Advertisement

Agglomeration, Enterprise Size, and Productivity

  • Edward J. Feser
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)

Abstract

Much research on agglomeration economies, and particularly recent work that builds on Marshall’s concept of the industrial district, postulates that benefits derived from proximity between businesses are strongest for small enterprises (Humphrey, 1995; Sweeney and Feser, 1998). With internal economies a function of the shape of the average cost curve and level of production, and external economies in shifts of that curve, a small firm enjoying external economies characteristic of industrial districts (or complexes or simply urbanized areas) may face the same average costs as the larger firm producing a higher volume of output (Oughton and Whittam, 1997; Carlsson, 1996; Humphrey, 1995). Thus we observe the seeming paradox of large firms that enjoy internal economies of scale co-existing with smaller enterprises that should, by all accounts, be operating below minimum efficient scale. With the Birch-inspired debate on the relative job- and innovation-generating capacity of small and large firms abating (Ettlinger 1997), research on the small firm sector has shifted to an examination of the business strategies and sources of competitiveness of small enterprises (e.g., Pratten, 1991; Nooteboom, 1993). Technological external scale economies are a key feature of this research (Oughton and Whittam, 1997).

Keywords

Large Firm Plant Size Knowledge Spillover Producer Service Small Enterprise 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carlsson, B., 1996, “Small Business, Flexible Technology and Industrial Dynamics”, in P.H. Admiraal (ed.), Small Business in the Modern Economy, Black- well, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Chinitz, B., 1961, “Contrasts in Agglomeration: New York and Pittsburgh”, American Economic Review, 51:279–289.Google Scholar
  3. Ettlinger, N., 1997, “An Assessment of the Small-Firm Debate in the United States”, Environment and Planning A, pp. 419–442.Google Scholar
  4. Feser, E.J., 1998a, “Enterprises, External Economies, and Economic Development”, Journal of Planning Literature, 12:283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feser, E.J., 1997, The Influence of Business Externalities and Spillovers on Manufacturing Performance, Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
  6. Harrison, B., 1994, Lean and Mean, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Humphrey, J., 1995, “Introduction”, World Development, 23:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim, H.Y., 1992, “The Translog Production Function and Variable Returns to Scale”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 74:546–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Marshall, A., 1961, Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume, 9th edition, Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  10. Nooteboom, B., 1993, “Firm Size Effects on Transaction Costs”, Small Business Economics, 5:283–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Oughton, C. and G. Whittam, 1997, “Competition and Cooperation in the Small Firm Sector”, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 44:1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pratten, C., 1991, The Competitiveness of Small Firms, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Scott, A. J., 1988. Metropolis: From the Division of Labor to Urban Form, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  14. Stigler, G. J., 1951, “The Division of Labour is Limited by the Extent of the Market”, Journal of Political Economy, 59:185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sweeney, S. H. and E.J. Feser. 1998, “Plant Size and Clustering of Manufacturing Activity” Geographical Analysis, 30:45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward J. Feser
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of City and Regional PlanningUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations