Why is Economic Geography not an Evolutionary Science?
This paper explains the main commonalities and differences between neoclassical, institutional and evolutionary approaches that have been influential in economic geography during the last couple of decades. For all three approaches, we argue that they are in agreement in some respects and in conflict in other respects. While explaining to what extent and in what ways the Evolutionary Economic Geography approach differs from the Neoclassical (or ‘new’) Economic Geography and the Institutional Economic Geography, we can specify the value-added of economic geography as an evolutionary science. Finally, we briefly outline a research agenda of the Evolutionary Economic Geography we like to explore.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.ersa.org
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.:
- repec:dgr:tuecis:0315 is not listed on IDEAS
- Frenken, K. & Nuvolari, A., 2003.
"The Early Development of the Steam Engine: An Evolutionary Interpretation using Complexity Theory,"
03.15, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
- Koen Frenken & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2004. "The early development of the steam engine: an evolutionary interpretation using complexity theory," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 419-450, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p393. 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: (Gunther Maier)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.