Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
mechanisms that drive its evolution), or contextually (by demonstrating how it i ts into
the structure of a higher level mechanism). Mechanisms also operate along a temporal
dimension, with outcomes that may dif er across levels. While some mechanisms, such as
idea codii cation, have immediate and situation-specii c ef ects, their aggregate and long-
term ef ects (for example, in form of accumulated experience) may vary considerably,
depending on initial conditions and the constellation of all other mechanisms at work in
specii c empirical instances.
A causal mechanism includes the particular feature of the unit of selection that brings
about outcomes, as well as the processes connecting outcomes and initial conditions
(Hedström, 2005). In evolutionary explanations of organic systems, the competition
among genes and the contribution of competition to species i tness is seen as the key
causal mechanism. In the context of socio-economic entities like business clusters, the
repertoire of mechanisms is potentially large and diverse. Social evolutionary theorists
have approached the question of mechanisms in contrasting ways. On one side are those
who follow a strong version of biological analogy, assigning 'seli sh', gene-like qualities
to ideas in the sense that ideas have an 'interest' in and can af ect their own propagation
(Dawkins, 1976). For these theorists, it is the competition among ideas and their contri-
bution to social i tness that is considered the central causal mechanism. This implies that
it is no longer individual actors, in their role as decision-makers or communicators, who
should be the primary research focus, but the properties of ideas that enhance their own
survival chances in an environment containing competing ideas. Research has investi-
gated how 'ideas acquire people' (Lynch, 1996) in form of myths, legends, ghost stories,
and the like (Heath et al., 2001). This line of research holds promise for those interested
in explaining how ostensibly harmful ideas - for example, notions like secrecy and dis-
trust (Staber, 2007) - can persist over the long term. This research does not deny the role
of individual agents in proposing, modifying, and communicating ideas. It rather draws
attention to the possibility that some ideas may spread even though individuals are
unaware of, indif erent to, or even opposed to them (Dennett, 1995). Whether the study
of ideas as replicators can mature into a full-blown science of culture remains unclear at
this point (Aunger, 2000).
Other theorists have adopted a view that is more appreciative of the deliberate inter-
vention of human agents who provide an interpreting mind and thus give meaning to
the information contained in ideas. They propose that any novel idea that an individual
accepts must be 'translated' (Czarniawska and Joerges, 1996) - perceived or modii ed in
some way - to be more consistent with other ideas in a given context. Virtually any idea
can become stable within a social group if it is sui ciently supported by social norms,
which themselves are composed of ideas (Richerson and Boyd, 2005). A variety of trans-
lation mechanisms may be involved, such as imitation, improvisation, and discourse.
Individuals may imitate others as closely as possible if, for example, they believe it is in
their best political interest to do so (motivated by social conformity needs). Or, they may
imitate others because they perceive so much uncertainty that they don't know what
else to do but to follow those in their surroundings (motivated by uncertainty reduction
needs). When ideas travel from site to site by imitation, the recipients may enact them
in dif erent ways, thus contributing new variation. Translation may also involve deliber-
ate improvisation when individuals detect minimal information, discover unintended
consequences of their actions, and correct their mistakes until they i nd a reasonably
