IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Spécialisation industrielle et consommation apparente : le cas de la Province de Liège en Belgique



La structure sectorielle de la province de Liège en Belgique a sensiblement évolué depuis une vingtaine d'années. La spécialisation industrielle de cette province n'a pas toujours évolué dans une direction souhaitable. Par exemple, la province de Liège n'a pas tiré grand profit de la révolution de l'information qui a modifié la structure industrielle de la plupart des Pays Développés. Dans cette étude, l'évaluation qualitative de la spécialisation s'effectue en fonction de considérations tirées de la demande. Les limites de cette analyse sont clairement identifiées. Les résulats enregistrés par la province de Liège sont comparés à ceux relatifs à la Belgique et à l'Union Européenne.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikael Petitjean, 1998. "Spécialisation industrielle et consommation apparente : le cas de la Province de Liège en Belgique," SEII Working Papers 981102, University of Liège Faculty of Econonomics, Management and Social Sciences Department of Economics Service of International and Interregional Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sei:seiiwp:981102

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters,in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education (3rd Edition), pages 299-322 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ronald Findlay, 1995. "Factor Proportions, Trade, and Growth," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061759, January.
    3. Benarroch, Michael & Gaisford, James, 1997. "Economies of Scale, International Capital Mobility, and North-South Inequality," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 412-428, August.
    4. Paul Krugman & Anthony J. Venables, 1995. "Globalization and the Inequality of Nations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 857-880.
    5. Jacques-François Thisse & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1993. "Les implications de l'espace pour la concurrence," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 44(4), pages 653-670.
    6. Starrett, David, 1978. "Market allocations of location choice in a model with free mobility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 21-37, February.
    7. Puga, Diego, 1999. "The rise and fall of regional inequalities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 303-334, February.
    8. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    9. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    10. Samuelson, Paul A, 1983. "Thunen at Two Hundred," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 1468-1488, December.
    11. repec:hhs:iuiwop:430 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Gene M. Grossman (ed.), 1992. "Imperfect Competition and International Trade," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262570939, January.
    13. Daniel Heller, 1995. "Trade Restrictions, Migration, and Economic Geography," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 131(III), pages 535-546, September.
    14. Carlos M. Asilis & Luis Rivera-Batiz, 1994. "Geography, Trade Patterns, and Economic Policy," IMF Working Papers 94/16, International Monetary Fund.
    15. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Industrial specialization; specialisation industrielle; demande; consommation apparente;

    JEL classification:

    • F00 - International Economics - - General - - - General
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • L6 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sei:seiiwp:981102. 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: (Jules Gazon). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.