Clusters and economic development outcomes: An analysis of the link between clustering and industry growth

Economic Development Quarterly

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 324-344

  Feser, Edward ^a   Renski, Henry ^b   Goldstein, Harvey ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^c MODUL UNIVERSITY VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

Appalachia; Entrepreneurship; Industry cluster; Regional growth

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ECONOMIC GROWTH; EMPLOYMENT; ENTREPRENEUR; INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT; REGIONAL ECONOMY;

APPALACHIANS; NORTH AMERICA;

EID: 54049153647     PISSN: 08912424     EISSN: 15523543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0891242408325419     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Acs, Z.J., & Armington, C. (2004). Employment growth and entrepreneurial activity in cities. Regional Studies, 38(9), 911-927.
2. Armington, C., & Acs, Z. (2002). The determinants of regional variation in new firm formation. Regional Studies, 36(1), 33-45.
3. Buenstorf, G., & Klepper, S. (2005). Heritage and agglomeration: The Akron tire cluster revisited (Papers on Economics and Evolution, 2005-08). Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute of Economics, Evolutionary Economics Group.
4. Caves, R.E., & Porter, M.E. (1977). From entry barriers to mobility barriers. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91, 241-261.
5. Dumais, G., Ellison, G., & Glaeser, E.L. (2002). Geographic concentration as a dynamic process. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 193-204.
6. Feser, E., Goldstein, H., Renski, H., & Renault, C. (2002). Regional technology assets and opportunities: The geographic clustering of high-tech industry, science and innovation in Appalachia. Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional Commission.
7. Feser, E., & Koo, J. (2000). High-tech clusters in North Carolina. Raleigh: North Carolina Board of Science and Technology.
8. Feser, E.J., & Sweeney, S.H. (2000). A test for the coincident economic and spatial clustering of business enterprises. Journal of Geographical Systems, 2, 349-373.
9. Figueiredo, O., Guimarães, P., & Woodward, D. (2002). Home-field advantage: Location decisions of Portuguese entrepreneurs. Journal of Urban Economics, 52, 341-361.
10. Gabe, T.M., & Kraybill, D.S. (2002). The effect of state economic development incentives on employment growth of establishments. Journal of Regional Science, 42, 703-730.
11. Getis, A. (1984). Interaction modeling using second-order analysis. Environment and Planning A, 16, 173-183.
12. Guimarães, P., Figueiredo, O., & Woodward, D. (2003). A tractable approach to the firm location decision problem. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(1), 201-204.
13. Harrison, B. (1994). Lean and mean: The changing landscape of corporate power in the age of flexibility. New York: Basic Books.
14. Heckman, J.J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 161-196.
15. Isserman, A., & Westervelt, J. (2006). 1.5 million missing numbers: Overcoming employment suppression in County Business Patterns data. International Regional Science Review, 29, 311-339.
16. Meester, W. (2004). Locational preferences of entrepreneurs: Stated preference in the Netherlands and Germany. Heidelberg and New York: Physica.
17. National Research Council (1995). Research-doctorate programs in the United States: Continuity and change. Washington, DC: Author, National Academy of Sciences.
18. Ord, J.K., & Getis, A. (1995). Local spatial autocorrelation statistics: Distributional issues and an application. Geographical Analysis, 27(4), 286-306.
19. Porter, M.E. (1998, November/December). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 77-90.
20. Porter, M.E. (2003). The economic performance of regions. Regional Studies, 37(6-7), 549-578.
21. Rosenthal, S.S., & Strange, W.C. (2003). Geography, industrial organization, and agglomeration. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2), 377-393.
22. Sweeney, S.H., & Feser, E.J. (1998). Plant size and clustering of manufacturing activity. Geographical Analysis, 30(1), 45-64.
23. U. S. Patent & Trademark Office. (2000). United States patent grants by state, county, and metropolitan area (utility patents 1990-1999). Washington, DC: Author, Office for Patent and Trademark Information.