Concentrated economic power and Silicon Valley
AbstractSilicon Valley is the computer and microelectronics capital of America. To analysts from different academic disciplines and ideological persuasions, the economy of Silicon Valley has many faces. In the most romantic characterization, the Valley's astonishing success as home base for a myriad of companies that design, produce, and export computers, workstations, microchips, disk drives, and software is mainly a story about supremely -- even belligerently -- independent entrepreneurs. According to a second interpretation, the Valley is a full-fledged 'industrial district' on the north central Italian model, made up of a dense thicket of mostly small and medium-sized (but also some quite large) 'flexible specialists' that alternately cooperate and compete with one another, that are embedded in a local political economy with a shared culture and norms, and that may be well connected to the rest of the world but whose interfirm production relationships are thought to be highly localized. There is also a third perspective. Silicon Valley was created by, and remains profoundly dependent on, major multinational corporations and on the fiscal and regulatory support of the national government -- especially in the 'person' of the US Department of Defense. The Valley is fundamentally a world headquarters of, or at least an important node within, global networks of big firms and their small firm subcontractors and suppliers, and, as such, is subject to the same contradictory tendencies toward concentration of power but decentralization of production that are coming to characterize the entire global market-based economic system. The three aspects of Silicon Valley's political economy -- rampant entrepreneurship, an unusually high degree of interfirm circulation of engineering labor and other signs that have become associated with district-like behavior, and the visible hand of major corporations and their government - university partners in shaping the region into a base from which to manage operations that are executed beyond the Valley's domain -- are in fact not mutually inconsistent. In this paper, however, I argue that the third constitutes the dominant tendency driving the reproduction of this vibrant regional economy, and has done since the years after World War 2.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Pion Ltd, London in its journal Environment and Planning A.
Volume (Year): 26 (1994)
Issue (Month): 2 (February)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.pion.co.uk
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Kerstin Press, 2006. "Divide to conquer? The Silicon Valley - Boston 128 case revisited," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0610, Utrecht University, Section of Economic Geography, revised Dec 2006.
- Burak Beyhan, 2011. "Spatial Characteristics of Labor Mobility and Innovation inside an Industrial Cluster: Some Reflections from Siteler in Ankara," ERSA conference papers ersa10p421, European Regional Science Association.
- Adams, Stephen B., 2011. "Growing where you are planted: Exogenous firms and the seeding of Silicon Valley," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 368-379, April.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Neil Hammond).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.