Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Regional Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cres20
To cite this article: Arnoud Lagendijk (2006) Learning from conceptual flow in regional studies: Framing present debates,
unbracketing past debates, Regional Studies, 40:4, 385-399, DOI: 10.1080/00343400600725202
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Regional Studies, Vol. 40.4, pp. 385 –399, June 2006
Critical Surveys
Edited by STEPHEN ROPER
Past Debates
ARNOUD LAGENDIJK
Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box 9108, NL-6500 HK
Nijmegen, the Netherlands. E-mail: A.Lagendijk@ru.nl and A.Lagendijk@fm.ru.nl
LAGENDIJK A. (2006) Learning from conceptual flow in regional studies: framing present debates, unbracketing past debates,
Regional Studies 40, 385 –399. The field of regional studies is characterized by an intense flow of ideas and concepts, accompany-
ing what can be described as a restless shifting of perspectives and approaches. Most of the inspiration for this dynamics is drawn
from other disciplinary fields. Yet, the importation and translation of ‘external’ ideas is often criticized for resulting in rather
haphazard and fuzzy conceptualizations. Moreover, rather than carefully assessing new ideas and insights in the context of
ongoing debates on regional development, there is a tendency to sidetrack existing lines of debate and call for new ‘turns’
and ‘perspectives’. Without playing down the importance of conceptual innovation, the paper calls for a stronger appreciation
of our conceptual inheritance. Taking the genealogy of a dominant line of thinking in the field, the ‘Territorial Innovation
Models’, as a starting point, the paper discusses how one can advance the debate by using both ‘old’ and ‘new’ (internal and
external) ideas regarding three core analytical levels in regional studies: micro, meso and macro. Recent ideas on relationality,
in particular, are considered helpful in reassessing as well as refining the value of ‘older’ structuralist –institutionalist macro-
approaches, and in situating the contribution from more recent debates on the (micro) role of cognition and knowledge.
Finally, a call is made for a careful absorption of sociological work to take into account the broader (meso) institutional economic
environment in which regions operate.
Regional studies Economic geography Regulation approach Institutional approaches Cognitive approaches
LAGENDIJK A. (2006) Ce que l’on peut tirer des flux conceptuels dans le domaine des études régionales: articuler les débats actuels,
démystifier les débats antérieurs, Regional Studies 40, 385 –399. Le domaine des études régionales se caractérise par un flux rapide
d’idées et de notions, conjointement avec un déplacement continuel de perspectives et d’approches. Dans une large mesure, cette
dynamique s’inspire des autres disciplines. Toujours est-il que l’importation et la traduction des idées ‘externes’ se voient souvent
critiquées parce qu’il en résulte des conceptualisations plutôt incohérentes et floues. Qui plus est, au lieu d’évaluer avec prudence
des idées et des aperçus nouveaux dans le cadre des débats en cours sur l’aménagement du territoire, on a tendance à détourner le
sens des débats en cours et de demander des ‘tournures’ et des ‘perspectives’ nouvelles. Sans reléguer l’importance de l’innovation
conceptuelle au second plan, cet article cherche à réclamer une meilleure compréhension du patrimoine conceptuel. Prenant
comme point de départ la généalogie d’une ligne de pensée dominante dans ce domaine, les ‘Territorial Innovation Models’
(modèles de l’innovation territoriale), cet article cherche à discuter comment on pourrait avancer le débat en employant à la
fois les ‘nouvelles’ et les ‘anciennes’ idées (internes et externes) à l’égard de trois niveaux analytiques de base dans le domaine
des études régionales: à savoir, micro, méso et macro. On considère que les idées récentes sur la notion de relationalité en particulier
aident non seulement à évaluer mais aussi à peaufiner la valeur des approches macro-structuralo-institutionalistes plus anciennes, et
à positionner la contribution des débats plus récents à propos du rôle (micro) de la cognition et de la connaissance. Pour conclure,
on réclame l’intégration prudente du travail sociologique afin de tenir compte du milieu économique institutionnel plus large
(méso) où fonctionnent les régions.
Etudes régionales Géographie économique Approche de contrôle Approches institutionnelles Approches cognitives
ren, zu berücksichtigen.
LAGENDIJK A. (2006) Aprender del flujo conceptual en estudios regionales: Formulando debates presentes y descatalogando
debates pasados, Regional Studies 40, 385 –399. El campo de los estudios regionales se caracteriza por un intenso flujo de ideas
y conceptos que acompañan a lo que se puede describir como un agitado cambio de perspectivas y planteamientos. La principal
inspiración para esta dinámica viene de otros campos disciplinarios. No obstante, muchas veces se critica la importación y traduc-
ción de ideas ‘externas’ porque desembocan en conceptualizaciones bastante incoherentes y confusas. Además, en lugar de evaluar
detenidamente nuevas ideas y perspectivas en el contexto de debates continuos sobre el desarrollo regional, hay una tendencia a
desviar las lı́neas actuales de debate y requerir nuevos ‘giros’ y ‘perspectivas’. Sin minimizar la importancia de la innovación con-
ceptual, aquı́ buscamos una apreciación más sólida de nuestra herencia conceptual. Si tomamos como punto de arranque la gen-
ealogı́a de una lı́nea dominante de pensamiento en este campo, los ‘Modelos de Innovación Territorial’, en este artı́culo analizamos
cómo podrı́amos avanzar en el debate al usar ideas ‘antiguas’ y ‘nuevas’ (internas y externas) con respecto a los tres niveles analı́ticos
principales en estudios regionales: micro, meso y macro. Se cree que las recientes ideas, particularmente sobre relacionalidad, son
muy útiles a la hora de volver a valorar y definir el valor de los más ‘antiguos’ enfoques macro estructuralistas e institucionalistas, y
de situar la contribución de debates más recientes sobre el rol (micro) de cognición y conocimiento. Finalmente, creemos que es
necesaria una cuidadosa absorción del trabajo sociológico para tener en cuenta el ambiente económico institucional más extenso
(meso) en el que funcionan las regiones.
Estudios regionales Geografı́a económica Enfoque regulatorio Enfoques institucionales Enfoques cognitivos
PHASE ONE: STRUCTURALIST– regimes, namely that between ‘Fordism’ and ‘post-
ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVES Fordism’ inspires the organizational perspectives on
regional development [9, 10]. Two variants will be dis-
In a seminal paper entitled ‘In what sense a regional cussed here in more detail.
problem?’, MASSEY (1979) argues that regional develop-
ment needs to be examined in the light of changes in the
The Californian School
organization of production and the overall economic
system. Massey thus ushers in a decade in which the Within geography, the structuralist –organizational per-
rapidly growing interest in regional dynamics is based spective on the region has three main sources of inspi-
on what can be called a structuralist –organizational per- ration. First, a network of French scholars nurtures a
spective on spatial –economic development, culminat- debate, still ongoing, in which structuralist notions
ing in STORPER and WALKER ’s (1989) opus magnus, drawn from the Regulation Approach are confronted
The Capitalist Imperative. Where previous structuralist with micro- and meso-level concepts of spatial organi-
approaches interpreted regional development primarily zation, as exemplified by the French Proximity School
in terms of ‘spatial fixes’ accommodating the crisis ten- (BENKO and LIPIETZ , 1998). Second, under the
dencies of capitalism [1, 2], Marxist thinking is now heading of the ‘localities debate’, a group of British geo-
combined with (neo)institutional and evolutionary graphers examined the way regions, as complex sets of
The Californian School’s ambitions are reflected, in the combination of evolutionary, regulationist and
particular, in its theoretical breadth. Its theoretical con- neo-classical thinking, evokes considerable criticism.
ceptualization starts with a combination of a techno- Various authors point at the tensions and even inconsis-
logical interpretation of capitalist transition, based on tencies in the overall argumentation due to its eclecti-
Schumpeterian evolutionary economic thinking and cism (GERTLER , 1992; BARNES, 1996). Another
Long Wave approaches [6] with the historical perspec- point of critique is that despite the theoretical breadth
tive of the Regulation Approach. Capitalism is charac- and, in many parts, the high level of sophistication,
terized by unpredictable technological development the ideas remain too grand and schematic, and lacking
paths, punctuated by major transitory periods, and in a sensitivity to differences in place and time,
embedded in, as well as impinging upon, evolving between regions, sectors, transactions, networks and
socio-spatial organizational forms of production [5]. agents (AMIN and THRIFT, 1995b). As will be shown
Hence, regions acquire a double meaning. On the below, it is the issue of diversity that comes to dominate
one hand, regions are the products of industries that, the agenda of economic geography in California, and
through a process called ‘geographical industrialization’, elsewhere, later on.
shape their own conditions of production, including
markets for labour and specialized inputs, and dedicated
The ‘second industrial divide’
regulatory forms [9, 13]. Geographical industrialization
is strongly path-dependent. Crucial is the transition Another seminal contribution to the debate on new
from initial growth to stabilization. Where initially regional modes of production triggered by structural
upcoming industrial trajectories may offer an open shifts is provided by PIORE and SABEL’s (1984) work
window of opportunity for regions to catch on, on The Second Industrial Divide. A central point of
further developments are generally restricted to ‘first theirs is that the crisis of Fordism can be solved by insti-
mover’ regions. On the other hand, regions represent tutional responses either at the global level, through a
sites of innovation that may induce fundamental shifts kind of global Keynesian demand management, or at
in technological development, and thus the rise of the local level, by instigating a kind of permanent inno-
new industries. Regional innovative capacity stems vation underpinning a dynamic, flexibly specialized
from, in particular, the advantages accruing from the form of organization of production, and professionaliza-
growth of vertically disintegrated forms of production, tion of the workforce. With hindsight, it is only the
resulting in external economies and economies of second solution that has materialized, notably in the
scope. Interestingly, to explain the advantages of vertical form of ‘industrial districts’ (IDs) and in the form of
disintegration, the Californian School invokes (Neo-) high-tech districts around the world [14]. These dis-
Classical economic notions derived from Sraffa, and tricts can avert problems of overaccumulation and
Coase and Williamson, amongst others [4, 8]. One of over-investment through the ability of rapid and effi-
the key ambitions is to integrate the pervasive, but cient redeployment of resources and labour between
essentially static, logic of transaction costs economics different activities, and a strong inclination to inno-
in a broader, more dynamic perspective on economic vation and investment. Flexibility, in turn, is enabled
development. In the words of STORPER and WALKER by a strongly disintegrated production structure, com-
(1989, p. 137), ‘The fundamental insights of Coase bined with effective forms of communication and
and Williamson must be set within more realistic the- coordination through socially embedded networks
ories of technological development and competitive [18, 12]. Social institutions of different kinds, formal
behaviour to generate a more robust view of the and informal, help to shape local networks and collec-
dynamics of industry division and redivision’. tive strategic capacities. Industrial districts thus present
How has this ambitious contribution performed? sites of embedded ‘micro-regulation’ [7, 11] (PIORE
With hindsight, the results appear to be mixed. A and SABEL , 1984, p. 269), in which the economy and
390 Arnoud Lagendijk
community are deeply intertwined. Therefore, where on capitalist development, further conceptual develop-
the Californian School puts technological dynamics at ment is driven by a different intellectual agenda oriented
the centre of the analysis, here the perspective is primar- towards diversity and non-structuralist interpretations of
ily social –institutional, where technology is viewed as economic evolution. In the words of AMIN (2000,
cardinal, but essentially instrumental. Technology is p. 152):
not associated with the power of capital, as in Marxist
the interest in industrial districts draws on a much wider
approaches, nor is it a primary evolutionary force, as
fascination with a new phase of capitalism that is
in the Californian School. Instead, technology is con- human-centred, democratic, and regionally oriented. It
sidered to be a potential ally of labour seeking to is also part of a new theoretical project: understanding
develop its own competitive position, a view that the socio-institutional foundations and evolutionary
chimes with the readings of IDs by Italian scholars: processes of economic life.
In essence, this is what an ID is: a socio-economic vortex, More in line with a (neo)Weberian than a
a kind of ‘permanent small industrial revolution’, the (neo)Marxist interpretation of capitalism (COLLINS,
transforming energy of which is imprisoned – like 1992), socio-institutional phenomena are seen as essen-
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014
groups, as well as rules of participation, are (re)shaped by economic incentives (LOASBY, 1998). Such systems
and uncertainties reduced: ‘social co-ordination is not are, in two ways, responses to human cognitive capabili-
a product of interaction among persons with given, ties and limitations. First, they shape and align cognitive
fixed “portfolios” of interests, but a product of the frames of economic agents, inducing integration.
sequence of interactions themselves’ (SALAIS and Second, they sustain ‘cognitive divisions of labour’, a
STORPER , 1997, p. 296). Economic conventions bear, feature already identified by Adam Smith as a key
in a systematic way, on product quality, productivity, driver of specialization. Together, cognitive structures
labour, supplier– buyer relations, communication and define a system’s ‘absorptive capacity’ in a world charac-
group membership, resulting in distinct ‘Worlds of terized by a constant and abundant flow of economic
Production’. Storper and Salais distinguish between information (COHEN and LEVINTHAL , 1990).
four such worlds: the Interpersonal or Marshallian The development of cognitive approaches has been
World, with emphasis on networking; the Market boosted, in particular, by the conceptualization of a
World, featuring strong competition between standard knowledge cycle by NONAKA and TAKEUCHI (1995).
products; the Intellectual World, dominated by inno- This cycle is characterized by two dynamics. On the
vation; and the Industrial World, characterized by one hand, agents absorb knowledge either by the
mass production. Worlds of Production are spatially internalization of codified knowledge, with the help
embedded, and often in regional agglomerations: of tacit knowledge earlier acquired, or through sociali-
zation involving the exchange of tacit knowledge. On
the conventions which underlie innovative performance
the other hand, agents contribute to the knowledge
and specialization are in some cases highly specific to dis-
crete sub-national regions, places in which certain learning
flow either by converting tacit into codified knowledge
based real worlds of production are concentrated, with (externalization, e.g. patents) or by recombining
associated action frameworks and conventions rooted in knowledge of various types to make new knowledge.
the regional population. Nonaka and Takeuchi thus provide a framework that
(SALAIS and STORPER , 1997, p. 63) sheds light on the articulation of tacit and codified
knowledge, and models the flow of knowledge
Especially the Interpersonal World and parts of the between single systems like firms or regions, and the
Intellectual World give rise to the emergence of outside world. This articulation and flow in generally
‘Regional Worlds’ of collective learning [26, 27]. In nurtured in regions as shared context of knowledge
such territories, conventions form ‘relational assets’ or creation, defined as ‘ba’ (CORNO et al., 1999).
‘untraded interdependencies’ underpinning regional Various authors regard the present nature of knowl-
competitiveness, comparable with the ‘club goods’ edge circulation as a key factor behind the continuing
mentioned above. Building institutions that nurturing significance of the region. The region provides a suit-
such assets should be key objective of regional policy able scale and place for hosting ‘knowledge commu-
(STORPER , 1997). nities’ (LOASBY, 1998) or ‘cognitive laboratories’
(LOMBARDI , 2003) engaged, in particular, in socializa-
tion and recombination [30, 29]. Due to spatial proxi-
mity and social embedding, regions help to reduce
PHASE THREE: THE RISE OF COGNITIVE
cognitive distances between different actors and
PERSPECTIVES
groups, facilitating shared practices and collective strat-
Institutional approaches, notably the ‘conventions’ egy-making. Reduced cognitive distances within a
perspective, emphasize the reduction of uncertainty as proximate setting result in what STORPER and
a key condition for collective learning and investment, VENABLES (2004, p. 358) call ‘buzz’ stemming from
and hence prosperity. Cognitive approaches take a face-to-face (F2F) communication, since: ‘F2F
step back and focus on the way economic agents scan, communication [is] not just an exchange; it is a
Learning from Conceptual Flow in Regional Studies 393
performance, where speech and other kinds of actions, development of knowledge communities and networks
and context, all come together to communicate in a is perceived as a more complex, multilevel process (cf.
very complex way on many different levels at the DICKEN, 2004). A key problem one needs to address
same time’. For the more tacit part of the knowledge then, according to MORGAN (2004), is the way the lit-
cycle, advanced communication technologies do not erature tends to juxtapose organizational and physical
present a suitable alternative for F2F encounter. Even proximity as separate, reified entities. Instead of pitting
networks, near or far, are not sufficient. Knowledge one against the other, geographers should focus on
dynamics, notably internalization and socialization, are how the formation of socio-economic relations mani-
nurtured by atmosphere, i.e. to use Marshall’s famous fests itself in spatial and organizational ways, on how
phrase, on what is ‘in the air’, conveyed by local these dimensions are articulated and intersected.
‘untraded interdependencies’ and conventions [32].
BATHELT et al. (2004, p. 38) define buzz as ‘the infor-
mation and communication ecology created by F2F
TAKING STOCK: REAPING THE FRUITS OF
contacts, co-presence and co-location of people and
THE ‘TIM’ GENEALOGY?
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014
Piore and Sabel. Yet, as various critical observers have tion with institutions, organizations and networks but-
repeatedly stated, it also propagated what can be seen as tressing competitive survival, projected upon the
an increasingly inward-looking, parochial perspective region.
on regional development (LOVERING, 1999; DICKEN, Confronted with this development, MAC LEOD
2004; LAGENDIJK , 2004). (2001, p. 1156) confesses ‘to being particularly struck
Therefore, how have these issues been addressed? by the diminutive theoretical role played by the RA
The first issue posed a serious challenge to the research [Regulation Approach] in the recent round of institu-
agenda. According to various critical observers, region- tionalist approaches, especially considering its key role
alist institutionalist approaches faced difficulties in iden- in earlier debates around post-Fordism’. Yet, our theor-
tifying the deeper causes of good performance resulting etical journey so far seems to suggest that this diminu-
from territorially rooted collective learning, tending to tive role does not so much ensue from an outright
functionalist or even tautological forms of explanation distancing from the Regulation Approach, but rather
(STORPER , 1997; KEATING, 1998; MAC LEOD, 1999; from a step-by-step slippage away from ‘harder’ political
GORDON and MC CANN, 2000). A full explanation economic perspectives. From Piore and Sabel onwards,
required social interaction and institutions themselves the region has obtained the status of a post-Fordist
to be explained. Storper’s own work on conventions ‘superfix’, able to address multiple regulatory dilemmas
went some way to address this problem, although it involved in the creation and distribution of economic
did not produce a full-blow theory of convention devel- wealth. This turn has allowed the regionalist literature
opment. As discussed above, the key response to this to explore the region’s virtues of flexibility, innovation
challenge has been a further inquiry into the interpret- and distinctiveness without having to pay detailed atten-
ative and cognitive aspects of socio-economic inter- tion to its wider political –economic setting and
action, learning and innovation, zooming in, context. In doing so, to quote LOVERING ’s (1999)
increasingly, on the micro level of knowledge creation, view, regionalists may have become ‘unwitting agents
sharing and use. This, in turn, has been the major drive of the reconstitution of regional governance in
behind the recent development of the cognitive Hayekian-liberal terms’ (p. 391). Although Lovering’s
approaches. Through embarking on a cognitive turn, critique targets, in particular, the translation of region-
hence, the debate shifted towards a clarification of alist thinking in various policy-oriented concepts, such
‘meso’ (regional performance) through ‘micro’ (cogni- as ‘Learning Regions’ and ‘Regional Innovation
tion, entrepreneurship). Systems’, the present analysis suggests that it also
The initial response to the second issue, the tendency applies to the more theoretical regionalist thinking.
towards of parochialism, has been the suggestion to Indeed, what this move has allowed is a growing recon-
broaden the research agenda by paying more attention ciliation of regional studies with mainstream economics
(again) to the ‘non-local’ (OINAS, 1999). Bathelt and strategic management thinking, as manifested by
et al.’s ‘buzz and pipeline’ perspective, for instance, the frequent citing of the work of Michael Porter.
calls for the right mix between ‘local’ and ‘non-local’. While the recent interest in cognitive aspects has
One could question, however, to what extent bringing helped to shed light on deeper processes of innovation
‘non-local’ factors on board helps to counter ‘parochial’ and economic development within regions, it has
tendencies. In DICKEN ’s (2004), view, the ‘non-local’ made the second issue of parochialism even more press-
involves a complex, layered world in which the local ing. Indeed, by further concentrating on learning, the
just forms one chain as a node in a variety of networks. cognitive perspective may actually draw us closer to
An important dimension in this broader world is advocating an ‘Hayekian’ world driven by one basic
the shaping of global production networks. Just ambition: processing information to innovate. In
adding a ‘non-local’ dimension to the analysis may not JESSOP’s (2004a) view, it might make us an accomplice
be sufficient to shed light on this complexity. in the advocacy of the ‘Knowledge Based Economy’
Learning from Conceptual Flow in Regional Studies 395
as an hegemonic economic imaginary. The question a relational perspective. Indeed, while recent contri-
becomes how one can redress such theoretical slippage butions have explicitly addressed the role and signifi-
while preserving the valuable insights stemming from cance of relationality in geographical thinking, one
social –institutional and cognitive perspectives. could argue that throughout the genealogy presented
This review leads to two suggestions for our research here, there has been an undercurrent of relational think-
agenda: ing (YEUNG, 2005). Therefore, without advocating a
relational turn, this section will explore how advancing
. The first concerns the way the subject of knowledge
a relational perspective can help to develop the research
is examined. While the present interest in knowledge
agenda. A key question is to what extent such a perspec-
is understandable given actual economic develop-
tive may draw on ‘old’ elements from our genealogy,
ments, one should be careful not to go too far
and which ‘new’ themes would be fitting to include.
down the ‘cognition’ route. As GERTLER (2003)
A crucial point is to place relationality in the right
recently argued, geographical research should focus
perspective. While relational thinking has played a key
on the social – institutional context of knowledge
role in geographical theorization, this has generally
development and use, as shaped, in particular,
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014
such as proximity and regional networks with inherent less attention to the role of the firm (TAYLOR , 1995),
properties, a relational approach assesses their role by they shed light on relational aspects of economic devel-
focusing on the way these phenomena are wedded in opment at a larger scale, through notions such as ‘indus-
a particular context (backward dimension), and how try cycles’, ‘first mover advantages’ and ‘vertical
they perform strategically (forward), in conjunction (dis)integration’. The challenge is here to strike the
with other regional characteristics and assets (lateral). right balance between more structural aspects and
An good example is TORRE and RALLET ’s (2005, the pervasive role of difference and heterogeneity, by
p. 52) contextual, socially constructivist interpretation drawing both on older, more structurally oriented
of the role of proximity: work and recent work focusing on diversity (cf.
MOULAERT and SEKIA , 2003; JESSOP, 2004b).
Geographical proximity is not so much an economic cause Such a revived, but also qualified, interest in more
of agglomeration as a social effect of the embeddedness of structural aspects of spatial – economic development
economic relations in inter-individual relations. Face-to-
brings up another theme from our own conceptual
face interaction between two actors cannot alone generate
synergies; the latter can only develop between two indi-
history, namely regulation. While less of a concern
viduals who belong to the same network or share recently in the domain of regional studies, the Regu-
common representations. lation Approach has played a substantial role in the dis-
cussion on ‘varieties of capitalism’ and market
In the context of industrial districts, LOASBY’s (1998, governance, bridging, in particular, the link between
p. 82) points at the vital role of the locational strategies sectoral forms of market coordination and macro-
of core firms in upholding the significance of local economic structures and institutions (HOLLINGS-
networks (also REES, 2005): WORTH and BOYER , 1997; LEWIS et al., 2002).
Hence, not only historically, but also spatiality, the
Thus long-term survival seems to depend on the presence concept of regulation serves to strike the balance
of a firm, or preferably firms, which are unwilling, or pre- between structure and diversity. This role is further
ferably unable, to do without local partners but are never-
theless able to induce them to make the major changes that
endorsed by the way recent writings have tended to
might be necessary to preserve the competitiveness of the understand regulation as a contextualized process
area. rather than as tendency towards a internally stable and
coherent configuration (GOODWIN, 2001). A process
Such inducement depends on and fosters close com- view allows for a stronger recognition of the role of
munication and shared cognitive frames, and visionary local agency and identity, and a more sophisticated
strategies, which, in turn, help to shape regional con- and refined understanding of the distinctive impact of
ventions of participation and interaction. Loasby’s political strategies at various levels in a relational
work, as well as other literature focusing on cognition manner (JESSOP, 2001). Moreover, the regulationist lit-
in regional contexts, has helped recent work on indus- erature is moving on several other fronts, including
trial districts to address further the link between the interest in the way state and selected non-state actors
micro and meso levels of regional development coalesce in ‘hegemonic projects’, and the constitutive
(CORNO et al., 1999; RULLANI , 2003). Furthering role of discourses, conventions and societal paradigms
this agenda in a relational perspective provides a key (MAC LEOD, 1997; JESSOP, 2004a).
challenge for research on knowledge and regional Time for the final question. If one accepts the signifi-
economic development. cance of advancing a relational perspective, and the
Turning to the second issue from the previous need for revaluing fitting concepts and unbracket
section, i.e. the need to span the meso and macro debates from one’s theoretical past, what ‘blind spots’
domains by contextualizing regional development might be left? While this is an intrinsically open ques-
within broader (socio)economic and institutional tion, one issue springs to mind. In addressing both
Learning from Conceptual Flow in Regional Studies 397
‘micro in meso’ and ‘meso in macro’ issues, there is one together, and the easiness with which certain critical
kind of institution that appears to be elementary, but issues in the debate tend to be neglected or ‘bracketed’,
that has received scant attention in the regionalist point at some serious weaknesses. Still underdeveloped
debate, namely the market. At first sight, this omission notions of space and scale, an often uncritical stance
is surprising. Institutional and sociological approaches towards the notions of competitiveness and learning, a
have gone a long way in showing how the spatial, parochial, regionalist projection of the notion of insti-
organizational and institutional variety in capitalist tutions, and, hence, a poor engagement with debates
market forms impinges upon the performance of on globalization and broader societal changes endorse
economic agents, as well as upon the performance of this weakness. Yet, the way forward is not one of an
larger units such as sectors, states and regions encom- overhaul of one’s conceptual baggage, nor of insisting
passing a specific form of market governance (WHITE , primarily on better definitions and more rigour. What
1981; FLIGSTEIN, 1996; HOLLINGSWORTH and is most important is the quality and depth of debate,
BOYER , 1997). Markets are ‘highly social in character, which requires insight into the way prevailing concepts
even when social interaction is at a distance’ (THRIFT, and arguments in the present and past have surfaced and
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014
2000, p. 694). Indeed, this literature even uses similar nestled in the debate, how they grew, lingered and
notions as the ‘soft’ regionalist perspectives: institutions, went. To return to Barnes’s plea for exploring one’s
conventions, networks, governance and relations of metaphors, one should be sensitive to the way concepts
power. Like other social phenomena, markets are and arguments tend to shift in the debate, how they tend
infused with cultural, legal, political and institutional to be rewoven under new theoretical labels, and how
dimensions (PECK , 2005), and manifest highly specific certain concepts and arguments become side-tracked.
forms of spatiality. Therefore, why have these develop- In itself, conceptual shifts and deaths are part of the
ments have had such a limited impact upon regional game, but it is essential one takes notice and reflect
studies? The present discussion of the genealogy of upon it.
regional studies suggests a straightforward answer. The In more substantive terms, a key challenge emerging
market does not fit in a ‘parochial’ view on the region from the exploration here is to deepen and refine
that sees the world outside in singular terms, i.e. further a relational perspective on regional develop-
driven primarily by fierce competition and forces of ment, by focusing, in particular, on the development
ubiquitification. The challenge for geography is thus of ‘middle-level’ concepts mediating between ‘local’
to confront a rich understanding of the region with specificities and powers, on the one hand, and more
an equally rich notion of the wider economic environ- structural developments, on the other. Such an agenda
ment. The latter includes not only global production could selectively build on long-standing discussions
networks, and complex systems of capitalist institutions, inspired by more structuralist perspectives, as well as
but also, and essentially, organized markets. It is in this on recent interests in institutional and cognitive
context that one should value Peck’s advocacy for a aspects of economic development. Like before,
close dialogue with meso and macro sociological ‘foreign’ concepts, such as stemming from the socio-
perspectives, remembering his warning that such a dia- logical interests in market organization and ‘variations
logue should not lead to a crude importation of external of capitalism’, may be of help to advance one’s thinking.
ideas. Yet, much care should be taken when such concepts are
inserted in a broader theoretical framework oriented
towards a more sophisticated understanding of regional
CONCLUSION development.
Inherent to their nature, geographers tend to keep their
eyes open and look far afield. Given their eagerness to
absorb ideas and concepts continually from other disci-
plines, the discipline can be depicted as an open and Acknowledgements – The author thanks the organizers
of the International Conference ‘The Knowledge Based
inquisitive stream of thought. Moreover, its general Economy and Regional Economic Development’, St John’s,
concern with economic and social unevenness and Canada, 3–5 October 2003, for the invitation to present an
issues of governance and democracy endorse its critical earlier version of this paper. The helpful comments of two
engagement with broader societal questions. At the anonymous referees are also gratefully acknowledged, as
same time, however, the rather loose way in which con- well as the financial support offered by NWO for finalizing
cepts from very different backgrounds are woven the paper (Grant No. 450-04-004).
REFERENCES
AMIN A. (2000) Industrial districts, in SHEPPARD E. and BARNES T. (Eds) A Companion to Economic Geography, pp. 149 –168.
Blackwell, Oxford.
AMIN A. and ROBINS K. (1990) The re-emergence of regional economies? The mythical geography of flexible accumulation,
Environment and Planning D 8, 7 –34.
398 Arnoud Lagendijk
AMIN A. and THRIFT N. (1992) Neo-Marshallian nodes in global networks, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 16,
571 –587.
AMIN A. and THRIFT N. (1995a) Globalisation, institutional ‘thickness’ and the local economy, in HEALEY P., CAMERON S.,
DAVOUDI S., GRAHAM S. and MADANI -POUR A. (Eds) Managing Cities, pp. 92 –108. Wiley, Chichester.
AMIN A. and THRIFT N. (1995b) Institutional issues for the European regions – from markets and plans to socioeconomics and
powers of association, Economy and Society 24, 41 –66.
AMIN A. and THRIFT N. (2002) Cities. Reimagining the Urban. Polity, Cambridge.
BARNES T. J. (1996) Logics of Dislocation. Guildford, New York, NY.
BATHELT H., MALMBERG A. and MASKELL P. (2004) Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of
knowledge creation, Progress in Human Geography 28, 31 –56.
BECATTINI G. (2003) From the industrial district to the districtualisation of production activity: some considerations, in BELUSSI F.,
GOTTARDI G. and RULLANI E. (Eds) The Technological Evolution of Industrial Districts, pp. 1–18. Kluwer, Boston, MA.
BENKO G. and LIPIETZ A. (1998) From the regulation of space to the space of regulation, GeoJournal 44, 275 –281.
BROWN J. S. and DUGUID P. (2001) Mysteries of the region. Knowledge dynamics in silicon valley, in MILLAR W. F., LEE C.-M.,
HANCOCK M. G. and ROWEN H. S. (Eds) The Silicon Valley Edge: A Habitat for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, pp. 16 –39.
Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014
CAPELLO R. (1999) Spatial transfer of knowledge in high technology milieux: learning versus collective learning processes,
Regional Studies 33, 353 –365.
COHEN W. and LEVINTHAL D. (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science
Quarterly 35, 128–152.
COLLINS R. (1992) Weber’s last theory of capitalism: a systematization, in SWEDBERG R. and GRANOVETTER M. (Eds) The
Sociology of Economic Life, pp. 85 – 110. Westview, Boulder, CO.
COOKE P. and MORGAN K. (1998) The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions and Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
CORNO F., REINMOELLER P. and NONAKA I. (1999) Knowledge creation within industrial systems, Journal of Management and
Governance 3, 379–394.
revoisier O. and MAILLAT D. (1991) Milieu, industrial organization and territorial production system: towards a new theory of
spatial development, in CAMAGNI R. (Ed.) Innovation Networks. Spatial Perspectives, pp. 13 –34. Belhaven, London.
DICKEN P. (2000) Places and flows: situating international investment, in CLARK G. L., FELDMAN M. P. and GERTLER M. S. (Eds)
The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, pp. 275–291. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
DICKEN P. (2004) Geographers and ‘globalization’: (yet) another missed boat?, Transactions of the Institute of British Geography 29,
5 –26.
FLIGSTEIN N. (1996) Markets as politics: a political– cultural approach to market institutions, American Sociological Review 61,
656 –673.
GERTLER M. S. (1992) Flexibility revisited: districts, nation-states, and the forces of production, Transactions of the Institute of British
Geography 17, 259 –279.
GERTLER M. S. (2003) Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or the undefinable tacitness of being (there),
Journal of Economic Geography 3, 75 –99.
GOODWIN M. (2001) Regulation as process: regulation theory and comparative urban and regional research, Journal of Housing and
the Built Environment 16, 71 –87.
GORDON I. R. and MC CANN P. (2000) Industrial clusters: complexes, agglomeration and/or social networks?, Urban Studies 37,
513 –532.
GRAHL J. and TEAGUE P. (2000) The regulation school, the employment relation and financialization, Economy and Society 29,
160 –178.
HENDERSON J., DICKEN P., HESS M., COE N. and YEUNG H. W. C. (2002) Global production networks and the analysis of
economic development, Review of International Political Economy 9, 436– 464.
HENRY N. and PINCH S. (2000) Spatialising knowledge: placing the knowledge community of motor sports valley, Geoforum 31,
191 –208.
HENRY N. and PINCH S. (2001) Neo-Marshallian nodes, institutional thickness, and Britain’s ‘motor sport valley’: thick or thin?,
Environment and Planning A 33, 1169 –1183.
HOLLINGSWORTH J. R. and BOYER R. (1997) Coordination of economic actors and social systems of production, in
HOLLINGSWORTH J. R. and BOYER R. (Eds) Contemporary Capitalism: The Embeddedness of Institutions, pp. 1–47. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
JESSOP B. (2001) Institutional re(turns) and the strategic–relational approach, Environment and Planning 33, 1213 –1235.
JESSOP B. (2004a) Critical Semiotic Analysis and Cultural Political Economy. Working paper. Department of Sociology, University of
Lancaster, Lancaster.
JESSOP B. (2004b) From localities via the spatial turn to spatio-temporal fixes: a strategic –relational odyssey. Paper presented at the
2nd Discussion Forum No. 6. University of Bonn, Bonn.
KEATING M. (1998) The New Regionalism in Western Europe. Territorial Restructuring and Political Change. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
KRAMSCH O. and BOEKEMA F. W. M. (2002) Breaking out of the ‘isolated state’: views on the status and future of regional science
from a European border region, Environment and Planning 34, 1373–1393.
LAGENDIJK A. (2000) Learning in non-core regions: towards ‘intelligent clusters’ addressing business and regional needs, in
BAKKERS S., RUTTEN R. P. J. H., MORGAN K. and BOEKEMA F. (Eds) Learning Regions, Theory, Policy and Practice, pp.
165 –191. Edward Elgar, Aldershot.
Learning from Conceptual Flow in Regional Studies 399
LAGENDIJK A. (2003) Towards conceptual quality in regional studies: the need for subtle critique – a response to Markusen,
Regional Studies 37, 719– 727.
LAGENDIJK A. (2004) ‘Global lifeworlds’ versus ‘local systemworlds’: how flying winemakers produce global wines in intercon-
nected locals, Tijdschrift voor Sociale en Economische Geografie 95, 511 –526.
LAWSON C. (1997) Territorial Clustering and High-technology Innovation: From Industrial Districts to Innovative Milieux. Working Paper
Series 54. ESRC Centre for Business Research, Cambridge.
LEWIS N., MORAN W., PERRIER -CORNET P. and BARKER J. (2002) Territoriality, enterprise and reglementation in industry
governance, Progress in Human Geography 26, 433– 462.
LISSONI F. (2001) Knowledge codification and the geography of innovation: the case of Brescia mechanical cluster, Research Policy
30, 1479–1500.
LOASBY B. J. (1998) Industrial districts as knowledge communities, in BELLET M. and L’HARMET C. (Eds) Industry, Space and
Competition. The Contribution of the Economists of the Past, pp. 70 –84. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
LOMBARDI M. (2003) Cognitive models, efficiency, and discontinuities in the evolution of industrial districts and local production
systems, in BELUSSI F., GOTTARDI G. and RULLANI E. (Eds) The Technological Evolution of Industrial Districts, pp. 109 –138.
Kluwer, Boston, MA.
LOVERING J. (1999) Theory led by policy: the inadequacies of ‘the new regionalism’, International Journal of Urban and Regional
Downloaded by [USM University of Southern Mississippi] at 18:35 12 September 2014