A Dynamic View of Industrial Agglomeration

Abstract

This study first outlines the classic Marshallian and Weberian theories of industrial agglomeration, highlighting the difference between Weber's theory, which "discusses the process of agglomeration emergence, based on predictable profit, from a state of nothingness," and Marshall's theory, which "discusses the process of continued self-reinforcement of existing agglomeration." Consequently, one cannot expect to understand the dynamism of industrial agglomeration by viewing these two theories separately. This study integrates the two theories to identify a framework for viewing industrial agglomeration dynamically. Specifically, this paper pays particular attention to "gatekeeper"-type companies, which capture the demand from markets outside the industrial agglomeration and make use of networks within the industrial agglomeration to meet that demand.

Multinational Enterprise-Driven Industrial Agglomerations

“…Thus, the key enterprises in the industrial agglomeration have grown by proactively using the management systems of the MNE headquarters, which was necessary to do business with both the MNE headquarters and their overseas subsidiaries. In other words, despite both Dalian and Silicon Valley being high-tech industrial agglomerations, companies in Silicon Valley gained resources by familiarizing themselves with local business practices (Iammarino & McCann, 2006;Inamizu & Wakabayashi, 2013;McCann, Arita, & Gordon, 2002;McCann & Mudambi, 2005), whereas key local enterprises in Dalian were required to adopt business practices of their customer MNEs to acquire resources. Thus, it is difficult to make generalizations about high-tech industrial agglomeration models based on the case of Silicon Valley, which may, in fact, be a special case.…”

Platform Paradox

“…Factors used to explain industrial agglomeration are the minimization of labor and transportation costs, as well as internal and external economies (Inamizu & Wakabayashi, 2013 Takahashi (2000Takahashi ( , 2014, it is regionally created, and the organizational capabilities accumulated within it become the source of their competitiveness.…”

Collective Strategy for Implementing Innovation in SMEs

“…To take on orders for a broad range of prototypes, participating members have a strong awareness of member differentiation in technologies and fields. 4 If all members 3 A particularly interesting point regarding the development of Kyoto Shisaku Net after September 2010 is that it has become a "gatekeeper" organization (Inamizu & Wakabayashi, 2013) that responds to demands outside industrial clusters using its intra-cluster network. 4 As emphasized by Wada, Ichikohji, and Ikuine (2014) involved.…”