• Home
  • Issues
  • 2014
  • No 1
  • Innovative clusters and public administration: Market failures vs government failures

Innovative clusters and public administration: Market failures vs government failures

TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 12 (no. 1),
p. 41-52

Clusters and cluster policy are becoming more and more popular economic instruments, all around the world, to increase economic competitiveness of a country and promote its innovative growth. Cluster strategies are considered as an important tool of innovative development in many countries. Cluster approach is highly prospective: cluster formation and cluster development can increase competitiveness and efficiency of various regions within a country. However, clusterization of the economy could be accompanied with high concentration at industrial and regional levels and monopoly effects that could decrease economic welfare. The article analyzes key characteristics of a cluster as an economic phenomenon, provides modern venues of government innovation policy on the basis of cluster approach and investigates strengths and weaknesses of government cluster policy.

Keywords: government regulation; innovations; innovative cluster; industrial policy; cluster policy; R&D support; clusters’ competitiveness

  • A guide on cluster formation – main directions of cluster initiatives’ formation and management (2009). Intra-European cluster communication. Translated by International Institute of Public Administration and Management of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (In Russian.)
  • Kutsenko Е.S. (2010). Methodology of revealing the main directions of clusters development in Russian regions. Available at: http:/promcluster.ru/images/UPLOAD/metodologia_issledovania.pdf. (In Russian.)
  • Kutsenko Е.S. (2012a). Cluster development algorithm involving small and medium-sized regional enterprises / In Artamonov Yu.S. and Khrustalev B.B. (eds.) Cluster policies and cluster initiatives: theory, methodology, practice. Collective monograph. Penza: Penza State University of Architecture and Construction Publ., pp. 80–118. (In Russian.)
  • Kutsenko Е.S. (2012b). On the notion of cluster, protocluster and economic agglomeration. Discussion paper. (In Russian.)
  • Kutsenko Е.S. (2012c). Rational cluster strategy: Maneuvering between failures of market and state. Foresight-Russia – Journal of the National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 6–15. (In Russian.)
  • Lenchuk E.B. and Vlaskin G.A. (2010). Cluster approach within the innovative development strategy of foreign countries. Problemy prognozirivaniya, no. 5. (In Russian.)
  • Marshall А. (1993). Principles of Economics. Moscow: Progress Publ. (In Russian.)
  • Porter M. (2000). On Competition. Moscow: Williams Publishing House. (In Russian.)
  • Rekord S.I. (2010). Industrial and innovative clusters development in Europe: Evolution and current discussion. Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg State University of Economics and Finance Publ. (In Russian.)
  • Shlafman А.I. (2009). Innovative pefroemance of an enterprise and peculiarities of competition on the cluster level. Izvestiya of the Irkutsk State Economic Academy [Izvestiya Irkutskoy gosudarstvennoy ekonomicheskoy akademii], no. 1, pp. 86–88. (In Russian.)
  • Andersen C. and Opsal, T. (2010). Knowledge-based innovation and the benefits of clustering. BI Norwegian School of Management. Thesis.
  • Baldwin R. and Robert-Nicoud F. (2007). Entry and symmetric lobbying: why governments pick losers. Journal of European Economic Association, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 1064–1093.
  • Beason R. and Weinstein D. (1996). Growth, economics of scale, and targeting in Japan (1955–1990). Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 286–295.
  • Boekholt P. and Thuriaux B. (1999). Public policies to facilitate clusters: background, rationale and policy practices in international perspective / In Boosting innovation: the cluster approach. N.Y., ch. 16.
  • Bondonio D. and Greenbaum R. (2007). Do local tax incentives affect economic growth? Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 121–136.
  • Boschma R. and Wal L. (2007). Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: the case of a footwear district in the South of Italy. Industry & Innovation, vol. 14, no. 2, pp.177–199.
  • Branstetter L. and Sakakibara M. (2002). When do research consortia work well and why? Evidence from Japanese panel data. American Economic Review, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 143–159.
  • Breschi S. and Lissoni F. (2001). Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey, Industrial and Corporate Change. Oxford University Press, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 975–1005.
  • Brown P. and McNaughton R. (2003). Cluster development programmes: panacea or placebo for promoting SME growth and internalization? / In Etemad H. and Wright R. (eds.) Globalisation and entrepreneurship: policy and strategy perspective. Northhampton: Edwar Elgar, pp. 106–124.
  • Canina L., Enz C.A. and Harrison J.S. (2005). Agglomeration effects and strategic orientations: evidence from the U.S. lodging industry. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 48, pp. 565–581.
  • Chatterji A., Glaeser E. and Kerr W. (2013) Clusters of entrepreneurship and innovation. NBER Working Paper. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w19013/
  • Combes P., Duranton G. and Gobillon L. (2008). Spatial wage disparities; sorting matters. Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 723–742.
  • David P., Hall B.H. and Toole A.A. (2000). Is public R&D complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of econometric evidence. Research Policy, vol. 29, pp. 497–529.
  • Delgado M., Porter M. and Stern S. (2012). Clusters, convergence, and economic performance. NBER Working Paper 18250. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18250/
  • Duranton G. (2011). California Dreamin’: The Feeble Case for Cluster Policies. Review of Economic Analysis, no. 3, pp. 3–45.
  • Etzkowitz H., Dzisah J., Ranga M. and Zhou Ch. (2007). The triple helix model of innovation. University-industry-government interaction. Tech Monitor, Jan.–Feb., pp. 14–23.
  • Gassman O. and Han Z. (2004). Motivations and barriers of foreign R&D activities in China. R&D Management, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 423–437.
  • Gebreeyesus M. and Mohnen P. (2013). Innovative performance and embeddedness in networks: evidence from the Ethiopian Footwear Cluster. World Development, vol. 41, pp. 302–316.
  • Glaeser E., Kerr W. and Ponzetto G. (2009). Clusters of entrepreneurship. NBER Working Paper 15377. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15377/
  • Gordon I. and McCann P. (2000). Industrial Clusters: Complexes, Agglomeration and/or Social Networks? Urban Studies, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 513–532.
  • Griliches Z. (1992). The search of R&D spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, vol. 94, pp. 529–547.
  • Iammarino S. and McCann P. (2006). The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers. Research Policy, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 1018–1036.
  • Ketels Ch. (2007). Industrial Policy in the United States. Special Issue on the Future of Industrial Policy. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, vol. 7, no. 3–4, pp. 143–323.
  • Kukalis S. (2010). Agglomeration economies and firm performance: the case of industry clusters. Journal of Management, vol. 36, pp. 453–481.
  • Manning St. (2013). New Silicon Valleys or a new species? Commoditization of knowledge work and the rise of knowledge services clusters. Research Policy, vol. 42, pp. 379–390.
  • Martin P., Mayer T. and Mayneris F. (2011). Public support to clusters. A firm level study of French «Local Productive Systems». Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 41, pp. 108–123.
  • McCann B.T. and Folta T.B. (2008) Location matters: where we have been where we might go in agglomeration research. Journal of Management, vol. 34, pp. 532–565.
  • McDonald F., Tsagdis D. and Huang D. (2006). The development of industrial clusters and public policy. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, vol. 18, pp. 525–542.
  • Nishimura J. and Okamuro H. (2011). Subsidy and networking: the effects of direct and indirect support programs of the cluster policy. Research Policy, vol. 40, pp. 714–727.
  • Oliveira J. and Ali S. (2011). Gemstone mining as a development cluster: a study of Brazil’s emerald mines. Resource Policy, vol. 36, pp. 132–141.
  • Porter M. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 77–91.
  • Porter M. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 15–34.
  • Richardson Ch., Yamin M. and Sinkoviks R. (2012). Policy-driven clusters, interfirm interactions and firm internationalization: some insights from Malaysia’s Multimedia Super Corridor. International Business Review, vol. 21, pp. 794–805.
  • Rodan S. and Galunic S. (2004). More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 25, pp. 541–562.
  • Rosenthal S. and Strange W. (2004). Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economics / In Henderson V. and Thisse J-F. (eds.) Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, vol. 4. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 2119–2171.
  • Schmitz H. (1999). Global competition and local cooperation: success and failure in the Sinos Valey, Brazil. World Development, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 1627–1650.
  • Spence M. (1984). Cost reduction, competition, and industry performance. Econometrica, vol. 52, pp. 101–121.
  • Teece D. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications from integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, vol. 15, pp. 286–305.
  • Thyagu Nirmal N. and Mehta A. (2011). Competitive cluster growth on networks: complex dynamics and survival strategies. Physica A, vol. 390, pp. 1458–1473.
Publisher: Southern Federal University
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606