Proximities and the emergence of regional industry: evidence of the liability of smallness in Malta

Abstract

The interplays of different types of proximities are crucial to the emergence of new industries, including entrepreneurial ecosystems as pillar of the competitive advantage in regions. Though proximities can be advantageous, negative aspects on the economic development have also been discussed, leading to the discussion of the so-called proximity paradox. To better understand the effective functioning of these proximities, it must be concretized which institutional actors play a role, and how their collaboration and thus their proximity constellations contribute to the regional development. Based on empirical evidence of Malta, this paper operationalizes the different proximities types and conceptually investigates the different proximities between institutional actors in building a new regional industry, i.e. the gaming industry. The case of the Maltese gaming industry illustrates how regions with limited size and resourcescarcity, thus high proximities between actors (also prevalent in city-states and peripheral regions), can still defy the odds of the liability of smallness and, thus the proximity paradox. Results of this in-depth study shows how collaborative endeavour of proximate institutional actors can contribute to developing an effective entrepreneurial environment and the emergence of a new regional industry.

The effect of micro‐territorial networks on industrial small and medium enterprises' innovation: A case study in the Spanish region of Cantabria

“…This can produce a stagnation of knowledge exchange in the region (Carrincazeaux, Lung, & Vicente, 2008). Also, institutional proximity (Boschma, 2005) or technological proximity (Oerlemans, Meeus, & Boekema, 1998) are factors which initially could be seen as granting positive benefits, but some researchers consider that they may have negative effects on innovation, knowledge transfer, or network efficiency (Yamamura & Lassalle, 2020). Therefore, geographical proximity is assumed to be a condition that favours the exchange of knowledge by fostering innovation; however, too much proximity could be a detriment (Broekel & Meder, 2008).…”

Multicultural Hybridism as a Dynamic Framework to Reconceptualise Breakout in a Superdiverse and Transnational Context

“…The second facet of Multicultural Hybridism includes a Framework for the Breakout Process in Superdiverse Contexts, as shown in Figure 2. The framework is constructed on the basis of the diversification process (Lassalle and Scott, 2018) and Multicultural Hybridism (Arrighetti et al, 2014), incorporating the concept of superdiversity (Vertovec, 2007;Sepulveda, Syrett, and Lyon, 2011;Zubair and Brzozowski, 2018;Yamamura and Lassalle, 2020). Superdiversity signifies a new era of migration and multicultural diversity in Britain, with an unprecedented level of complexity in terms of demographic diversity and social patterns (Vertovec, 2007).…”

“…Superdiversity signifies a new era of migration and multicultural diversity in Britain, with an unprecedented level of complexity in terms of demographic diversity and social patterns (Vertovec, 2007). It draws attention to internal differences of ethnic entrepreneurial resources within ethnic groups, in which the dynamism between the superdiversity of migration and changes in opportunity structure brings new meaning to the mix of Mixed Embeddedness theory (Barberis and Solano, 2018;Yamamura and Lassalle, 2020). This means migrant entrepreneurs create business opportunities through recognitions of the contextualised opportunity structure (Yamamura and Lassalle, 2020).…”

Estratégias De Formação De Ecossistemas De Empreendedorismo E Inovação: Framework Conceitual a Partir De Casos Portugueses

“…Fiorentino (2019), por meio do estudo de região periférica, estabelece que ao redor do mundo há, cada vez mais, às margens das cidades, projetos de incubação de empresas e que estes vem questionando as estratégias tradicionais de regeneração urbana. Yamamura & Lassalle (2019), a partir da análise de uma ilha, observam que apesar das altas proximidades entre os atores sociais, pode haver o paradoxo da proximidade, e que este precisa ser superado para o trabalho colaborativo e o desenvolvimento de ambiente empresarial eficaz. Schaeffer et al (2018) analisam o papel das universidades no processo de criação de ecossistemas de inovação, e avaliam a atividade inovadora a partir de três vetores, a saber, criação de patentes, desenvolvimento de softwares e conhecimento intensivo em empreendedorismo.…”