The diffusion of knowledge in industrial districts and clusters
The dissemination of knowledge in industrial districts (ID) and clusters has often been linked to the existence of a specific tacit knowledge. Thus, the companies belonging to ID specialization sector might sustain a distinctive competitive advantage against isolated firms. However, the observation of technological changes in recent decades and the presence of ID whose technological intensity has dramatically increased in the same period suggest the existence and need for codified knowledge in these agglomerations. As result of tacit knowledge decline, the economic performance of ID could move backwards, given the greater ease to imitate and reproduce their contextual knowledge by competitor firms located in not district areas. The paper discusses the above assumptions, suggesting the existence of combinations/hybridizations of both types of knowledge in ID, which we have named locational-translational knowledge. This third type of knowledge could explain the maintenance of ID contextual advantages even in presence of higher doses of codified knowledge. This would require the presence of agents acting as interfaces able to absorb new pieces of codified knowledge in order to combine them with local knowledge for adjusting the specific needs of ID. However, we argue the existence of several constraints, such as the size of 'creative market district', in ID which may require the opening of ID to knowledge imported from academic institutions and other formal research organizations, in contrast with autarky or isolation suggested by tacit knowledge. Finally, an analysis of the ID evolution enables us to appreciate that the process of absorption, combination and dissemination of external knowledge may have existed throughout the life cycle of ID but supported, at each stage, for different institutional agents: the 'impannatore', the 'cappofiliera' firm and, lastly, for formal knowledge-oriented institutions such as the above referred.
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.:
- Margherita Balconi & Andrea Pozzali & Riccardo Viale, 2007. "The “codification debate” revisited: a conceptual framework to analyze the role of tacit knowledge in economics," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(5), pages 823-849, October.
- Bj–rn Johnson & Edward Lorenz & Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2002.
"Why all this fuss about codified and tacit knowledge?,"
Industrial and Corporate Change,
Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 245-262.
- Bjorn Johnson & Edward Lorenz & B.-A. Lundvall, 2002. "Why all this Fuss about Codified and Tacit Knowledge?," Post-Print halshs-00483646, HAL.
- Ancori, Bernard & Bureth, Antoine & Cohendet, Patrick, 2000. "The Economics of Knowledge: The Debate about Codification and and Tacit Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 255-287, June.
- Cowan, Robin & David, Paul A & Foray, Dominique, 2000. "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 211-253, June.
- Cowan Robin & David Paul & Foray Dominique, 1999. "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness," Research Memorandum 025, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
- Robin Cowan & Paul A. David & Dominique Foray, 1999. "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness," Working Papers 99027, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Lars Håkanson, 2007. "Creating knowledge: the power and logic of articulation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 51-88, February.
- Dominique Foray, 2006. "The Economics of Knowledge," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262562235, July.
- Paul Nightingale, 2003. "If Nelson and Winter are only half right about tacit knowledge, which half? A Searlean critique of 'codification'," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 149-183, April. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p368. 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 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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 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.