Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
13 Reputation, trust and relational centrality
in local networks: an evolutionary geography
perspective*
Stefano Denicolai, Antonella Zucchella and
Gabriele Cioccarelli
1. Introduction: social variety in an evolutionary economic geography
The literature about clusters and districts highlights that geographical proximity facili-
tates knowledge sharing and, therefore, innovation processes (Breschi and Lissoni, 2001;
Cooke, 1998). According to a more or less tacit assumption in this stream, local knowl-
edge is somewhat 'in the air': all district i rms apparently have equal access to this impor-
tant asset. This perspective tends to underestimate the relevance and the evolutionary
path of knowledge creation
inside
the i rm, which generates a variety of routines: each
organization is approached by researchers as a sort of 'black box', while the focus goes
on the relationships among local agents (Boschma and Kloosterman, 2005). Moreover,
economic geography pays attention to whether generic locations or local networks are
relevant for the development and sustainability of a competitive advantage (Boschma,
2004; Castells, 1996). This leads to the assumption - according to the traditional stream
- that, in a particular cluster, local i rms share similar levels of absorptive capacity. This
circumstance provides a unique and inimitable location-bounded completive advantage
for any i rm located in a given place.
Evolutionary economic geography adds a complementary view to these assumptions.
It highlights that, also within the same district, i rms could be very heterogeneous in their
knowledge and competence bases (Boschma and Ter Wal, 2007; Nelson and Winter,
1982). The variety of i rms and their evolution over time are important dimensions of
analysis. Organizations involved in local networks aren't 'black boxes': they dif erently
absorb, explore and exploit local knowledge, because they use dif erent routines, beliefs
and habits.
Knowledge l ows are a critical issue in this framework. Geographical proximity
facilitates knowledge sharing and, thus, interactive learning and innovation. However,
local i rms show cognitive schemes that depend on both know-how and social dynam-
ics (Bathelt and Glückler, 2003; Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Nooteboom, 2004). These
two dimensions, especially within local clusters, are deeply intertwined (Granovetter,
1985). Firms' absorptive capacity is grounded, i rst of all, on knowledge bases, but it
signii cantly relies also on social issues such as culture, trust and reputation (Cohen and
Levinthal, 1990; Malmberg and Maskell, 2002). Knowledge externalities in districts are
not necessarily 'in the air', because knowledge tends to remain inside the boundaries of
i rms and of local networks (Zucchella et al., 2004). Since local agents dif er in terms of
absorptive capacity, the above mentioned accumulation of knowledge and social assets
increases i rms' variety over time.
The critical issue addressed in this chapter is that the
280
