Divide to conquer? The Silicon Valley - Boston 128 case revisited
The present paper investigates the role of decentralisation for the adaptability of production networks in clusters. It develops a simulation model able to test to what extent decentralised, networked clusters with many small firms (Silicon Valley) can be more adjustable than those composed of fewer, large companies (Boston 128). The model finds that for limited degrees of product complexity, decentralisation increases cluster adaptability at the expense of greater instability. This increases the risk of firm failure. Moreover, it is shown that agent numbers matter greatly for the competitiveness of decentralised clusters. Only if they host more firms than integrated cluster types is their lead in performance maintained. As a result, an additional condition had to be met to allow the Silicon Valley type to outperform the Boston 128 one: Greater firm numbers and strong startup dynamics.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2006|
|Date of revision:||Dec 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Secretariaat kamer 635, P.O.Box 80.115, 3508 TC Utrecht|
Web page: http://econ.geo.uu.nl
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- B Harrison, 1994.
"Concentrated economic power and Silicon Valley,"
Environment and Planning A,
Pion Ltd, London, vol. 26(2), pages 307-328, February.
- Pisano, Gary P., 1991. "The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 237-249, June.
- Helsley, Robert W. & Strange, William C., 2002. "Innovation and Input Sharing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 25-45, January.
- Giovanni Dosi & Daniel Levinthal & Luigi Marengo, 2001.
"Bridging Contested Terrain: Linking Incentive-Based and Learning Perspectives on Organizational Evolution,"
LEM Papers Series
2001/20, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
- Giovanni Dosi & Daniel A. Levinthal & Luigi Marengo, 2003. "Bridging contested terrain: linking incentive-based and learning perspectives on organizational evolution," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 413-436, April.
- Storper, Michael & Harrison, Bennett, 1991. "Flexibility, hierarchy and regional development: The changing structure of industrial production systems and their forms of governance in the 1990s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 407-422, October.
- Goldstein, G. S. & Gronberg, T. J., 1984. "Economies of scope and economies of agglomeration," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 91-104, July.
- Edward L. Glaeser, 2003. "Reinventing Boston: 1640-2003," NBER Working Papers 10166, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
- Guy Dumais & Glenn Ellison & Edward L. Glaeser, 2002.
"Geographic Concentration As A Dynamic Process,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 193-204, May.
- Guy Dumais & Glenn Ellison & Edward Glaeser, 1997. "Geographic Concentration as a Dynamic Process," NBER Working Papers 6270, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Guy Dumais & Glenn Ellison & Edward L Glaeser, 1998. "Geographic Concentration as a Dynamic Process," Working Papers 98-3, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
- Ron A. Boschma, 2002. "Knowledge, Market Structure, and Economic Coordination: Dynamics of Industrial Districts," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 291-311.
- Ellison, G. & Glaeser, E.L., 1994.
"Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach,"
94-27, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Ellison, Glenn & Glaeser, Edward L, 1997. "Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 889-927, October.
- Glenn Ellison & Edward L. Glaeser, 1994. "Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach," NBER Working Papers 4840, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kenney, Martin & von Burg, Urs, 1999. "Technology, Entrepreneurship and Path Dependence: Industrial Clustering in Silicon Valley and Route 128," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 67-103, March.
- Brusco, Sebastiano, 1982. "The Emilian Model: Productive Decentralisation and Social Integration," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 167-184, June.
- Richard N. Langlois, 2002.
"Modularity in Technology and Organization,"
in: Entrepreneurship and the Firm, chapter 2
Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Edward L. Glaeser, 2003. "Reinventing Boston: 1640-2003," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 2017, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:0610. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.