Pieter Terhorst, Dept. of Geography and Planning
University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
On the Articulation of Sectoral Policy Networks and the Scaling of Spatial Clusters (assigned to theme
This paper is about the articulation of sectoral policy networks and the scaling of spatial clusters. Idealtypically economic as well as extra-economic relations at the meso-level can be regulated on a functional or a territorial basis. In sectoral policy networks, whatever form they may take, all economic and extra-economic relations are regulated along functional lines, irrespective of their spatial scale, while in spatial clusters they are regulated along territorial lines. Dutch horticulture, for instance, is primarily organised on a meso-corporatist basis, i.e. on a functional basis, while Italian industrial districts are primarily organised on a territorial basis. In most of the literature on ‘clusters’, ‘industrial districts’, the ‘regional world’, ‘new industrial spaces’, regional innovation milieux’, ‘learning regions’ and ‘regional innovation systems’, it is assumed that spatial clusters of similar and related industries as well as labour markets for specialised skills, externalities, low transaction costs, local networks, the circulation of (tacit) knowledge and the institutional framework in which they are embedded are all found at more or less the same spatial scale. In other words, economic and extra-economic relations are regulated on a territorial basis. Clusters are mostly defined in relatively self-contained terms, with little attention paid to the scaling of the inter-firm linkages and the institutional framework in which they are embedded. While much of the cluster literature focuses predominantly on the influence of local factors on cluster development, there as a growing recognition that clusters are embedded in a broader institutional matrix at the regional, national and even supranational levels. The fact that clusters are embedded in a broader institutional matrix at various levels makes it highly likely that there is a large variety in how clusters are scaled. This raises the question whether the scaling of clusters varies with the specific form of capitalism in which they are embedded. In other words, does the scaling of clusters vary with the ‘business system’ in which they are embedded? This is an attractive hypothesis but in my paper I argue that this line of research does not bring us very far. My main argument is that ‘business systems’ are made up various sectoral policy networks that are very different in terms of number and type of actors involved, the major functions of the networks (lobbying or implementation of public policy), and the balance of power between firms and the state. In my view, it is more fruitful to explore how different policy networks that are part of a specific business system are related to the scaling of specific spatial clusters. That’s why I compare in my paper how the scaling of two spatial clusters, namely the Dutch vegetables-under-glass cluster and the Amsterdam trade and transportation cluster, is related to the functional regulation of their respective policy networks. My main conclusion is that the Dutch vegetables-under-glass sector as well as the trade and transportation sector is primarily organised along functional lines. The former stands for sectoral corporatism and the latter for state corporatism. And because they are primarily organised along functional lines the local and the national level are tightly interwoven despite the fact that both industries are spatially fairly concentrated.
 | Conference organized through conf-vienna
(copyright Gunther Maier) |