Andrew Cumbers

Learning, innovation and regional development: a critical appraisal of recent debates

A resurgence of interest in the region as a scale of economic organization has been apparent within economic geography over the past decade or so. In view of the apparent shift towards a ‘knowledge-driven economy’, the capacity of regions to support processes of learning and innovation has been identified as a key source of competitive advantage. This paper provides a critical appraisal of recent work on innovation, learning and regional development, situating this within its intellectual context. We argue that, while the focus on knowledge and learning is highly relevant, much of the literature fails to adequately ground its arguments in empirical enquiry and also tends to underemphasize the importance of wider extra-local networks and structures. In conclusion, we offer some directions for further research.

Evolution in Economic Geography: Institutions, Political Economy, and Adaptation

Abstract Economic geography has, over the past decade or so, drawn upon ideas from evolutionary economics in trying to understand processes of regional growth and change. Recently, some researchers have sought to delimit and develop an “evolutionary economic geography” (EEG), aiming to create a more systematic theoretical framework for research. This article provides a sympathetic critique and elaboration of this emergent EEG but takes issue with some aspects of its characterization in recent programmatic statements. While acknowledging that EEG is an evolving and pluralist project, we are concerned that the reliance on certain theoretical frameworks that are imported from evolutionary economics and complexity science threatens to isolate it from other approaches in economic geography, limiting the opportunities for cross-fertilization. In response, the article seeks to develop a social and pluralist conception of institutions and social agency in EEG, drawing upon the writings of leading institutional economists, and to link evolutionary concepts to political economy approaches, arguing that the evolution of the economic landscape must be related to processes of capital accumulation and uneven development. As such, we favor the use of evolutionary and institutional concepts within a geographical political economy approach, rather than the construction of some kind of theoretically separate EEG—evolution in economic geography, not an evolutionary economic geography.

Networking, trust and embeddedness amongst SMEs in the Aberdeen oil complex

Over the last decade or so, networking has become a ‘vogue concept’ in small business research, connecting with wider debates on learning and regional development. Participation in inter-firm networks is seen to provide small firms with access to a broader pool of resources and knowledge, helping them to overcome size-related disadvantages. In particular, the role of such networks as channels for innovation and learning within regions and localities has been emphasized in the context of an apparent shift towards a knowledge-driven economy. In this paper, we provide an empirically-grounded analysis of networking, trust and embeddedness amongst small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the Aberdeen oil complex. Drawing upon survey and interview data, it is argued that connections to extra-local networks play a crucial role in providing access to wider sources of information and knowledge. At the same time, an Aberdeen location still matters to oil-related firms because of the access it offers to crucial forms of industry-specific information and expertise. In concurring with recent calls for more empirically-grounded research which seeks to ‘test’ theoretical propositions against relevant data, we suggest in conclusion that a combination of firm surveys and face-to-face interviews provides an appropriate way forward.

Introduction: clusters in urban and regional development

Clusters have become a key focus of discussion and analysis in contemporary debates on urban and regional economic development (Feldman, 2000; Porter, 1990; Steiner, 1998). Closely associated with the work of the Harvard business economist, Michael Porter (1990, 2000), the cluster concept has attracted particular interest from academics, consultants and policy-makers concerned with promoting urban and regional growth in an increasingly global economy (Benneworth et al., 2003; Glaeser, 2000; Martin and Sunley, 2003). As Steiner (1998, pp. 1 and 4) observes, clusters have become an object of desire for many cities and regions, resting on the widely accepted assumption that increased specialisation will lead to increased levels of productivity, growth and employment. Cluster-based policies have been adopted by a range of organisations operating at different geographical scales, including regional development agencies within a number of European and North American states, national government units such as the UK government’s Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and supranational bodies such as the OECD and the European Commission (see—for example, DTI, 1998; European Commission, 2002; OECD, 2002). Such policies require the identification of specialist clusters which can then be targeted for support, typically in the form of R&D assistance, bespoke training, venture capital, initiatives which attempt to inculcate a culture of innovation and learning and efforts to build and reinforce a sense of cluster identity amongst constituent firms and organisations (Raines, 2002). As advocates of clusters often argue (Porter 1998, 2000; Botham and Downes, 1999), the approach is not confined to dynamic new clusters of the knowledge economy, but can be applied in a variety of sectoral and spatial contexts, from old industrial regions undergoing structural readjustment to peripheral rural regions seeking new sources of growth and even prospective industrial ‘hotspots’ in the ‘global south’ (Altenberg and Maeyer-Stamer, 1999; World Bank, 2000). Despite a growing literature, reflected in a burgeoning number of articles, journal special issues (see European Planning Studies, Small Business Economics)—to which we are, of course, adding another—and official reports, we would argue that there is still a lack of critical intellectual engagement with the cluster concept. Whilst a number of critiques of clusters and concepts associated with what has been termed the ‘new regionalism’ in economic geography and related fields have appeared in recent years (see, for example, Lovering, 1999; MacLeod, 2001; MacKinnon et al., 2002; Cumbers et al., 2003b), there remains a marked absence of work which critically evaluates the theoretical and policy claims of the cluster concept

Global justice networks : geographies of transnational solidarity

List of tables Acknowledgements 1. Neoliberalism and its discontents 2. Networks, global civil society and global justice networks 3. Global justice networks: operational logics and strategies 4. Global justice networks: geographical dynamics and convergence spaces 5. Peoples Global Action (Asia): peasant solidarity as horizontal networking? 6. International Federation for Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers: labour internationalism as vertical networking? 7. Social Forums as convergence spaces 8. Geographies of transnational solidarity Endnotes References Index

Grassrooting Network Imaginaries: Relationality, Power, and Mutual Solidarity in Global Justice Networks

In this paper we draw critically upon actor network theory (ANT) in order to analyse the contours of relationality, communication, and operational logic within a global justice network—Peoples Global Action Asia. Drawing upon the concept of translation, we consider how connections are fostered and sustained within the network, focusing upon the work of key organisers (those we term the ‘imagineers’) and key events in producing the network. In so doing, we ground ANT in direct political engagement and introduce the concept of ‘grassrooting vectors’ to highlight the power relations at work within global justice networks, a consideration which is crucial to the formation of mutual solidarity between social movements.

A Geographical Political Economy of Evolution in Economic Geography

Abstract Key themes for evolution in economic geography are identified that clarify and further refine and reinforce our argument for broader conceptions of institutions, social agency, and power and for the situation of the plural and emerging field of evolutionary approaches more fully within geographical political economy. We address the following issues: conceptual and terminological clarity; evolution and institutions within and beyond the firm; agency, bounded determinacy, and power; and research method and design. Our central contention is that geographical political economy provides a coherent and well-structured conceptual and theoretical framework with which to broaden and deepen our understanding, exploration, and practice of evolutionary thinking in economic geography.

Doing evolution in economic geography

abstract Evolutionary approaches in economic geography face questions about the relationships between their concepts, theories, methods, politics, and policy implications. Amidst the growing but unsettled consensus that evolutionary approaches should employ plural methodologies, the aims here are, first, to identify some of the difficult issues confronting those working with different frameworks. The concerns comprise specifying and connecting research objects, subjects, and levels; handling agency and context; engaging and integrating the quantitative and the qualitative; comparing cases; and, considering politics, policy, and praxis. Second, the purpose is to articulate a distinctive geographical political economy approach, methods, and illustrative examples in addressing these issues. Bringing different views of evolution in economic geography into dialogue and disagreement renders methodological pluralism a means toward improved understanding and explanation rather than an end in itself. Confronting such thorny matters needs to be embedded in our research practices and supported by greater openness; more and better substantiation of our conceptual, theoretical, and empirical claims; enhanced critical reflection; and deeper engagement with politics, policy, and praxis.

The national state as mediator of regional development outcomes in a global era - A comparative analysis from the UK and Norway

In recent years, commentators have downplayed the role of the national state in shaping regional economic development. In particular it has been argued that globalization processes are undermining the national level as a container of economic regulation and action. This has been accompanied by a celebration of the regional level as a site for constructing competitive advantage, amid growing evidence of increased sub-national economic agglomeration. This article contests this view, arguing that in the current era the state remains a key actor in both mediating the effects of global economic integration and shaping the trajectories of regional economies. The argument is illustrated through a comparative analysis of oil-based regional economic developments in the UK and Norway. The case studies highlight the contrasting role played by the national state in the two countries and the varied spatial outcomes and prospects that arise as a result.

Constructing a global commons in, against and beyond the state

The “commons” is emerging as one of the progressive political key words of our time. Against a backdrop of continuing neoliberal governance of the global economy, there is interest in a “translocal” global commons as an alternative that transcends both state and capitalist forms of appropriation. In this paper, I offer a constructive critique of the global commons. While sympathetic to arguments about the deficiencies of state-centric forms of socialist projects for emancipation, I nevertheless argue that realizing the commons vision of a more democratic politics means continuing engagement with the state, particularly for connecting up and scaling up local autonomous projects to achieve more transformative social change.