For geographers and economists, urban agglomeration remains an enduring feature of the industrial landscape and a perennial source of theoretical and empirical interest. Curiously, despite this long-standing interest, there has been a remarkable tendency to explain agglomeration with reference to Alfred Marshall's trinity of external economies and industrial district model. In this paper, we seek to draw some contrasts in the form and causes of agglomeration. Our discussion proceeds by developing a simple and highly schematic taxonomy of what could be considered the emblematic forms of agglomeration in proto-industrial, industrial and post-industrial urban contexts. Highly simplified though they are, such contrasts highlight the changes in the spatial extent of agglomeration, the contribution of particular industrial sectors and types of external economy and of exports to the process of agglomeration over time. As such, there is an urgent need to reconcile the perspectives of economists and geographers in a renewal of the theory of agglomeration.

The author owes to Hugh Patrick of Columbia University for his meticulous, detailed and valuable comments, which have led to many improvements in this article-and is also appreciative of the constructive suggestions and encouragement received from an anonymous referee. Any remaining errors are solely of the author. This article was drafted while he was a visiting fellow at the East-West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii. An early version was presented at a seminar held at the Center. He is indebted to seminar participants, especially Dieter Ernst, theme leader, for their comments.

No abstract

No abstract

The Japan-born "flying-geese (FG)" theory of growth has recently gained recognition in academia and popularity in the media. Since Kaname Akamatsu introduced his ideas in a very broad fashion in the 1930s, opportunities abound for further elaboration and application to contemporary development issues. This paper reviews some of his key ideas and presents a reformulation from a new evolutionary structuralist perspective. The oft-used, yet vague, concept of "the ladder of economic development" is defined in terms of a "leading-sector" stages model, a la Schumpeter-and what comes next as a new rung is considered. The enabling mechanisms of structural upgrading are explored, and the dynamics and benefits of an FG formation of aligned countries are stressed. Also, a new stages (FG-theoretic) model of balance-of-payments is introduced to discuss the financial issues of "borrowed growth" and "global (G2) imbalances." The dynamics of structural upgrading and interactive growth via trade and investment within a hierarchy of countries is the essence of these reformulated FG models, which make up what is now increasingly shaped and recognized as "new structural economics."

No abstract

No abstract

The Hegelian dialectic of thesis-antithesis-synthesis can provide a perspicacious framework for analyzing the evolutionary process of economic change as envisaged in many theories of growth and development from David Hume and David Ricardo to Joseph Schumpeter. An evolution of economic structure is a perpetual sequence of change with constant contradictions, selftransformation, and self-organization. The same dialectic is applied to the "flying-geese" paradigm of industrial upgrading (an emended version of Akamatsu's original model) that explains Japan's postwar process of structural transformation and upgrading, a process full of contradictory developments and incessant adjustments occurring at both the market (unconscious coordination) and the policy (conscious coordination) level. * This is a revised version of the presidential address delivered at the 13th International Conference