Suchergebnisse

The U.S. machine tool (MT) sector has undergone substantial restructuring over the past three decades. Despite signs of a commercial rebound in recent years, however, a number of critical issues remain for this industry. Not all firms share these concerns, in that differences exist between producers located in the core manufacturing belt and those located elsewhere. This paper examines the characteristics, competitive problems, and markets of firms located in these two regions. Survey data from a sample of 104 machine tool companies reveal that significant core–periphery differences exist with regard to firm–specific difficulties and markets served. The data also show that firms in the periphery have been growing significantly faster than firms in the core. The paper concludes with a discussion of the likely reasons for regional variability in the characteristics of firms in this industry. Directions for future research are also suggested, notably with regard to the interplay between national regulatory conditions and the competitive performance of MT firms.

ABSTRACT
This paper examines the competitive characteristics of small and medium‐sized manufacturing firms (SMFs) in a Canada‐U.S. crossborder region (the Niagara Frontier). Particular attention is given to the innovation and business performance of comparably‐sized firms on both sides of the border. The results of two firm‐level surveys are presented. A comparative analysis of the two groups suggests that Canadian Sh4Fs exhibit significantly stronger export and innovation performance than their US. counterparts. The results also suggest that U.S. firms face tougher competitive difficulties arising fiom specific national and regional circumstances, including shortages of skilled labor, higher corporate tax rates, rising import competition, and a more complex regulatory environment. The implications of the empirical results are discussed in the context of policy options for regional economic development in crossborder zones such as the Niagara Frontier

The authors explore the role of contact requirements in the locational tendencies of producer service establishments. Empirical evidence from two demand-side surveys suggests that close proximity between vendors and clients is required for contracts that involve frequent buyer–seller interaction (face-to-face linkages). These types of contracts are shown to be relatively low duration and/or low cost in nature. Specific activity classes that exhibit these characteristics include data processing, computer software development, product testing, and equipment repair services. In contrast, more advanced (and often more expensive) services such as management consulting and industrial design exhibit lower levels of contact sensitivity. The paper concludes with a discussion of forthcoming prospects for the development of a contact-based model of producer service location.

ABSTRACTThis paper reviews some of the past decade's studies of producer or intermediate‐services exports from local regions. After a discussion of conceptual and methodological problems and inconsistencies, we present these studies according to the three basic methodologies: surveys, location quotients, and input‐output. Overall, our sense is that these studies support limited but important conclusions: (1) If intermediate services are defined broadly, certain of these activities have as their major function interregional or international transfer or trade. By nature, these distributive services have widespread clients, and benefit from locations with substantial physical and communications infrastructure. (2) Among most business‐and financial‐service activities, most offices are established to serve a local region, but may derive some revenues from beyond this expected zone. (3) The exceptions—the activities and establishments that derive much of their revenue beyond such "normal" zones—are particularly specialized, particularly large, or parts of multiregional enterprises. (4) Such firms tend to locate in larger or more specialized urban places, probably because of the labor force, the corporate connections, and the rapid dissemination of ideas, contacts, and information within and among the largest metropolitan areas. These conclusions lead to some general policy recommendations.