Externalities, clusters and economic growth: The Cluster Policy Paradox
AbstractThe literature on clustering has highlighted several advantages of industrial agglomerations. Persons and firms benefit from the production and innovation activities of neighbouring companies in the same and related industries. Considering such benefits, which are viewed as positive externalities, Michael Porter argues that clustering is an important way for firms fulfilling their competitive advantages and for rising regional and national competitiveness. So, it is opportune to ask: what is the appropriate policy for maximizing the benefits of CE (cluster externalities)? There are basically two possible replies to the above question: on the one hand, the traditional optimal-policy perspective recommends providing a subsidy to firms generating CE, with the subsidy adjusted for equalizing the strength of the externality; on the other, a more pragmatic perspective based on Porterâ€™s policy prescriptions. However, the evidence shows a paradox: policy makers use the competitiveness rhetoric inspired in the competitive advantages of Porter but, in practice, they go on using the industrial targeting that was also criticized by Porter. In this paper we deal with this paradox proving that despite the extensive amount of externalities is the traditional comparative advantage approach that must guide policy. This finding is congruent with the Porterâ€™s policy prescriptions and has clear implications in regional policy allowing to support the answer to the following question: Must policy be focused on creation of new clusters in activities that have verified large positive effects elsewhere or, conversely, on developing the traditional activities in region, which allegedly have shown lower externalities? But the answer to this question depends on our comprehension of industrial aggregation processes, which implies the full understanding of concepts as clusters and externalities. So, the remainder of this paper is organized as follows. After reflecting on the concept of cluster in section 2, section 3 deals with the different type of externalities present in industrial agglomerations. Section 4 considers the existence of dynamic externalities and relates them with the advantages of backwardness. Section 5 uses a model that includes various types of externalities in order to draw lessons for guiding clustering policy. Finally, section 6 concludes.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa11p896.
Date of creation: Sep 2011
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Augasse 2-6, 1090 Vienna, Austria
Web page: http://www.ersa.org
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Meric S. Gertler, 2003. "Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or The undefinable tacitness of being (there)," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 75-99, January.
- Huang, Zuhui & Zhang, Xiaobo & Zhu, Yunwei, 2007.
"The role of clustering in rural industrialization: A Case Study of the Footwear Industry in Wenzhou,"
IFPRI discussion papers
705, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Huang, Zuhui & Zhang, Xiaobo & Zhu, Yunwei, 2008. "The role of clustering in rural industrialization: A case study of the footwear industry in Wenzhou," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 409-420, September.
- Gilles Duranton & Diego Puga, 2000.
"Nursery Cities: Urban Diversity, Process Innovation and the Life-Cycle of Products,"
CEP Discussion Papers
dp0445, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Gilles Duranton & Diego Puga, 2001. "Nursery Cities: Urban Diversity, Process Innovation, and the Life Cycle of Products," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1454-1477, December.
- Gilles Duranton & Diego Puga, 2000. "Nursery Cities: Urban diversity, process innovation, and the life-cycle of products," Working Papers dpuga-00-01, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Duranton, Gilles & Puga, Diego, 2000. "Nursery Cities: Urban Diversity, Process Innovation, and the Life-Cycle of Products," CEPR Discussion Papers 2376, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Antonio Ciccone, 1998.
"Agglomeration-effects in Europe,"
Economics Working Papers
499, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Aug 1999.
- Rodriguez-Clare, Andres, 2007.
"Clusters and comparative advantage: Implications for industrial policy,"
Journal of Development Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 43-57, January.
- Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 2005. "Clusters and Comparative Advantage: Implications for Industrial Policy," Research Department Publications 4391, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2009.
"The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States,"
NBER Working Papers
14806, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2009. "The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(4), pages 983-1028, December.
- Fagerberg, Jan, 1987. "A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 87-99, August.
- Antonio Ciccone & Robert E. Hall, 1996.
"Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity,"
NBER Working Papers
4313, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ciccone, A. & Hall, R.E., 1993. "Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity," Working Papers e-93-6, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
- Antonio Ciccone & Robert E. Hall, 1995. "Productivity and the density of economic activity," Economics Working Papers 120, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Glaeser, E.L. & Mare, D.C., 1994.
"Cities and Skills,"
e-94-11, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
- Argentino Pessoa, 2013.
"Competitiveness, Clusters And Policy At The Regional Level: Rhetoric Vs. Practice In Designing Policy For Depressed Regions,"
Regional Science Inquiry,
Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(1), pages 101-116, June.
- Argentino Pessoa, 2010. "Competitiveness, Clusters and Policy at the Regional Level: Rhetoric vs. Practice in Designing Policy for Depressed Regions," FEP Working Papers 386, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
- Koen Frenken & Frank Van Oort & Thijs Verburg, 2007. "Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth," Regional Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 41(5), pages 685-697.
- Keijiro Otsuka, 2006. "Cluster-Based Industrial Development: A View From East Asia," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 57(3), pages 361-376.
- Frank Neffke & Martin Svensson Henning & Ron Boschma, 2008. "Surviving in agglomerations: Plant evolution and the changing benefits of the local environment," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0820, Utrecht University, Section of Economic Geography, revised Dec 2008.
- Henri L.F. de Groot & Jacques Poot & Martijn J. Smit, 2008. "Agglomeration Externalities, Innovation and Regional Growth: Theoretical Perspectives and Meta-Analysis," Working Papers in Economics 08/01, University of Waikato, Department of Economics.
- Jianqing Ruan & Xiaobo Zhang, 2009.
"Finance and Cluster-Based Industrial Development in China,"
Economic Development and Cultural Change,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(1), pages 143-164, October.
- Ruan, Jianqing & Zhang, Xiaobo, 2008. "Finance and cluster-based industrial development in China:," IFPRI discussion papers 768, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Fagerberg, Jan & Verspagen, Bart, 2002.
"Technology-gaps, innovation-diffusion and transformation: an evolutionary interpretation,"
Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1291-1304, December.
- Jan Fagerberg & Bart Verspagen, 2001. "Technology-Gaps, Innovation-Diffusion And Transformation: An Evolutionary Interpretation," Working Papers 11, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
- Fagerberg, Jan & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "Technology-gaps, innovation-diffusion and transformation: an evolutionary interpretation," Open Access publications from Maastricht University urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-17999, Maastricht University.
- Antony Potter & H. Doug Watts, 2011. "Evolutionary agglomeration theory: increasing returns, diminishing returns, and the industry life cycle," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 417-455, May.
- Pessoa, Argentino, 2012. "Regional cluster policy: The Asian model vs. the OECD approach," MPRA Paper 42024, University Library of Munich, Germany.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.