Network Structure of an Industrial Cluster: Electronics in Toronto

Abstract

Over the past two decades there has been an international surge of analytical and policy interest in the`knowledge-based economy' in which firms are engaged in the production and adoption of new technologies, and the innovation and reinnovation of industrial products and processes. Innovation by firms, across the range of technologies from traditional to advanced, is conceived as part of a learning process, which may be incremental or reliant on new developments. Simultaneously, there has been a renewed interest in the geographical clustering of industrial firms in core regions and in major cities within them. This means there has been significant refocusing of research on how agglomeration economies and innovation sustain nodes of industrial activity. Industrial clusters, regional innovation systems, and industrial districts are the most common regional industrial models in use and though they tend to have different applications their developers have focused on bonds between firms and with other institutions within regions. The concept of globalization, however, recognizes the ease with which goods, capital, and ideas move at the international and interregional levels and there is a need to integrate this reality into models of industrial clustering by considering the network choices of industrial firms.In this paper I identify recent literature that breaks with conventional models of regional industrial systems, especially industrial clusters, in order to provide a clearer recognition of the importance of interregional (including international) inputs of industrial knowledge, product market connections, and other interorganizational relationships. Then I develop a case study of the knowledge networking of firms in the electronics cluster of the Toronto metropolitan region. I evaluate the significance of interregional compared with intraregional bonds and whether they vary with the organization and ownership of firms, company scale, and the different business environments in which firms exchange knowledge. The conclusion of the paper includes a brief consideration of the policy implications of the research results.

Innovation determinants over industry life cycle

“…This implies that the (large) firms in later stages are usually more 'capable' of engaging in international trade in compare with firms in earlier stage. More importantly, it is shown that large firms in declining industries are in fact more 'in need' of such access to international sources of knowledge input in compare with firms in earlier stages [38]. This is because firms in declining industries experience diminishing return from localization economies (i.e.…”

“…This is because firms in declining industries experience diminishing return from localization economies (i.e. local labor, supplier, and knowledge spillover) [18], hence for staying innovative these firms need to refresh their knowledge stock through networks of international trade [39] [38]. Therefore, not only large firms in declining industries are more 'capable' of engaging in international trade, but also they are in fact 'in need' of such engagement.…”

Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues

“…Examples include the Garment District in New York [72], the software industry in Oslo [49], the electronic cluster in Toronto [73], the media industry in Montreal [74], and the service industry in London [75].…”

Réseaux d’innovation dans les PME en estrie

“…S'il en est ainsi, c'est que le savoir tacite, les compétences de la main-d'oeuvre et la capacité de manipuler les savoirs codifiés sont incorporés et fonction du contexte spécifique et, conséquemment, transférables uniquement grâce à certains types d'interactions sociales. Pour arriver à transmettre ces savoirs tacites, un haut degré de confiance entre les organisations est requis (maskell et malberg, 1999 Cela dit, des travaux récents portant sur le transfert et le partage des connaissances révèlent l'importance des relations extraterritoriales dans les processus d'innovation des entreprises (Bunnell et Coe, 2001 ;Doloreux, 2004aDoloreux, , 2004bSimmie, 2001Simmie, , 2003Britton, 2003Britton, , 2004macKinnon, Cumbers et Chapman, 2002 (Howells, 1999).…”

“…en partant de l'hypothèse voulant que la proximité géographique facilite les rapports entre l'entreprise innovante et les apports externes qui lui sont nécessaires lors du processus d'innovation, plusieurs chercheurs ont récemment interrogé le rôle de l'en- (Doloreux, 2004a(Doloreux, , 2004bSimmie, 2003 ;Freel, 2002Freel, , 2003edquist, eriksson et Sjören, 2000edquist, eriksson et Sjören, , 2002Diez, 2000 ;Koschatzky, Kulicke et zenker, 2001 ;Cooke, Boekholt et tödtling, 2000 ;Henry et Pinch, 2000 ;Sternberg, 2000). or, des travaux récents portant sur le transfert et le partage des connaissances révèlent l'importance des relations extraterritoriales dans les processus d'innovation des entreprises (macKinnon, Cumbers et Chapman, 2002 ;macKinnon, Chapman et Cumbers, 2004 ;Simmie, 2001Simmie, , 2003Britton, 2003Britton, , 2004Bunnel et Coe, 2001 Pour apporter des éléments de réponse à ces deux objectifs, nous proposons, à la section suivante, une réflexion sur les fondements conceptuels du rôle de la région et de la proximité dans les réseaux d'innovation. La troisième section traite de la méthodologie et de l'enquête, alors que la quatrième section présente le profil socioéconomique de la région de l'estrie.…”