Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
10 A social-evolutionary perspective on regional
clusters*
Udo Staber
1. Introduction
The observation that something like an 'evolutionary turn' may be taking place in
economic geography (e.g. Boschma and Frenken, 2006; Boschma and Martin, 2007;
Grabher, 2009) does not in itself suggest that other theoretical approaches to questions
of economic geography have lost momentum. This is most apparent in research on
regional clusters.
1
By theorizing from a range of perspectives to highlight issues related
to institutions, technology, power, knowledge, culture, and so forth, researchers have
made signii cant contributions to our understanding of clusters and the processes that
drive them. However, the multitude of theoretical approaches in use has also fragmented
the i eld, producing a plethora of models and many dii cult-to-measure concepts that,
when seen in isolation, limit the generalizability and applicability of research i ndings.
Theoretical fragmentation is probably unavoidable in research on constructs as fuzzy as
clusters and related concepts such as l exible specialization, collective learning, and iden-
tity. But there is also the need for explanations that combine generality and parsimony
with rich descriptions of local phenomena. The social-evolutionary approach, intended
as a general framework for linking disparate parts and perspectives on developmental
aspects of clusters, may meet that need in several respects.
Many evolutionary accounts of clusters lack precision. They don't provide a clear
answer to some of the fundamental questions raised in evolutionary economic geogra-
phy. For example, what does it mean to say that a cluster has evolved? Has the cluster
merely changed, or has it moved toward greater adaptive complexity? How did a particu-
lar cluster arise where and when it did? At which point does a cluster enter a new phase
in its life-cycle? What exactly is involved when a cluster reaches a threshold (e.g. towards
chaos) or faces critical values (e.g. initiating system shifts)? What are the mechanisms
involved in local knowledge l ows, and why might their impact dif er across local set-
tings? Under what conditions and how do institutional and organizational rules evolve
over time? Routines and competencies in knowledge spillover or collective learning do
not reproduce themselves automatically or spontaneously. They are acted on by indi-
viduals who replicate, reproduce, or transform them, for reasons that must be explained
rather than assumed. Not all agentic interventions are successful; many are harmful, yet
they may persist. In short, we need a better understanding of why the clusters we observe
in dif erent places are the way they are, rather than should be.
To this end, I propose an evolutionary idea-based view of how human agency is impli-
cated in the ongoing social construction of a cluster. I do not develop here a full-blown
evolutionary theory of agency, nor am I presenting a set of testable hypotheses. Instead,
I present the fundamentals of a conceptual scheme that is intended as a 'sensitizing'
framework, to highlight the role of ideas (cognitive and normative beliefs) and their
221
