Proximity Relations and Firms’ Innovative Behaviours: Different Proximities in the Optics Cluster of the Greater Paris Region

  • André TorreEmail author
  • Sofiène Lourimi
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


There have been some important developments in the analysis of proximity relations since its origin. First introduced by a group of French economists (Kirat and Lung 1997; Torre and Gilly 1999), during the 1990s this approach was primarily confined to the analysis of industrial production relations and was specifically developed in the context of the study of innovation processes. Industrial relations, innovation, firm mobility, new technology, territorial resources, local productive systems… all have been studied, endlessly explored and brought back under the spotlight again by the confrontation between theoretical analysis and empirical research (Boschma 2005; Carrincazeaux et al. 2008; Rychen and Zimmermann 2008).


Innovation Process Bargaining Power Switching Cost Geographical Proximity Breakthrough Technology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aggeri F, Segrestin B (2001) What is beyond multi-project management? A collective learning perspective on a recent automobile development project. Paper presented to the EIASM conference, University of Twente, EntschedeGoogle Scholar
  2. Arend RJ (2009) Defending against rival innovation. Small Bus Econ 33:189–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baptista R, Mendonça J (2009) Proximity to knowledge sources and the location of knowledge-based start-ups. Ann Reg Sci 45(1):5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bathelt H, Schuldt N (2010) International trade fairs and global buzz, part I: ecology of global buzz. Eur Plan Stud 18(12):1957–1974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P (2004) Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Prog Hum Geogr 28:31–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biggiero L, Sammarra A (2010) Does geographical proximity enhance knowledge exchange? The case of the aerospace industrial cluster of Centre Italy. Int J Technol Transf Commer 9(4):283–305Google Scholar
  7. Bonte W (2008) Inter-firm trust in buyer–supplier relations: are knowledge spillovers and geographical proximity relevant? J Econ Behav Organ 67:855–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boschma R (2005) Proximity and innovation. A critical assessment. Reg Stud 39(1):61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Vicente J (2008a) The scientific trajectory of the French School of Proximity: interaction- and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. Eur Plan Stud 16(5):617–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carrincazeaux C, Grossetti M, Talbot D (2008b) Clusters, proximities and networks. Special Issue of Eur Plan Stud 16(5):613–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dankbaar B (2007) Global sourcing and innovation: the consequences of losing both organizational and geographical proximity. Eur Plan Stud 15(2):271–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Entwistle J, Rocamora A (2006) The field of fashion materialized: a study of London Fashion Week. Sociology 40:735–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freel MS (2003) Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Res Policy 32:751–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Freire-Gibb LC, Lorentzen A (2011) A platform for local entrepreneurship: the case of the lighting festival of Frederikshavn. Local Econ 26:157–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gallie EP (2009) Is geographical proximity necessary for knowledge spillovers within a cooperative technological network? The case of the French biotechnology sector. Reg Stud 43(1):33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giuliani E, Bell M (2005) The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Res Policy 34:47–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Information Society Technologies Advisory Group (2006) Shaping Europe’s future through ICT. ISTAG, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  18. Kechidi M, Talbot D (2010) Institutions and coordination: what is the contribution of a proximity-based analysis? The case of Airbus and its relations with the subcontracting network. Int J Technol Manag 50(3/4):285–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kirat T, Lung Y (1997) Innovation and proximity. Territories as loci of collective learning processes. Eur Urban Reg Stud 6(1):27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Laursen K, Reichsten T, Salter A (2010) Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university-industry collaboration in the UK. Reg Stud 45(4):507–523Google Scholar
  21. Lazaric N, Longhi C, Thomas C (2008) Gatekeepers of knowledge versus platforms of knowledge: from potential to realized absorptive capacity. Reg Stud 42(6):837–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maskell P, Bathelt H, Malmberg A (2006) Building global knowledge pipelines: the role of temporary clusters. Eur Plan Stud 14:997–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Norcliffe G, Rendace O (2003) New geographies of comic book production in North America: the new artisan, distancing, and the periodic social economy. Econ Geogr 79(3):241–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. North DC (1991) Institutions. J Econ Perspect 5(1):97–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Opticsvalley (2004) Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Eclairage-Affichage, Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Procédés industriels, Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Santé et science du vivant. Optics ValleyGoogle Scholar
  26. Ponds R, Van Oort F, Frenken K (2007) The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Reg Sci 86(3):423–443Google Scholar
  27. Porter M (1980) Competitive strategy: techniques for analysing industries and competitors. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Porter M (1998) The role of geography in the process of innovation and sustainable competitive advantage of firms. In: Chandler AD, Hagström P, Sölvell Ö (eds) The dynamic firm. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. RERU (2008) La Proximité, 15 ans déjà !, Special issue of the Revue d’Economie Régionale et Urbaine, 3Google Scholar
  30. Rychen F, Zimmermann JB (2008) Clusters in the global knowledge-based economy: knowledge gatekeepers and temporary proximity. Special Issue of Reg Stud 42(6):767–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Takeda Y, Kajikawa Y, Sakata I, Matsushima K (2008) An analysis of geographical agglomeration and modularized industrial networks in a regional cluster: a case study at Yamagata prefecture in Japan. Technovation 28(8):531–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Torre A (2008) On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transfer. Reg Stud 42(6):869–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Torre A (2011) The role of proximity during long-distance collaborative projects. Temporary geographical proximity helps. Int J Foresight Innov Policy 7(1–3):213–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Torre A, Gilly JP (1999) On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Reg Stud 34(2):169–180Google Scholar
  35. Torre A, Rallet A (2005) Proximity and localization. Reg Stud 39(1):47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vaz T, Nijkamp P (2009) Knowledge and innovation: the strings between global and local dimensions of sustainable growth. Entrep Reg Dev 21(4):441–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Walther JB, Loh T, Granka L (2005) Let me count the ways: the interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. J Lang Soc Psychol 24(1):36–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weterings A, Boschma R (2009) Does spatial proximity to customers matter for innovative performance? Evidence from the Dutch software sector. Res Policy 38(5):746–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weterings A, Ponds R (2008) Do regional and non-regional knowledge flows differ? An empirical study on clustered firms in the Dutch life sciences and computing services industry. Ind Innov 16(1):11–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UMR SAD-APT, INRA, Agro ParistechParis Cedex 05France
  2. 2.General Directorate for competitiveness, industry and servicesFrench Ministry of IndustryParisFrance

Personalised recommendations