Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
function as a selection and retention mechanism for the primary evolving population,
among other mechanisms not discussed here. It is assumed, furthermore, that this under-
standing of co-evolution is of particular interest for geographers if these mechanisms
have a 'regional' characteristic such as 'co-location', 'proximity' or 'regional social
capital'. In this sense, co-evolution is a 'local' mechanism of self-reinforcement of an
evolving (i rm) population.
2. Aspects of co-evolution
The evolution of a new technology, a new sector or a new type of region (such as a district
or a cluster) always takes place in an environment, which on the one hand is given, but
on the other hand also develops continuously. Both form a dynamic, emerging system.
The systemic understanding of evolution has an ai nity to geographical thought that
prefers to address highly complex structures and processes (Martin and Sunley, 2007).
It is essential to take this complexity seriously and allow for it in the sharpness of the
analytical tools used. What are the specii c characteristics of the concept of co-evolution?
Malerba's three questions can provide an answer: 'what is coevolving with what, how
intense is this process and whether indeed there is a bi-direction of causality'.
Given a multiplicity of systemic relations in which the evolution of a technology, a
sector or a type of region is embedded, an exact dei nition of what is co-evolving is abso-
lutely essential. A precise dei nition of co-evolution is that two emerging populations
exist more or less simultaneously, linked with a mutual causality of development between
the evolving and the co-evolving 'population': 'Two evolving populations coevolve if
and only if they both have a signii cant causal impact on each other's ability to persist'
(Murmann, 2003, p. 22; see also Malerba, 2006, p. 18). Co-evolution in this sense is
technology- specii c or sector-specii c and thereby dependent on context. Economic
geography can learn from empirical studies made by economists and economic histo-
rians. First, certain sectors grow in close association with others and could be seen as
'co-evolutionary' (see section 3). Second, research in technology made clear quite early
on that a new technology can only be successful with simultaneous transformation in
institutional arrangements. Thus sectors and institutional arrangements co-evolve (see
section 4). As such institutions are often tied to specii c territories, geographical localisa-
tion of the co-evolving processes takes place. One example is Murmann's seminal study
on the emergence of the dye industry in Germany (2003). Third, economic geographers
may see the region as a special form of institution. Storper and Walker (1989, p. 71)
introduced the hypothesis that a newly emerging industry creates its own environment.
A new sector can go hand in hand with a process of institutionalisation that not only
determines the creation of its market (Loasby, 2000) and the regulatory system for its
competitiveness, but also includes the creation of a 'region' as a supporting environment
(see section 5). Co-evolution in economic geography thereby focusses on the issue of the
emerging co-location.
It goes without saying that evolution and co-evolution are time-consuming processes.
All the more surprising is the observation that the dimension of time or the temporality
of sub-processes has rarely been discussed in this context. There is only a limited debate
on the construct of time in economics (Setteri eld, 1995) and it is not clear whether the
evolutionary approach implies a historical time concept or a Robinsonian 'logical' time
concept (see Martin and Sunley, 2006). In evolutionary studies by economic historians,
Search WWH ::




Custom Search