empowering organizations. Lecture notes in information systems and organisation (Vol. 11). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Australia, UniSA Business, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Rowena Vnuk & Allan O’Connor

Authors
  1. Rowena Vnuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Allan O’Connor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rowena Vnuk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Management, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Silvia Rita Sedita

  2. Department of Economics and Management, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Silvia Blasi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vnuk, R., O’Connor, A. (2021). Industry Clusters, Intermediary Activities and Sustainable Transitions: A Call for Integration of Multiple Conceptual Frameworks?. In: Sedita, S.R., Blasi, S. (eds) Rethinking Clusters. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61923-7_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61923-7_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-61922-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-61923-7

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation