Suchergebnisse

International audience ; Cluster theory is a well‐established field of research (Greve, 2009; Martin & Sunley, 2003; Porter, 1998, 2008) andhas been an enduring element in national economic policies around the globe (Benner, 2012; Ketels, 2015). Also thesport sector has seen political and economic initiatives for cluster development on national and international level(EU4SportsClusters, 2015; EuroSIMA, 2015; Sporaltec, 2016).Shilbury (2000), pioneer in this topic, emphasises that in Australia sport clusters are potentially a new form of thesport delivery system in response to environmental changes, e.g., reduced state subsidies for sport. Until today sportclusters have been viewed as one conceptual category. However, this paper suggests a dual typology of sportclusters depending on the level of heterogeneity of cluster members and the type of interorganizational linkages.This study compares two clusters from the sailing industry to two clusters from the surfing industry. The use of amultiple case study with pairs of similar case studies permits theory development through literal and theoreticalreplication. Similar results amongst similar cases strengthen theory through literal replication. Differing resultsacross different pairs of cases deepen theory (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2009). This qualitativeresearch uses interviews (n=117) and observations (n=17) as the primary data sources, and organizationalinformation (n=47) and archival data (n=27) as secondary data sources.The results reveal two diametrically opposed models for clusters in the sport industry in terms of socio‐economicproximity (i.e., social proximity affecting economic proximity and vice versa (Gerke, Desbordes, & Dickson, 2015)).These two models represent the fundamental logic of community and society (Dalla Pria & Vicente, 2006; Storper,2005). The logic of a society like cluster is founded in the paradigm of proximity because of complementarity. Thetwo sailing clusters rely on the logic of society because the ...

International audience ; Cluster theory is a well‐established field of research (Greve, 2009; Martin & Sunley, 2003; Porter, 1998, 2008) andhas been an enduring element in national economic policies around the globe (Benner, 2012; Ketels, 2015). Also thesport sector has seen political and economic initiatives for cluster development on national and international level(EU4SportsClusters, 2015; EuroSIMA, 2015; Sporaltec, 2016).Shilbury (2000), pioneer in this topic, emphasises that in Australia sport clusters are potentially a new form of thesport delivery system in response to environmental changes, e.g., reduced state subsidies for sport. Until today sportclusters have been viewed as one conceptual category. However, this paper suggests a dual typology of sportclusters depending on the level of heterogeneity of cluster members and the type of interorganizational linkages.This study compares two clusters from the sailing industry to two clusters from the surfing industry. The use of amultiple case study with pairs of similar case studies permits theory development through literal and theoreticalreplication. Similar results amongst similar cases strengthen theory through literal replication. Differing resultsacross different pairs of cases deepen theory (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2009). This qualitativeresearch uses interviews (n=117) and observations (n=17) as the primary data sources, and organizationalinformation (n=47) and archival data (n=27) as secondary data sources.The results reveal two diametrically opposed models for clusters in the sport industry in terms of socio‐economicproximity (i.e., social proximity affecting economic proximity and vice versa (Gerke, Desbordes, & Dickson, 2015)).These two models represent the fundamental logic of community and society (Dalla Pria & Vicente, 2006; Storper,2005). The logic of a society like cluster is founded in the paradigm of proximity because of complementarity. Thetwo sailing clusters rely on the logic of society because the ...

International audience ; Cluster theory is a well‐established field of research (Greve, 2009; Martin & Sunley, 2003; Porter, 1998, 2008) andhas been an enduring element in national economic policies around the globe (Benner, 2012; Ketels, 2015). Also thesport sector has seen political and economic initiatives for cluster development on national and international level(EU4SportsClusters, 2015; EuroSIMA, 2015; Sporaltec, 2016).Shilbury (2000), pioneer in this topic, emphasises that in Australia sport clusters are potentially a new form of thesport delivery system in response to environmental changes, e.g., reduced state subsidies for sport. Until today sportclusters have been viewed as one conceptual category. However, this paper suggests a dual typology of sportclusters depending on the level of heterogeneity of cluster members and the type of interorganizational linkages.This study compares two clusters from the sailing industry to two clusters from the surfing industry. The use of amultiple case study with pairs of similar case studies permits theory development through literal and theoreticalreplication. Similar results amongst similar cases strengthen theory through literal replication. Differing resultsacross different pairs of cases deepen theory (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2009). This qualitativeresearch uses interviews (n=117) and observations (n=17) as the primary data sources, and organizationalinformation (n=47) and archival data (n=27) as secondary data sources.The results reveal two diametrically opposed models for clusters in the sport industry in terms of socio‐economicproximity (i.e., social proximity affecting economic proximity and vice versa (Gerke, Desbordes, & Dickson, 2015)).These two models represent the fundamental logic of community and society (Dalla Pria & Vicente, 2006; Storper,2005). The logic of a society like cluster is founded in the paradigm of proximity because of complementarity. Thetwo sailing clusters rely on the logic of society because the boat‐building projects are complex and require a varietyof specialised skills that are supplied by small‐and medium‐sized cluster members. The creation of a formal clustergoverning body accompanies an existing collective logic between much diversified and specialised local actors. Thelogic of a community like cluster is founded in the paradigm of cognitive proximity. The two surfing clusters rely onthe logic of community because cluster members have similar business models, competencies, and value creationprocesses. There are few buyer‐ supplier relationships and firms tend to be direct competitors, thusinterorganisational linkages tend to be competitive in nature.

International audience ; Cluster theory is a well‐established field of research (Greve, 2009; Martin & Sunley, 2003; Porter, 1998, 2008) andhas been an enduring element in national economic policies around the globe (Benner, 2012; Ketels, 2015). Also thesport sector has seen political and economic initiatives for cluster development on national and international level(EU4SportsClusters, 2015; EuroSIMA, 2015; Sporaltec, 2016).Shilbury (2000), pioneer in this topic, emphasises that in Australia sport clusters are potentially a new form of thesport delivery system in response to environmental changes, e.g., reduced state subsidies for sport. Until today sportclusters have been viewed as one conceptual category. However, this paper suggests a dual typology of sportclusters depending on the level of heterogeneity of cluster members and the type of interorganizational linkages.This study compares two clusters from the sailing industry to two clusters from the surfing industry. The use of amultiple case study with pairs of similar case studies permits theory development through literal and theoreticalreplication. Similar results amongst similar cases strengthen theory through literal replication. Differing resultsacross different pairs of cases deepen theory (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Yin, 2009). This qualitativeresearch uses interviews (n=117) and observations (n=17) as the primary data sources, and organizationalinformation (n=47) and archival data (n=27) as secondary data sources.The results reveal two diametrically opposed models for clusters in the sport industry in terms of socio‐economicproximity (i.e., social proximity affecting economic proximity and vice versa (Gerke, Desbordes, & Dickson, 2015)).These two models represent the fundamental logic of community and society (Dalla Pria & Vicente, 2006; Storper,2005). The logic of a society like cluster is founded in the paradigm of proximity because of complementarity. Thetwo sailing clusters rely on the logic of society because the boat‐building projects are complex and require a varietyof specialised skills that are supplied by small‐and medium‐sized cluster members. The creation of a formal clustergoverning body accompanies an existing collective logic between much diversified and specialised local actors. Thelogic of a community like cluster is founded in the paradigm of cognitive proximity. The two surfing clusters rely onthe logic of community because cluster members have similar business models, competencies, and value creationprocesses. There are few buyer‐ supplier relationships and firms tend to be direct competitors, thusinterorganisational linkages tend to be competitive in nature.

Project Work presented as the partial requirement for obtaining a Master's degree in Information Management, specialization in Information Systems and Technologies Management ; One fundamental question in one's economy development, is why some areas perform better than others? This document aims to map the Portuguese service proximity and relatedness from the private sector perspective. We analyze services offered by private entities contracted by the Portuguese government and describe their patterns to better understand how this space is structured. This thesis explores how services interact inside the Portuguese procurement space and lastly, if their closeness benefits their market share. It integrates evolutionary economic foundations with Portuguese data to create a unique model that can then be further scrutinized. It contains a holistic approach to further understand Portugal's reality and helps sharpen what is yet undiscovered. It propositions over an optimal data resolution selection and sheds some light on future strategies to policy makers on the usage of vocabulary codes.

Do elections matter for sanction effectiveness? Scholars have long highlighted the importance of domestic political factors in target (i.e. sanctioned) states in explaining when economic sanctions work. This line of research, however, has primarily focused on political regime characteristics and interest groups that are relatively low time-variant during sanction episodes. Building on this literature, we explore the effect of temporal proximity to elections. While the impact of elections have been examined in the context of military conflicts, their possible effects on sanction effectiveness have not been subject to systematic scrutiny. We argue that target governments are more likely to comply with sender demands as elections loom near in order to avoid the likely political costs of sanctions. The effect of elections, however, is likely to vary across different election characteristics and political regime types. We assess the empirical merits of our claims using data on over 1,000 sanction cases between 1950 and 2020. The results from a battery of empirical tests, including those that account for potential selection bias, support our hypotheses. We find that elections have a positive effect on sanction success, and this effect is more prominent in less democratic states that hold competitive elections. This suggests that even if sanctions have a relatively low success rate against non-democratic polities, elections may provide a window of opportunity for senders to extract concessions from target states.

AbstractSince some decades, inequality has been attracting a growing interest within political debate as well as in theoretical and empirical studies. Considering inequality at a regional level offers useful insights for policy makers, facilitating the assessment of the effectiveness of strategies aimed at reducing regional disparities and helping in developing place‐based actions. The study of regional inequality poses some relevant issues related to the spatial nature of data. In fact, dealing with georeferenced data implies the opportunity of considering the spatial interactions among regional units that are likely to play a role in shaping the inequality dynamics. Some studies have highlighted the importance of incorporating spatial effects in a traditional measure of inequality such as the Gini index. These studies are based on the definition of a proximity structure, which allows one to discriminate between the spatial and the non‐spatial component of inequality. Different definitions of the proximity structure are likely to influence the spatial component of inequality. Those aspects are analysed in the present paper to offer more detailed insights in the territorial dimension of inequality. The measures and their decompositions are discussed in the case of European NUTS 3 regions.

PurposeThis paper analyses the impact of institutional proximity, cognitive proximity and geographical proximity (in the form of agglomeration economies) on the firm-level productivity of foreign-owned firms in Ireland. The analysis of agglomeration economies, consisting of internal economies of scale, localization economies, related variety and urbanization economies, has a strong pedigree in regional economics literature. Increasingly, however, alternative explanations of firm-level productivity performance have been explored with institutional and cognitive proximity often identified as other important determinants of performance. This paper presents an analysis of the importance of agglomeration economies (based on geographical proximity) versus institutional and cognitive proximity (which may be a-spatial).Design/methodology/approachA series of measures capturing regional level agglomeration economies are generated as well as measures of institutional and cognitive proximity. The impact of these effects on foreign-owned firm-level productivity is analysed using data from the Irish Census of Industrial Local Units 2009. The estimation method employed is general method of moments (GMM) which allows for the potential endogeneity of variables within the system of analysis.FindingsThe results reveal that institutional proximity has a positive impact on productivity. A possible reason for this result is that local units of the same nationality are sharing knowledge in relation to successfully conducting business in Ireland. However, cognitive proximity is found to be statistically insignificant. Agglomeration economies are also important with urbanization economies and the availability of skilled labour having a positive effect on productivity.Originality/valueThe key contributions of this paper are as follows; firstly, the paper provides the first test of the institutional and cognitive proximity hypotheses on productivity while also controlling for a series of internal and external agglomeration economies. Secondly, the analysis considers, firm level, regional level and national level indicators as determinants of firm's productivity. In combining micro and macro level indicators, the paper attempts to answer the call of Van Oort et al. (2012) for such analyses. Thirdly, the paper provides the first detailed examination of the role of 'proximity' on foreign-owned manufacturing firms in the Irish context.

The author attempts to provide a synthesis of the long-run evolution of cities by taking an economic perspective. He defends the idea that urban growth for preindustrial cities has been limited by the tyranny of distance. Then he argues that technological progress, by fostering mobility, has reinforced economies of agglomeration and thus allowed for larger cities. This has led to the development of industrial cities and the dominance of the tyranny of distance. Nowadays, however, technological progress in communications and telecommunications seems to be challenging the rationale for agglomeration in cities as more and more economic interactions can be realized at arm's length. Increasing mobility may have turned into a threat for cities, hence the prediction about the demise of cities. Nonetheless, it is argued that the 'tyranny of proximity' may provide a strong glue to keep postindustrial cities together.