Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
to knowledge spillovers and innovative cities are rather more complex.
This is because the knowledge objectives and the innovation performance
of multinational firms are not necessarily centred on cities (Simmie and
Sennet 1999). As a consequence, the model of pure agglomeration presents
the biggest difficulties in being traced back to any of the archetypical kinds
of technological regimes which are identified in the literature. The reason
is that the heterogeneity of spatial patterns which can be included under
this heading, and ranging from the city to the regional innovation system,
depends critically on the idiosyncratic local capabilities and the degree of
system integration. Agglomeration therefore allows for the coexistence of
different technological regimes characterizing the same geographical unit
of analysis, but the sense in which it is driven by 'pure' externalities can
be unclear.
In contrast, the industrial complex will often be characterized by
regions with a highly specialized industrial structure. For modes of inno-
vation which are primarily based on major R&D and capital investment
and long development lead times, in many cases the industrial complex
may provide the most suitable environment for technology creation
and experimentation. Where evident, the composite and advanced local
knowledge-production basis is also likely to display a strong concentra-
tion at the spatial level. The industrial complex structure is also often a
suitable structure for the development of multilateral networks of dis-
similar but complementary relations between MNEs and local actors
(Patrucco 2001, 2003). Where MNEs invest in a region, the system will
often exhibit the characteristics of the complex. On the other hand, as seen
above, in the industries in which the host region or cluster is technologi-
cally strong, the major presence of indigenous firms tend to deter MNEs
in the same industry from carrying out considerable innovation activities
in the primary technological fields related to the local industry strengths.
As such, when MNEs choose to invest in these types of regions it gener-
ally implies that the focus of the local relations is mostly related to supply
chain issues, rather than technology or knowledge sourcing. However,
MNEs operating in other industries will still be there attracted for innova-
tion and knowledge purposes in those technologies whose lines of develop-
ment represent diversification from the primary technologies of their own
industry (Cantwell and Kosmopoulou 2002).
Finally, from the perspective of geography, there is also a fundamental
difference in the particular modes of innovation governance between the
two social network models (Simmie et al. 2004; von Tunzelmann 2003,
2009a, b). While trust-led social networks are generally geographically
embedded, and also rooted in historical experience based on strong social
proximity, competence-based social networks may rely on various kinds
