Driving forces of cluster evolution – Growth and lock-in of two German packaging machinery clusters

Abstract

This paper explores the driving forces for divergent trajectories of cluster evolution within the same branch of industry using the example of two packaging machinery clusters located in the German regions of Schwaebisch-Hall and Mittelhessen. Between 1998 and 2010 the Schwaebisch-Hall cluster recorded an increase in employment of almost two thirds. On the other hand, employment in the Mittelhessen cluster declined by about 15% and the cluster is characterised by negative functional and cognitive lock-in. This study tackles the existing lack of comparative in-depth longitudinal case studies with regard to cluster evolution. In doing so, the driving forces from recent conceptual approaches to cluster dynamics are exemplified empirically, which has rarely been done before. It is pointed out that dynamics at individual firm level (e.g. routines, spin-offs) are equally important -albeit highly interdependent -as those dynamics of relations (e.g. learning, rivalry, policy) and those operating at a systemic level (e.g. cluster heterogeneity, markets). Therefore we consider conceptual approaches to cluster evolution, which combine several driving forces to really understand changes, as necessary.

Time should tell (more): evolutionary economic geography and the challenge of history

“…Longitudinal regional case studies can also provide insightful evidence of causal relationships in particular regions. While historical case studies of regions have proud traditions in economic geography, going all the way back to the descriptive tradition (Scott, 2000), more evolutionary regional case study work is particularly necessary from a historical perspective (Mossig & Schieber, 2016), especially concerning the role of regional institutions, knowledge network development (Boschma & ter Wal, 2007) and the initial conditions of new path formation. The work done by Hassink (2007), Trippl and Otto (2009), Sydow, Lerch, and Staber (2010) and Østergaard and Park (2015) can serve as early evolutionary examples of such ambitions.…”

“…5 One important development in this regard has been the growth of the literature concerning the life cycles of regional clusters (Boschma & Fornahl, 2011;Crespo, 2011;Menzel & Fornahl, 2010). Theoretical contributions concerning this issue, and especially what triggers movement between the stages of cluster growth (Crespo, 2011;Menzel & Fornahl, 2010), has been accompanied by a small but growing number of studies devoted explicitly to evolutionary change in regional clusters (Hervas-Oliver & Albors-Garrigos, 2014; Martin & Trippl, 2017;Mossig & Schieber, 2016;Shin & Hassink, 2011). However, Boschma and Fornahl (2011) note the unsatisfactory empirical situation as regards the empirical validation of the cluster life-cycle approach, while Martin and Sunley (2011) question the long-term validity of the concept, arguing instead for a complex adaptive systems approach.…”

The impact of actors, networks and institutions in the cluster’s evolution

“…However, all of them agree that there are distinct “emergence”, “growth”, “maturity” and “decline” phases, and that there are many ways to renew the cluster development (Martin and Sunley, 2011; Menzel and Fornahl, 2010). However, there is no consensus in the literature about the appropriate analytical framework (Fornahl et al , 2015; Mossig and Schieber, 2016). The life cycle frameworks have in common that they do not consider clusters as homogeneous entities; instead, they are influenced by the interplay of heterogeneous agents (Martin and Trippl, 2015).…”

“…The life cycle frameworks have in common that they do not consider clusters as homogeneous entities; instead, they are influenced by the interplay of heterogeneous agents (Martin and Trippl, 2015). Some studies have pointed out that different dynamics at the micro, meso and macro levels can drive local firms through cluster life cycles, and this can be summed up by looking at the roles of actors, networks and institutions (Fornahl et al , 2015; Mossig and Schieber, 2016).…”

Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience

“…Empirically and methodologically, as a long-term (or cross-time, see Pike et al, 2016) extended case study, the paper draws on more than a dozen pieces of funded economic and policy research and evaluation studies undertaken by the authors in the intervening years. Akin to what Peck and Theodore (2010) have described elsewhere, quoting Larner and Laurie (2010), as 'thickening' methodologies, these studies provide a combined exploration of how emergent geographies are socially constructed and spatially constituted (through time) (see also Gong and Hassink, 2017;Mossig and Schieber, 2016). These studies have comprised a substantial array of mixed methods -'grey' literature reviews; primary business surveys; secondary data analysis of existing sector relevant surveys and UK Companies House data; market assessments and scenarios; membership of industry and policy steering and working groups at national and regional levels; industry conferences and roundtables (observation and participation); trade show presentations; academic field trips 2 ; 'Chatham House rules' 3 industry lunches; business case studies; and close to 150 semi-structured interviews with key informants, stakeholders, CEOs and other senior management positions in motorsport and related businesses.…”