Cluster Creation

When I was finishing this book review essay, I was sitting in a German train below a leaflet with the title ‘Cluster als Chance’ (Clusters as an Opportunity), which broadcasted the success of cluster policies in German regions. This is not a specific German practice: one is also faced with similar public relations efforts in countries such as the Netherlands, the UK, and the United States. The cluster concept is well known in the social sciences for almost two decades, and the cluster message seems to have reached the general public as well. Just like other innovations, academic concepts also seem to have a life cycle and diffuse in different speeds in different contexts. Are clusters here to stay, or is it just another input to the cycle of fads and fashions in regional studies and policies? This would be a too easy introduction, and conclusion. There are big questions underlying the cluster debates that deserve more committed attention. One of these big questions is how does one create and sustain wealth in an increasingly knowledge based and global economy? Studies on clusters have traditionally been descriptive: what happens in cluster X, Yor Z? Hundreds of cluster studies have given researchers some understanding of how clusters function and what their (dis)advantages are. The key source in the cluster literature is Michael Porter, who provides thorough descriptions of multiple clusters around the world, and who claims that clusters increase productivity, and stimulate innovation and new firm formation (PORTER, 1990, 1998). The move from description to normative implications has quickly been made. Often too quickly, some scholars would argue. Policy-makers have been eager to embrace the cluster concept in order to legitimize government interventions in a newera of (spatialized) industrial policy. For example, in the Lisbon strategy of the European Union, state aid for innovation clusters is even seen as one of the solutions to the problem of sub-optimal levels of research and development and innovation (EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2006). Corporate strategists have a more bipolar attitude towards clusters as it provides both a threat (knowledge leakage) and an opportunity (knowledge inputs) to firms. Three major books in the cluster debate will be discussed in this book review essay. One often heard critique on cluster studies is their relative static, cross-sectional mode of analysis. This shortcoming has been partly nullified by the excellent collection of papers on cluster genesis in Cluster Genesis. Technology-based Industrial Development edited by Pontus Braunerhjelm and Maryann Feldman. This book aims to improve one’s understanding of how clusters emerge and how they transform local economies in order to provide guidance on the role of public policies in the genesis of industrial clusters. The book provides a series of history and context-sensitive accounts of cluster emergence. This makes it possible to separate causes from consequences. For example, it is often claimed that venture capital firms and support organizations are critical ingredients of cluster emergence. However, this appears to be a consequence of cluster emergence. A common feature throughout the Regional Studies, Vol. 43.2, pp. 319–323, March 2009