Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Industrial districts and regional planning
What is the significance of the industrial district for planning the development of
regions? The first point to note is that the cases that have been commented on in
the literature are of spontaneous growth of speciflc industry groups, in the sense
of not being subject to a firm government policy or programme. This makes it
uncertain whether such districts can be planned. On the other hand, the areas
around Bangalore, in Southern India, São Paulo in Brazil, or Karachi, Pakistan, are
islands of development within a matrix of underdevelopment, cases of
autonomous growth with little reference to the regions around them. This seems
to indicate that their growth can be established independently of neighbouring
cities and regions (van Dijk 1993).
Another starting point is that there are some parallels to be drawn between the
industrial district and the growth pole. Concentrated development centred on one
point is vital to both concepts, in accordance with basic economic theory. For a
single large industry, there are internal economies it may achieve through its
scale of operation. In the case of many industries linked loosely in one sector,
there are external economies. For both, there are “urbanization economies”
resulting simply from being in a large city with many different kinds of industry
and other economic activities.
But whereas the growth poles idea stresses the single large pole industry, firm
or unit, generating growth through its own growth and innovation, and through
its linkages downstream to consumers and upstream to suppliers, the industrial
district concerns a multiplicity of smaller firms, and details how they act in
competition and through complementarity to maintain growth.
Translating growth poles from a spontaneous process, as described by Perroux,
to policy, has already been shown to be fraught with difficulties and dangers,
relating to the lack of completeness in any planning of an “artificial” or planned
pole, the problems of identify ing an appropriate pole industry, and the long time-
scale needed for the linkage structures to emerge. Similar difficulties would
apply to the implementation of an industrial district. Indeed, it would be likely to
be more difficult, because the key firms involved are many rather than one.
There is also the point that the very nature of the industrial district is such that
planning is difficult. Flexibility of labour, flexible technology, growth and decline
of firms according to demand, are all problematic as planning proposals.
Flexibility of labour is in part a matter of social structure; flexible technology
and machinery is not the kind to be supported by standard financial backers, who
cannot be told exactly what their machinery is to be used for; flexibility of the
firm itself is a matter for management and entrepreneurship.
In these circumstances, the best to be offered might be supportive structures that
encourage the creation of firms with flexibility. A key feature here is the
environment which allows the emergence of entrepreneurs and managers, the
opposite of the large firm structure in many old industrial districts, where very
few workers have had any management experience. Local chambers of
