Sources of Regional Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia 

Vol. 1. Project Background and Prior Research 

on Economic Growth Paths 

Prepared for the Appalachian Regional Commission 

Prepared by: 

Economic Development Research Group, Inc. 

 Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. 

 MIT Dept. of Urban Studies & Planning

Revised 2007 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary 

Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia 

SOURCES OF GROWTH PROJECT

The Sources of Growth project is part of a series of research efforts funded by the Appalachian 

Regional Commission to improve our understanding of factors affecting economic growth in 

rural and distressed areas. As stated in the Volume 1 Introduction, “the starting premise of 

this project is that there can multiple paths that an area can pursue in successfully enhancing 

job and income creation. They may build on natural resources, cultural resources, human 

resources, local amenities, institutional facilities or location advantages. The resulting 

direction of economic growth may involve manufacturing or supply chain development, 

resource extraction or tourism development, educational development or trade center 

development.” This research is intended to provide a basis of information that can ultimately 

be useful for enhancing the effectiveness of policies and tools aimed at improving the region’s 

economic development. 

Results of the Sources of Growth project are presented in a series of documents listed below. 

This document is Volume 1. 

• Executive Summary –synthesis of findings from all work products related to the 

study’s four main research components. 

• Volume 1, Project Background and Prior Research on Economic Growth Paths – 

study objectives, characteristics of non-metro Appalachian counties, classification of 

economic development growth paths, and synopsis of white paper findings on theory 

relating to economic development growth paths. 

• Volume 2, Case Studies of Local Economic Development Growth Processes –

findings related to growth paths as observed for selected case studies covering 

manufacturing industry specialization clusters, supply chain-based development, 

tourism-based development, advanced technology development, and diversification 

from resource-based economies. 

• Volume 3, Statistical Studies of Spatial Economic Relationships – findings from a 

series of econometric modeling and GIS-based analyses, focusing on roles of spatial 

adjacency, market access and transportation in determining economic growth and 

development of trade centers. 

• Volume 4, Tools for Economic Development & Study Conclusions – description of 

new and updated tools available to ARC and its Local Development Districts to assess 

economic development opportunities and potential directions for economic growth. 

• Appendices – (A) Spatial Analysis of Economic Health, (B) Economic Analysis of 

Hub-Spoke Relationships, (C) White Papers on Economic Growth Theories, (D) 

Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Spatial Influences in Economic 

Development 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary 

Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i 

1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE...............................................................................................1

1.2 STUDY COMPONENTS AND TEAM ROLES.................................................................................3

1.3 CLASSIFICATION OF APPALACHIAN COUNTIES ........................................................................6

1.4 CLASSIFICATION OF ECONOMIC GROWTH PATHS ..................................................................10

2 THEORY OF GROWTH PATHS..............................................................................................13

2.1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES .................................................................................13

2.2 TRADE CENTERS ...................................................................................................................16

2.3 INDUSTRY AGGLOMERATION (CLUSTERS).............................................................................20

2.4 SUPPLY-CHAINS AND DISPERSAL ECONOMIES ......................................................................25

2.5 NATURAL AND CULTURAL ASSETS .......................................................................................29

2.6 LEARNING-BASED DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................36

2.7 REFERENCES CITED...............................................................................................................45

3 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE..........................................................52
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary 

Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Sources of Growth project involved a team of researchers including: 

• Economic Development Research Group, Inc. (EDRG) – Lisa Petraglia (Project 

Director), Glen Weisbrod and Teresa Lynch, with research support from Tyler 

Comings and Brett Piercy; 

• Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. (RTS) –Stuart Rosenfeld, Phil Psilos and Dan 

Broun. 

• Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies & Planning 

(MIT-DUSP) – Prof. Karen R. Polenske, Prof. Joseph Ferreira, Jr. and Ayman Ismail, 

with research support from Tan Zhijun, Isabelle Xin Li, 

Yi Xu and Leigh Graham. 

The project also benefited from the expertise of outside policy and research experts who 

reviewed various project documents, participated in meetings and provided technical 

guidance: Deb Markley (Co-Director of the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, a Rural Policy 

Research Institute), Joseph Cortwright (Vice-President of Impresa Consulting), Ken Poole 

(Executive Director of ACCRA: The Council for Community and Economic Research), David 

Freshwater (Professor of Agricultural Economics and Public Policy at the University of 

Kentucky), David McGranahan and Luc Anselin (Professor. Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer 

Affairs and Regional Economics Applications Laboratory at the University of Illinois, 

Urbana- Champaign). 

Overall project direction and oversight was provided by Dr. Greg Bischak of the Appalachian 

Regional Commission, whose wide range of research experience served to focus the project 

team on the development of policy applications. Important insight and suggestions were also 

provided by officials of the Appalachian Regional Commission who participated in a day-long 

symposium with the project team, including Thomas Hunter (executive director of ARC, Ann 

Pope (federal co-chair of ARC) and Rick Peltz (alternate federal co-chair). In addition, Ken 

Wester and Jason Wang of ARC assisted the project team in collecting and assembling 

transportation and geographic data. 

Finally, the project team acknowledges the important role of prior ARC-funded research 

studies by Andrew Isserman, Ed Feser and Oleg Smirnov that provided a foundation for this 

project to build upon. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 1

1 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background and Objective 

(A) Background: Growth Paths for Rural Economic Development 

The Appalachian Region spans many diverse local economies (across 410 counties in 

13 states), but is generally characterized by a greater degree of economic hardship and 

poverty than the nation as a whole. The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) 

was started specifically to help improve economic conditions in the region through a 

series of infrastructure and area development programs, accompanied by an active 

research program to help increase the effectiveness of those programs. 

It has become clear that the most distressed economic conditions are generally 

occurring in the more isolated and rural parts of Appalachia, and that targeted efforts 

are needed to address those conditions. At the same time, it has also become clear that 

“in-vogue” economic development strategies, which often focus on seeking largescale high-tech cluster development, are not necessarily appropriate or realistic for 

isolated, rural areas. Accordingly, the ARC embarked on a series of efforts to enhance 

our understanding of the alternative paths of growth that can be appropriate for rural 

areas, and ways that local development districts can move down those paths. The 

Sources of Growth project grew out of that effort. 

The starting premise of this project is that there can multiple paths that an area can 

pursue in successfully enhancing job and income creation. They may build on natural 

resources, cultural resources, human resources, local amenities, institutional facilities 

or location advantages. The resulting direction of economic growth may involve 

manufacturing or supply chain development, resource extraction or tourism 

development, educational development or trade center development. For any specific 

area, though, some growth paths are much more likely to succeed than others. So 

successful economic development becomes a matter of first understanding the possible 

growth paths that may be relevant for a region, then assessing the best directions and 

pursuing the necessary steps to make them succeed. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 2

(B) Objectives: Building on Prior Research

The Sources of Growth project emerged as a logical (and much needed) step from 

regional growth research – much of it ARC sponsored - to understand factors affecting 

economic growth, persistent distress, and implications for local policy initiatives in 

Appalachia’s non-metro counties. It builds upon a program of prior ARC-funded 

research that has sought to explain why some parts of Appalachian have economically 

outperformed others and been more successful in moving out of economic distress, 

and what practically can be done to raise the economic well-being of communities 

long in need. Key prior ARC studies on these topics are listed in Exhibit 1-1 (table). 

Exhibit 1-1. Prior ARC-Funded Studies Pertaining to Economic Growth Patterns 

• Amenities and Rural Appalachian Growth (Deller, 2003) 

• An Assessment of the Economic Base of Distressed and Near-Distressed 

Counties in Appalachia (Smirnov and Smirnova, 2000) 

• An Assessment of Entrepreneurship in Local Appalachian Economies (CFED, 

1998) 

• An Assessment of Labor Force Participation Rates and Underemployment in 

Appalachia (Keystone Research Center, 2001) 

• The Economic Effects of the Appalachian Regional Commission (Isserman and 

Rephann, 1995) 

• Analysis of Business Formation, Survival and Attrition Rates of New and 

Existing Firms and Related Job Flows in Appalachia (Brandow Co., 2001) 

• The Appalachian Economy, Establishment and Employment Dynamics 1982-

1997: Evidence from the Longitudinal Business Database (Foster, 2003) 

• Exports, Competitiveness, and Synergy in Appalachian Industry Clusters, 

Rosenfeld, 1997 

• Birth and death of Manufacturing Plants and Restructuring in Appalachia’s 

Industrial Economy, 1963-1992, Jensen, 1998 

• Regional Technology Assets and Opportunities: The Geographic Clustering of 

High-Tech Industry, Science and Innovation in Appalachia, Feser and 

Goldstein, 2002 

• Core-Periphery Effects on Appalachian Regional Growth, Moore, 1994 

• Trends in National and Regional Economic Distress, 1960-2000, Wood, 2005 

• Building on Past Experiences: Creating a New Future for Distressed Counties, 

Glasmeier and Fuellhart, 1999. 

• Branch Plants and Rural Development in the Age of Globalization, Glasmeier 

et al, 1995 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 3

This new project has sought to address two limitations with existing research on 

sources of economic growth: (a) the literature features a multiplicity of theoretical 

approaches, with different perspectives for viewing the same growth phenomena; and 

(b) much of the current research is not accessible to practitioners, nor developed in 

ways that can directly help communities to pursue economic development. 

Accordingly, this project has generated a series of reports collectively aimed at 

fulfilling three core objectives: 

a) to span currently divergent lines of research on economic growth in order to 

build a broader understanding of factors that can facilitate economic 

development; 

b) to advance the state of data analysis concerning how spatial location and 

access may affect the economic growth of ARC counties; and 

c) to translate these activities into understandable findings and applications usable 

by practitioners. 

1.2 Study Components and Team Roles 

(A) Study Components 

The Sources of Growth project involved four research undertakings: 

(1) thematic “white papers” summarizing the distinguishing features of various 

economic development paths and the theories underlying them, 

(2) case studies of economic development paths occurring in various non-metro 

areas in Appalachia, 

(3) statistical studies of economic growth factors and the role of spatial 

relationships in Appalachia’s non-metro counties, 

(4) enhancement of tools for assessing local economic growth opportunities. 

The white papers reviewed existing theories and literature in the fields of regional 

science and economics to describe the mechanisms that affect the nature of a local 

area economy and how further economic growth occurs. They examined the 

following forms of local and regional economic development: industry clusters, trade 

centers, supply chain and dispersal economies, resource-dependent, natural asset and 

learning-based economic development. They were also reviewed and discussed by an 

expert panel at a day-long symposium. This process provided an important foundation 

for identifying the different types of growth paths and the location factors determining 

their appropriateness for various areas. 

The case studies used in-person interviews with local business and government 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 4

officials, together with data analysis of economic trends, to provide insight into how 

the various growth paths have actually taken hold for selected local areas. These case 

studies also provided a basis for assessing how hypotheses concerning the form and 

evolution of growth paths matched up (or in some cases, did not match) with actual 

experiences of those communities. This element of the project thus provided an 

important basis for refining our understanding of how location factors can enhance, 

constrain or redirect the direction and degree of economic growth success. 

 

The statistical studies examined time-series data on changes in economic growth 

patterns and their relationship to spatial isolation, market access and transportation 

infrastructure. The reasons for this focus were: (1) recognition that while the various 

paths of economic growth served different markets, they all depended in some way on 

access; (2) that many of ARC’s programs have aimed to reduce isolation and improve 

access, and (3) the availability of relatively new analytic methods for examining 

spatial relationships among counties. 

The effort to enhance practical tools focused on upgrading the web-based Local 

Economic Assessment Package (LEAP) available for ARC’s Local Development 

Districts and other economic development agencies to assess economic opportunities 

and targets for business growth and attraction. Based on findings from the other study 

elements, additional data sources and analysis measures were identified for evaluating 

the relevance of economic growth paths for local areas. Some of those additional 

elements have now been implemented, while others are still planned. . 

(B) Study Team Process

Research Team. This research project was a joint effort of Economic Development 

Research Group, Inc. (EDRG), Regional Technology Strategies, Inc. (RTS) and the 

Department of Urban Studies & Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

(MIT-DUSP). 

• EDRG managed the overall project, organized the one-day symposium and 

expert panel review processes; developed three of the case studies, conducted 

time series analysis of access impacts on economic growth, developed a set of 

growth path indicators for the Local Economic Assessment Package, and 

authored the summary documents on overall study findings. 

• RTS staff contributed to the classification of growth paths, developed a white 

paper on learning-based clusters, participated in the symposium and completed 

three of the case studies. 

• MIT-DUSP provided the core literature review and data set assembly, 

developed white papers on trade centers and resource-based economies, 

participated in the symposium, conducted statistical analysis of economic 

“hub-spoke” relationships, and also conducted spatial correlation analysis of 

county-level economic growth outcomes. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 5

Expert Panel for Research and Policy. An expert panel also contributed to the study 

by reviewing the white papers developed by project team members to summarize the 

state of theory and research on economic development strategies and growth paths. A 

One-day symposium was then held to discuss the content of the white papers, their 

policy implications, and the priorities for further research. The symposium was 

attended by the expert panel, officials of ARC and the project team. The goal was to 

refine our understanding of how various growth paths actually evolve and how they 

can be encouraged in non-metro parts of Appalachia. (A summary of findings on 

economic development theory from the white papers is included in this volume, and 

additional material from the white papers appears in a separate Appendix volume.) 

The expert panel was comprised of: 

• Deb Markley - Co-Director of the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, a Rural 

Policy Research Institute. 

• Joseph Cortwright – Vice-President of Impresa Consulting and former chief 

economic development staff for the Oregon Legislature. 

• Ken Poole - Executive Director of ACCRA: The Council for Community and 

Economic Research; 

• David Freshwater –Professor of Agricultural Economics and Public Policy at 

the University of Kentucky; formerly Program Manager of TVA Rural Studies 

Program 

• David McGranahan – Senior Economist at the US Dept of Agriculture’s 

Economic Research Service, specializing in rural development. 

Technical Modeling Expertise. Additional technical support for spatial modeling 

issues was provided by Luc Anselin, Professor Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer 

Affairs and Senior Research professor of the Regional Economics Applications 

Laboratory (REAL), University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign. He provided advice 

on methods for investigating spatial influences on economic growth patterns, led a 

day-long seminar on GeoDA spatial analysis software, and provided comments on 

several elements of the MIT team’s spatial analysis findings. 

(C) Reports on Study Findings

Results of the Sources of Growth project are presented in a series of volumes: 

• Executive Summary –synthesis of findings from all of the project’s research 

components. 

• Volume 1, Project Background and Prior Research on Economic Growth 

Paths – study objectives, characteristics of non-metro Appalachian counties, 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 6

classification of economic development growth paths, synopsis of white paper 

findings on theory relating to economic development growth paths, and 

empirical literature review on spatial growth modeling studies. 

• Volume 2, Case Studies –findings related to growth paths as observed for 

selected case studies covering manufacturing industry specialization clusters, 

supply chain-based development, tourism-based development, advanced 

technology development, and diversification from resource-based economies. 

• Volume 3, Spatial Analysis – findings from a series of econometric and 

statistical modeling studies and GIS-based analyses, focusing on roles of 

spatial adjacency, market access and transportation in determining economic 

growth and development of trade centers. 

• Volume 4, Tools for Economic Development – description of new and 

updated tools available to ARC and its Local Development Districts to assess 

economic development opportunities and potential directions for economic 

growth. 

• Appendices – (A) Spatial Analysis of Economic Health, (B) Economic 

Analysis of Hub-Spoke Relationships, (C) White Papers on Economic Growth 

Theories 

1.3 Classification of Appalachian Counties 

The Appalachia Region is an area of 410 counties, spanning thirteen states. For 

purposes of this study, there are two key attributes that vary among the counties. They 

are: (1) level of urbanization and (2) level of economic distress. This study focuses on 

the economic development of non-metropolitan areas, which are the counties where 

the highest levels of economic distress have tended to occur. 

(A) Categories of Urbanization

The level of urbanization is defined in terms of a distinction between metropolitan and 

non-metro areas. Exhibit 1-2 (map) shows the location of metropolitan and non-metro 

counties within Appalachia. A “metropolitan area” is defined as a county or set of 

counties with an urban cluster having a population of 50,000 or more in which at least 

50% of the residents work also work in that area. The remaining counties are 

classified as “non-metro.” Altogether, the Appalachian region has 140 metropolitan 

counties (with a total 2000 census population of 14.1 million) and 270 non-metro 

counties (with a total population of 8.7 million,). 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 7

Exhibit 1-2 Metro and Non-Metro Classification of Appalachian Counties 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 8

The 270 “non-metro” counties are further subdivided into 92 “micropolitan areas” 

(each having a total population base of 10,000 to 49,999 with at least 25% of the 

workers residing within that area) and 178 “non-core” counties (also more formally 

referred to as OBSA – “Outside of Core-Based Statistical Areas”). Exhibit 1-3 (map) 

shows the location of the micropolitan and non-core counties. Altogether, the 

Appalachian region has 92 micropolitan counties (with a total population of 4.9 

million) and 178 non-core counties (with a total population of 3.8 million). 

Exhibit 1-3: Micropolitan and Non-Core Classification of Appalachian Counties 

Source: map generated by the MIT Multiregional Planning Research Group. 

Data Sources: 2004 Urban Influence Codes, Economic Research Services, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture; 2000 Cartographic Boundary Files, U.S. Census Bureau; 2004 National Highway 

Planning Network, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 9

(B) Categories of Economic Performance

The level of economic performance of Appalachian counties is classified as one of 

four categories: “distressed,” “transitional,” “competitive” and “attainment.” Each 

year, the ARC updates its tracking of the economic performance of the region’s 

counties. Using a recent three-year moving average on the unemployment rate, percapita income levels and the Census poverty rate, thresholds are applied to create the 

four classes of economic performance. Exhibit 1-4 shows how the ARC economic 

performance categories are defined. 

Exhibit 1-4. Criteria for County Economic Performance Levels, FY 2005 

No. of 2000-2002

Economic Counties in Three-Year Average 2001 Per Capita 2000 Census

Level Appalachia Unemployment Rate "Market" Income Poverty Rate

Distressed 82 7.3% or more and $17,627 or less and 18.6% or more OR

twice U.S. 

poverty rate & 

qualify on one 

other indicator

[150% of U.S. 4.8%] [67% of U.S. $26,309] [150% of U.S. 12.4%] 

Competitive 20 4.8% or less and $21,047 - $26,308 and 12.4% or less 

[100% of U.S.] [80% of U.S. = $20,541] [100% of U.S.]

Attainment 8 4.8% or less and $26,309 or more and 12.4% or less

[100% of U.S.] [100% of U.S.] [100% of U.S.]

Transitional 300 All counties not in other classes. Individual indicators vary.

Sources: U.S. Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics 

(LAUS), 2000-2002 (employment data); U.S. Department of Commerce - Bureau of Economic Analysis, 

Regional Economic Information System (REIS), 2001 (income data); U.S. Department of Commerce - 

Bureau of the Census, 2000 (poverty data).

Exhibit 1-5 shows how the relationship between level of urbanization and level of 

economic performance. It is notable that nearly all of the counties with an economic 

performance rating of “attainment” or “competitive” are within metropolitan areas. 

Conversely, most of the counties with an economic performance rating of “distressed” 

are (non-core) rural areas. 

Exhibit 1-5. Relationship between Urbanization and Economic Performance 

 

“Attainment” & 

“Competitive” 

“Transitional” “Distressed” All of 

Appalachia 

Urban Influence 

Codes (2003) 

# of 

counties 

Population 

(2000) 

# of 

counties

Population 

(2000) 

# of 

counties 

Population 

(2000) 

# of 

counties 

Population 

(2000) 

Metropolitan 26 5,229,995 104 8,552,415 10 359,457 140 14,141,867

Micropolitan 3 120,353 69 4,152,993 20 640,796 92 4,914,142

Non-Core (rural) 1 18,324 86 1,965,980 91 1,785,929 178 3,770,233

Grand Total 30 5,368,672 259 14,671,388 121 2,786,182 410 22,826,242

Data source: Economic Research Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2003. 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/UrbanInf/
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 10

This project focuses specifically on the non-metro counties which account for nearly 

all of the under-performing areas. Exhibit 1-6 shows that distressed counties exist 

across all parts of Appalachia, though they are most strongly represented in the central 

part. Concerns have been raised in current regional growth research (Isserman 2005) 

that more important than a metro – non-metro county distinction would be 

classification distinguishing degrees of rurality at the sub-county level, since there are 

many cases of a county containing both a thriving urban area and poor rural 

communities. The USDA-ERS’ Beale Codes offer further gradations on county 

classifications based on population densities and whether or not an adjacency to a 

metro area exists. Those more complicated codes are used in the empirical analysis 

parts of this project, as described later (refer to Volume 3).

Exhibit 1.6 County Economic Performance Ratings by Geographic Region

North South Central Total

91 102 77 270

transitional 74 83 36 193

distressed 16 18 41 75

competitive 11 0 2

arc status

# of Non-metro Appalachian Counties

Appalachia's Major Region

1.4 Classification of Economic Growth Paths 

Exhibit 1-7 (schematic) illustrates five basic types of growth paths, along with the 

process for initially assessing their appropriateness for a given area, and later 

evaluating program efforts to pursue them. 

Exhibit 1-7. Types of Regional Growth Paths and their Use 

Assetbased 

Strategy

Performance Evaluation – gauging progress on a growth path

Given Local Conditions – Resources, Constraints and Opportunities

Decision Criteria on Most Appropriate Growth Path(s) to Pursue

Goal – Improved Economic Development

Supply 

Chain 

Strategy

Learningbased 

Strategy

Agglomeration 

Strategy

Trade 

Center 

Strategy
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 11

This research study began with a general articulation of specific growth processes that 

have been emerging in the regional science literature and shown some success in the 

applied economic development field. The initial study phase focused on refining our 

understanding of the select set of growth theories and seeing how well each could be 

adapted to address rural locations such as Appalachia. A set of white papers was 

developed and became the basis for holding a one-day symposium in Washington DC, 

with comments led by an expert panel. A synopsis of the key conclusions from these 

white papers is presented in Chapter 2. 

The specific economic growth paths examined included: trade center development, 

industry concentration clusters, dispersal economies (e.g. supply-chain development), 

resource-dependent growth, and asset-based growth (including both learning-based 

and natural amenity-based development). A brief description of each is provided in 

Exhibit 1-8 below. The theory behind these growth paths is discussed in the following 

chapter, and case study examples of them are provided in a separate report volume 

(refer to Volume 2). 

Exhibit 1-8. Definition of Five Major Classes of Economic Growth Paths 

Basis for County’s 

Economy Growth 

Description 

Trade Center Growth pattern emanating from a small urban cluster that 

provides goods and services to the exurban communities & 

rural hinterlands 

Agglomeration 

(e.g. cluster economy)

Growth resulting from geographic concentrations of 

interconnected businesses and institutions that enhance the 

productivity of the core industries. 

Supply-Chain 

(e.g. dispersal economy) 

Remote location is chosen over the central metropolitan 

area to host a node of economic activity (distribution or 

assembly) that is part of a larger (geographic) production 

chain. 

Natural Amenity or 

Cultural Assets 

Growth as a result of either quality-of-place attracting new 

households –or – efforts to actively develop & promote 

cultural, recreation, eco-tourism venues and their 

supporting visitor services. A variant exists based upon 

natural-resource assets that are tied to extractive activities 

such as mining, logging. 

Knowledge (Learning) 

Assets 

Growth opportunities leveraged from the collective 

knowledge embodied in the region, including social 

capital, technical applications / commercialization, 

institutional assets (educational and financial), 

entrepreneurial start-ups. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.1 Study Overview

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 12
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 13

2 THEORY OF GROWTH PATHS

A series of white papers were developed that reviewed existing literature to inform our 

understanding of the various bases for economic growth, including 

(a) trade centers, (b) industry concentration clusters, (c) supply chain and dispersal 

economies, (d) resource-dependent growth, and (e) asset-based growth. 

The white paper research process was designed to provide a better understanding of 

where and when a specific form of regional growth is most applicable and what 

characterizes such an economy; the potential to confuse/misidentify the economic 

growth process; whether multiple explanations of the growth process could represent 

an evolution of a region’s economy; why there may be exceptions to what growth 

theory prescribes and most important the implications for development policy to 

achieve success along any of these paths. This chapter provides a synopsis of the key 

findings from these papers and the subsequent symposium discussion. The issues 

raised here provide a basis for identifying key aspects to be addressed in any economic 

development strategy that pursues a specific growth direction. 

2.1 Economic Development Processes 

(A) Role of Basic Industries. Underlying essentially all economic development 

strategies is the concept of developing business activity that can bring a flow of 

spending into the target region, which in turn can generate income and associated jobs. 

Economic-base theory classifies all economic activity as either “basic” or “non-basic” 

(Berry and Garrison 1958, Klosterman 1990, Blumenfeld 1955). A basic sector is 

composed of local businesses and firms that produce goods or services for “export” to 

customers located outside of the local area, which thus generates the flow of spending 

into the region. Products based on natural resources (e.g., mining, logging or tourism), 

learning-based resources (e.g., major educational institutions or cultural attractions) 

and manufacturing centers (e.g., furniture or computer products) tend to be basic 

industries because they usually export most of their products to outside customers in 

response to national or international demands. The non-basic sector is then comprised 

of firms that operate and produce primarily for local consumption. Analysts consider 

most local retail and personal services to be non-basic economic activities. 

Using this classification, it then becomes clear that the means of strengthening and 

growing the local economy is to develop and enhance the basic sector. The basic 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 14

sector can be seen as the “engine” of a local economy, whereby development of firms 

that serve outside markets provides a basis for growing business investment and 

activity. Exports further fuel the economic growth of an area through “multiplier 

effects.” Revenues from exports trickle through the local economies as payments to 

local factors of production, land, labor, and capital. These, in turn, generate an 

economic multiplier in the form of a chain-reaction effect. Local industries buy inputs 

from local suppliers, which then pay local employees and buy further inputs from 

local suppliers, etc. Local industries pay salary or wages to local employees, who then 

buy local products, further stimulating local businesses, who pay their local 

employees, and so on. These multiplier effects are important in triggering economicgrowth, especially when the local economy is not developed enough to constitute a 

strong local demand; “priming the pump” in Keynesian terms (Berry and Garrison 

1958, Klosterman 1990).

(B) Confusion about Clusters. Perhaps no single concept has propagated as much 

interest or confusion in the economic development field as the concept of clusterbased economic development. The concept of cluster-based development took off in 

the field of economic development following the work of Michael Porter (1990). He 

described the advantage of developing interconnected networks of businesses, 

suppliers, and associated institutions in ways that can increase productivity and create 

“Sustainable Competitive Advantage” (SCA). 

However, in the sixteen years that followed, the meaning and interpretation of those 

concepts diverged between researchers and applied economic developers. Porter’s 

original work never claimed that clusters were restricted to individual locations or 

individual industries. However, to many economic developers the concept became 

simplified down to the popular dictionary definition of the word “cluster,” which 

implies a spatial concentration of a single item or type of activity in a single region. 

Going even further, some consultants further “dumbed down” the concept of cluster 

definition to economic base studies that simply generate a listing of the most 

prominent industries in a given study area. Those latter concepts are often of little use 

for achieving practical and effective economic development (Weisbrod and Piercy, 

2006). 

In fact, researchers have since clarified how the advantages of cluster dynamics can 

encompass concentrations of economic activity among places or industries or 

technologies or supply chains. This point is made clear in Exhibit 2-1, which shows 

Enright’s (2001) twelve dimensions that can describe a competitive cluster. Following 

that research perspective, we can view clusters broadly, as concentrations of 

interrelated companies and institutions of sufficient scale to generate external 

economies. Their location may be concentrated in a single community, spread 

throughout a broad region, or aligned along a corridor stretching for hundreds of 

miles. However, in all cases, they include competing firms, cooperating material and 

service suppliers, and associated institutions – all of which may do business with each 

other and share needs for common talent, technology and infrastructure. This 

definition encompasses the range of potential growth models for Appalachia, though 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 15

the reader should be aware that arguments about and refinements to this definition are 

many. 

Exhibit 2-1 Twelve Factors Describing a Competitive Cluster 

Dimension Types 

Geographic scope Localized, Dispersed 

Density (Number of firms) Dense, Sparse 

Breadth (horizontally related industries) Broad, Narrow 

Activity Base (activities in the value-added chain) Activity-Rich, Activity-Poor 

Depth (Range of vertically-related industries) Deep, Shallow 

Geographic Span of Sales Local, Regional, National, Global 

Strength of Competitive Position Leading in Region, Nation, World 

Stage of Development Embryonic, Emerging, Mature 

Technological Activities Users, Adapters, Generators 

Innovative Capacity (Ability to generate key 

innovation relevant to competitive advantage) 

High Innovation, Low Innovation 

Ownership Structure Local, National, Foreign 

Industrial Organization (Governance structures 

and relationships among firms) “All Ring - No Core”, “All Core - No Ring”, 

“Core-Ring with coordinating or leading firm 

Co-Ordination Mechanisms 

(Organization of inter-firm relationships) 

Spot markets, Short-term coalitions, LongTerm Relationships, Hierarchies 

Source: Enright (2001) 

Clusters are often, but need not necessarily be, defined around a specific industry 

sector, supplier-buyer network or industry supply chain. Some, such as 

semiconductors in Northern California, automobile manufacturing in and around 

Detroit, and furniture in Northeast Mississippi fit neatly within NAICS -based industry 

definitions. Other clusters are based on process technologies, such as the firms that 

produce plastic goods in the Naugatuck Valley of Connecticut. The largest users of 

plastics technology and skills, however, are Bic, Schick, and Lego, none of which is 

classified as a plastics company. Still other interdependencies that define clusters 

include supply chains, core technologies, proximity to natural resources, or 

distribution channels. Rocha (2002), in fact, outlines seven different intersections of 

geographical, industrial, inter-sectoral, and inter-organizational dimensions that have 

been used to create conceptual and operational definitions of clusters. 

A correct representation of clusters thus starts with a portrayal of core industries, 

suppliers of capital goods, direct inputs, and specialized services, as well as privatesector economic activities that are “induced” by the presence of core industries. It 

may also include associations or supporting institutions specific to the cluster, skill 

and education providers such as universities and community and technical colleges 

that contribute to the territory’s human capital stock, (and which may be public or 

private but are most frequently public institutions), and knowledge providers such as 

research institutions, technology diffusion organizations, and other providers of 

research and technology. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 16

If we adopt this broad research-oriented concept of clusters, then it becomes clear that 

all of the growth paths examined in this study are variant forms of clusters. That 

includes trade centers, industry agglomerations, supply chains and dispersal 

economies, resource-dependent growth, and asset-based growth. However, if we 

adopt the more commonly used concept of clusters as viewed by practitioners, which 

defines clusters as the concentration of a single industry in a community or region, 

then only the “industry agglomerations” would be classified as traditional clusters. All 

other growth paths would then be classified as alternative economic growth strategies. 

2.2 Trade Centers

Trade Center Economic Growth. A pattern of economic growth and development 

emanating from a small urban cluster that provides goods and services to the exurban 

communities & rural hinterlands. Spending money flows from the outlying region 

into the trade center. 

(A) Overview of Trade Centers. A trade center can be defined as the urban nucleus 

(metropolitan or micropolitan) in a county or group of counties that plays a central 

role in the region’s economy and economic-growth. It typically has a number of key 

ingredients, such as business and office space, a community college, retail outlet, 

and/or medical, business and personal services. A trade center can be the core of 

major metropolitan area, but it can also be a small town (of 10,000 or more 

population) that serves residents of a multi-county rural region. The core county is 

then classified as a micropolitan center. Trade center-based economic growth 

depends on the development of “hub-spoke” travel and trade patterns that connect the 

core community with the outlying region that it serves. (See schematic of 

metropolitan and micropolitan area relationships in Exhibit 2-2.) 

Exhibit 2-2. Schematic of Spending Flows and Relative Locations of 

Micropolitan Areas in Non-Metro Rural Fringe 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 17

From an economic development policy viewpoint, the key questions are: (1) how do 

trade centers evolve over time as urban centers of retail trade and services for a 

surrounding hinterland, (2) what are the characteristics of a successful trade center, 

and (3) how can existing trade centers be leveraged as an agent for economic 

development. These questions are addressed through a discussion of the functional 

role of trade centers and a synthesis of theories drawn from the economic development 

and economic geography literature that help explain the role of trade centers as 

economic growth engines relevant in Appalachia. 

(B) The Functional Role of Trade Centers. The functional role of a trade center can 

be best understood by answering the following questions: (1) what functionally makes 

a trade center, (2) what are the hierarchies of trade centers and their roles, and (3) what 

are the complementary roles of other adjacent, proximate or otherwise interacting 

activity centers. 

The concept of trade centers is based on the highly simplified central-place model of 

Christaller and Lösch. The central-place model examines the interaction between a 

rural region that is dependant on activities requiring extensive land use, e.g., 

agriculture or mining, and an urban center that has significant economies of 

agglomeration, and is based on activities requiring higher density, e.g., trade or 

industry (Hoover 1997, Krugman 1995). 

Urban geographers identified typical geometric patterns that describe the way trade 

centers form with respect to the surrounding rural regions. They also defined 

hierarchies of trade centers that range from small towns that serve a rural surrounding 

area, to a larger city that serves a group of small surrounding towns, and so on. These 

hierarchies are influenced by three basic factors: transportation costs, market density, 

and scale or agglomeration economies (Hoover 1975). Most of these factors are based 

on an agrarian or industrial economy where the economy’s equilibrium is determined 

around the optimum physical delivery of goods from their origin to their final 

consumers. However, different patterns may evolve as a result of the current service 

economy, e.g., higher sprawl of urban activities. New factors may affect the evolution 

of trade centers, their distribution over space, and their functional role, e.g., the 

globalization of markets and the role of exports in economic development (see our 

later discussion of economic-base and import- substitution theories), and 

agglomeration and dispersion, including supply-chain theories. 

Based on these theories, it can be suggested that a trade center performs a critical 

functional role to its rural surrounding area. Hoover (1975, p. 129) illustrates a 

hierarchy of services that are typically performed by trade centers depending on their 

size and position in the hierarchy, and ranging from the “convenience services” to the 

“primary wholesale-retail” services. This hierarchical model may be extrapolated to 

other types of services, e.g., financial services ranging from a small bank branch, to a 

full banking service; or to educational institutions ranging from a primary school to a 

large regional university with research capabilities. However, the distribution and 

hierarchy of trade centers may have evolved from the simple “transportation-
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 18

dependant” model that is based on proximity, to a more complicated model that 

incorporates the effects of services and technology (e.g., call centers scattered over 

space with no transportation cost and low investment requirements). 

(C) The Multiplier Effect of Trade Centers. The current definition of metropolitan 

and micropolitan areas reflects their linkages with the adjacent areas in the form of 

labor commuting, commodity flows, and shopping and recreational activities. Each of 

these linkages has a “multiplier effect” on the adjacent regions. For example, labor 

commuting to/from these centers to adjacent areas has a multiplier effect on the 

economy of the counties where the workers live. The size of the multiplier effect 

varies depending on the size of a region’s economy and the employment base, but 

analysts typically determine local multipliers of two or three (ERS 2005). Applying 

this multiplier of two or three to the 25 percent minimum-commuting requirement 

implies that 50 to 75 percent of the income in the adjacent counties where workers 

reside is connected to the central economy of the metropolitan or micropolitan area. 

This could be a direct relationship, through commuting to jobs located in the central 

county, or an indirect relationship, through services provided to local residents whose 

jobs are in the central county. 

(D) Adjacency and the Urban Influence of Trade Centers. Geography matters in 

economic development. A county’s geographic context has a significant effect on its 

economic growth and development through its size and access to larger economies. 

This access to larger economies, which represent the centers of trade, information, 

education, communication, labor, and finance, enables a smaller economy to connect 

to national and international marketplaces. Studies by Smirnov and Smirnova (2000) 

attempt to portray how areas can be classified as trade center “hubs” that export goods 

and services, and outlying areas that represent “spokes” importing goods and services 

from the hubs. 

The measurement of adjacency and urban influence has also been developed by ERS 

using a set of county-level, urban-influence categories. The 2003 urban-influence 

codes divide the 3,141 US counties into 12 groups based on their urbanization 

(large/small metropolitan, micropolitan, or noncore) and adjacency to large/small 

metropolitan, micropolitan, or none (see Exhibit 2-4). 

The urban influence codes define proximity based on physical adjacency. For 

example, there are 15 micropolitan areas that are adjacent to a large metropolitan area 

in Appalachia, with a total population of more than 1 million (~70 thousand 

inhabitants per town). Due to their location, it is likely that these trade centers’ 

economies are linked with the larger adjacent metropolitan area. In using these trade 

centers as triggers for economic growth to their surroundings areas, we can emphasize 

their functional and economic relationship with the larger metropolitan city. 

The urban influence codes also define 24 smaller micropolitan areas that are not 

adjacent to a large metropolitan area. They have a total population of ~ 900 thousand 

inhabitants (~37 thousand inhabitants per town). These trade centers are not connected 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 19

through geographic proximity to the larger metropolitan cities, and they may fall lower 

in the hierarchy. Analysts should consider other factors that may contribute to their 

connectedness when thinking of an economic-development strategy. For example, are 

these trade centers part of a supply chain? Are they nodes on a major transportation 

route (highway, airport or river)? Empirical studies described in the next chapter 

discuss how alternate measures of proximity may explain how different types of trade 

centers affect economic growth outcomes for Appalachia. 

Exhibit 2-4. Urban Influence Codes 

United States Appalachia 

Description counties Pop. 

(million)

Pop. 

density counties Pop. 

(million)

Pop. 

density

Metropolitan counties:

1 In large metro area of 1+ million residents 413 149.2 558 34 5.2 293

2 In small metro area of less than 1 million residents 676 83.4 132 106 9.0 182

 

Non-metropolitan counties:

3 Micropolitan adjacent to large metro 92 5.1 55 15 1.1 114

4 Non-core adjacent to large metro 123 2.4 27 17 0.4 52

5 Micropolitan adjacent to small metro 301 14.7 51 53 2.9 95

6 Non-core adjacent to small metro with own town 358 7.9 23 41 1.2 54

7 Non-core adjacent to small metro no own town 185 1.9 6 36 0.6 38

8 Micropolitan not adjacent to a metro area 282 9.1 27 24 0.9 78

9 Non-core adjacent to micro with own town 201 3.2 17 30 0.7 49

10 Non-core adjacent to micro with no own town 198 1.3 7 24 0.3 32

11 Non-core not adjacent to metro/ micro with own town 138 2.2 5 8 0.3 62

12 Non-core not adjacent to metro/micro with no own town 174 1.0 4 22 0.3 35

 Total 3,141 281.4 80 410 22.8 114

Source: Economic Research Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture. All population figures from year 

2000 Census. See http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/UrbanInf/. Calculations by MIT-DUSP. 

(E) Trade Centers as a Basis for Broader Economic Development. Economic-base 

theory provides an explanation of the role of metropolitan and micropolitan trade 

centers in the development of adjacent areas. The linkages of small adjacent counties 

to a large metropolitan or micropolitan economy provide it with access to a large 

external market for product and service “exports” (sales beyond the trade center itself). 

This market could be the local market in this adjacent urban region, or a national or 

international export market that is accessed through the network of firms and 

businesses in this area. In effect, the metropolitan or micropolitan area becomes an 

“export” market, or a channel to a larger export market for the adjacent economy. 

Similar to the role of export growth, the economic development strategy of “importsubstitution” also emphasizes the role of trade centers in local economic-growth. With 

adjacency to a large metropolitan or micropolitan area acting as a trade center, local 

industry in a proximal county could experience growth through an import-substitution 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 20

role, by providing a market for growth of locally-based suppliers. A small rural 

county that is not adjacent to a trade center does not have the size or scale that allows 

for local entrepreneurs to create local industries that substitute for imports. Adjacency 

to a larger trade center is thus a necessary but not sufficient condition to trigger this 

process. 

As trade centers ties together surrounding counties to comprise a larger market area, 

they can also provide a critical mass of labor force, training and/or commercial 

activity to make the area attractive for additional business activity. Building on the 

theories of “agglomeration” and “supply chains” (discussed later in this chapter), the 

trade center labor market can become a basis for directly growing industry clusters or 

growing suppliers to more distant industries. That can help explain the advantages of 

trade centers located in central places, along major transportation routes, or across 

industrial supply chains (physical or virtual). 

These opportunities together make the issue of access a critical one in Appalachia. 

Given the geography of the region, many of the rural counties have no adjacent urban 

trade center (metropolitan or micropolitan center), nor do they have effective access to 

one via the transportation network. Those counties tend to be the distressed ones. An 

obvious cause of this disconnectedness is the mountainous topography of the region. 

For that reason, the development of enhanced highway links, such as the Appalachian 

Development Highway System (ADHS), can become important in enhancing 

connectedness to trade centers. 

Case Studies. Examples of economic development based on trade centers are shown 

in Volume 2 focused on Pike County (KY) and Southwest North Carolina (Murphy). 

Measurement issues regarding the definition of a trade center are also discussed in the 

Volume 2 in the case examined for Scioto County (OH). 

2.3 Industry Agglomeration (Clusters)

Industry Agglomeration-Based Growth – Economic growth resulting from geographic 

concentrations of interconnected businesses and institutions that enhance the 

productivity of the core industries. 

 (A) Overview of Industry Clusters. An industry agglomeration cluster is a group of 

business enterprises and non-business organizations that benefit from belonging to the 

cluster by increasing their individual competitiveness. Binding the cluster together are 

“buyer-supplier relationships, or common technologies, common buyers or 

distribution channels, or common labor pools” (Enright 2001). Clusters are ultimately 

based on individual firm economic maximization functions. However, cluster analysts 

also recognize the role of trust and cooperation among cluster firms. They define nonbusiness organizations as “related and supporting institutions,” which are a critical 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 21

element in the success of the cluster. These organizations may include industry 

associations, universities, technical and community colleges with specialized 

industrial programs, economic-development agencies, or government industrialextension programs. Regional industry clusters are industry clusters that are 

concentrated geographically, where geographic proximity between member 

enterprises creates a competitive advantage for the industry and region (Enright 1996). 

(B) Functional Role of Industry Clusters. Michael Porter (1990), through his 

publication of The Competitive Advantage of Nations, revived policy interest in 

regional industry clusters as a source of national and regional competitive advantage. 

He identifies a key role for geographic proximity, which is largely consistent with the 

previous work by Isard (1956) on industrial-complex analyses. Porter’s clusters are 

also similar to the constellations of suppliers, producers, and other economic actors 

suggested by Darwent (1969). Exhibit 2-5 illustrates this interplay design, assembly 

supply, and educational activities. 

An even earlier antecedent is the work on agglomeration economics descending from 

Alfred Weber’s (1909) classical location theory formulation, and those descending 

from Alfred Marshall’s industrial districts formulation. These works have evolved 

into a more comprehensive theory of sectorally-based regional advantage through 

numerous iterations and refinements. The dual tenants that firms benefit from 

clustering with like firms, suppliers, and related institutions (1) through agglomeration 

economies or external economies of scale that reduce production, transportation, and 

coordination costs, and (2) through soft economies of learning and collaboration that 

speed innovation and product and process advancement (also Collective Efficiency).

Exhibit 2-5. Schematic of Agglomerated Economic Activities 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 22

(C) Basis for Development of Industry Clusters. The idea of why enterprises 

cluster in geographic space and how that influences regional economic-development 

finds its theoretical explanation in the literature in two basic theories, both of which 

cite externalities to explain why firms cluster: 

• industrial location theory that builds on both Weber and Hoover, where the 

benefits are called agglomeration economies; and 

• Marshall’s analysis of external “economies of scale” (agglomeration benefits) 

and their presence in “industrial districts.” 

Finally, it can be argued that a metropolitan or micropolitan trade center may also help 

a competitive industry to emerge by benefiting from economies of scale and links to 

national and international supply chains. Some industries rely on an urban nucleus to 

provide the basic elements required for a cluster to emerge. Industry clusters need 

infrastructure that supports them (e.g., labor and transportation for a manufacturing 

industry, or research centers and universities for a hi-tech industry). They also need 

access to transportation, telecommunication, and other necessary infrastructure. All 

these elements need an existing trade center that could act as an incubator for this 

cluster. Therefore the existence of a trade center can be a starting basis for later 

emergence of industry clusters. 

(D) Process Motivating Cluster Development. It is important to note that few (if 

any) clusters have been “created” through policy or program interventions. Cluster 

formation and growth has tended to be an organic process with varying degrees of 

influence of factors such as natural resource (raw material or energy supply) inputs, 

antecedent industries, “lead firms,” either headquarters or branch plants, and local or 

regional craft or skill traditions. More recently, greater attention has been given to 

clusters that are created or enhanced by the residential location preferences of skilled 

professionals, creative and artistic communities, and entrepreneurs (Kotkin, 2000). 

Examples of “reasons” that have motivated firms to cluster appear in Exhibit 2-6. 

Exhibit 2-6 Types and Examples of Cluster-Based Development 

"Reason" For Cluster Example Cluster(s) 

Product Hosiery, Catawba Valley, North Carolina 

Process Plastics, Naugatuck Valley, Connecticut 

Industry Supply Chain Auto suppliers, Central Kentucky 

Company Supply Chain Proctor & Gamble, Alexandria, Louisiana 

Technologies Optics & Imaging, Tucson, Arizona 

Skills/talent New Media, Manhattan 

Resources Log homes, Montana 

Location/Infrastructure Distribution: Hampton Roads, Virginia 

Creativity Writers, Livingston, Montana 

Lifestyle Software, Fairfield, Iowa 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 23

Firms may remain in a cluster long after the initial “reason” for choosing its location 

has become irrelevant, largely due to the development of one or another form of 

special expertise over time (Enright, 2001). As noted by Feser, et al. (2001), “In their 

ideal form, clusters are essentially the empirical manifestation of the mutually 

reinforcing influences of first-mover effects, conventional business agglomeration 

economies, localized technology spillovers, and geographical path dependence.” 

Numerous state and regional studies in the US have explored the “family trees” of 

clusters to identify the process by which they have evolved and grown. The number 

and scope of businesses in a cluster typically results from spin-offs and company 

formation subsequent to layoffs. These include efforts by the UC-Connect in San 

Diego, Maryland’s TEDCO, and the National Commission on Entrepreneurship. In 

addition, the presence of a ready base of customers, suppliers, and knowledge also 

tends to coincide with an environment that exhibits a high degree of support for new 

entrepreneurs with a well facilitated entrepreneurial process which is a key component 

of cluster growth. 

A concise summary of the types of benefits that firms access through operating in 

clustered configurations considers both the “hard” economies related to cost factors 

stemming from agglomeration efficiencies and “soft” economies that capture “higher 

order” dimensions related to learning and collective efficiency. (See Exhibit 2-7.) 

Exhibit 2-7. Advantages of Industry Agglomeration Clustering 

Type of Economies Specific Factors Present Benefits to Firms 

“Hard” Economies Supply Chains Reduced transaction costs 

 (Agglomeration) Labor Pools Higher levels of experience 

 Specialized Services More options, lower costs 

 R&D and Technology Quicker adoption 

 Capital Increased availability 

 

“Soft” Economies Association Collective influence 

(Collective Efficiency) Networking Economies of scale, learning 

 Tacit Learning Innovation 

 Knowledge Leaks Imitation 

 Labor Grapevines Better employment opportunity 

Of course, the line between these types of economies is somewhat fuzzy: specialized 

services may evolve due to the intentional or unintentional communication of multiple 

firms’ service needs, and it is often difficult to separate cost reduction and innovation 

when assessing why firms adopt new technologies or processes. 

(E) Implications for Policy in Appalachia. Industry agglomeration clusters in nonmetropolitan areas (and less favored regions in general) face specific challenges on a 

number of the dimensions outlined above. It is well known that the nation’s rural 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 24

manufacturing economy was largely seeded by branch plants seeking lower operating 

costs and contains many firms that suffer from isolation and less sophisticated 

management. When considered along Enright’s descriptive dimensions rural clusters 

are challenged by their low density, less advanced technology activities, lower 

innovative capacity, and limited activity base. As noted by Rosenfeld (2001), the 

types of businesses that tend to clusters in less favored regions are inclined to rely 

more on cluster characteristics that reduce costs than on those that accelerate 

innovation and learning. The characteristics of many less-favored regions—low levels 

of educational attainment, weak schools, little investment capital, weak connections to 

external markets, and poor physical and support infrastructures—strongly favor those 

clusters that are low-tech, traditional industries, based more on imitation than 

innovation. Those clusters are very susceptible to global competition. 

This appears to be particularly true in Appalachia. Bernard, et al (2004), present six 

conclusions regarding Appalachian industries’ vulnerability to imports. They cite (1) 

accelerating growth in trade with low-wage partners such as China and India, 

particularly in non-capital or technology intensive industries, (2) the associated high 

probability of plant closure, employment loss, and output reduction resulting from the 

arrival of low-wage imports for a given sector, (3) the concentration of Appalachian 

manufacturing employment and output in industries that are highly exposed to these 

imports resulting from the Appalachian industry’s lower skill intensiveness and 

productivity, (4) an observed “more pronounced” impact of low-wage imports on 

shutdowns of Appalachian manufacturing plants than on plants in other US regions, 

(5) the forecasted rapid increase of low-wage imports in the coming decade, and 

finally, (6) low rates of entry and exit of Appalachian manufacturing industries 

indicating a tendency to be slow to adjust their product mix. (Bernard, et al. 2004) 

These phenomena are not unique to Appalachia or to non-metropolitan regions in the 

U.S. Nearly all of the industry agglomeration clusters that have been studied in less 

favored or less developed regions consist of companies that use low levels of 

technology and require skills that can be learned on the job, where barriers to and 

costs of entry are low, and that require little if any investment in research and 

development. An overview of the regions in the European Union categorized by its 

Social Fund as “less favored” characterizes them as having “sectoral specialization in 

traditional industries with little inclination for innovation and predominance of small 

family firms with weak links to external markets” (Landabaso, Oughton, and Morgan, 

1999, Rosenfeld, 2001). 

Yet, in recent years, accelerated globalization has combined with restructuring of 

global manufacturing firms to produce rapid job loss in the United States’ 

manufacturing sector. The popular press attributes much of this phenomenon to 

China’s current ascendance as an industrial power, as a consumer marketplace, and as 

a low cost production platform (Engardio, 2004). According to the US-China 

Economic and Security Commission’s 2004 report, over 1.5 million jobs were shifted 

from the US to China in the 1989-2003 period. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 25

For economic development professionals and researchers, the post-2001 period 

appears to be a “perfect storm” for the manufacturing sector. Several events have 

been at play: first, a jobless recovery from a brief recession of 2001-2002 has led US 

and global companies to restructure operations focused on cost saving and access to 

rapidly growing Asian markets (especially China); second, increased per-worker 

productivity stemming from automation and technology have reduced employment 

growth in many sectors; third, financial resources available among state and local 

governments to address industry competitiveness have been limited due to state budget 

shortfalls and other current federal spending priorities. Add to these factors two 

decades of trade liberalization which has hit some of the most vulnerable industries in 

the United States especially hard - furniture, textiles, and other traditional 

manufacturing sectors (all key employers in Appalachia) - when quota restrictions on 

imports have been lifted. 

Case Studies. Examples of manufacturing and industry agglomeration clusters are 

shown in Volume 2 focused on Chautauqua County (NY) and Monongalia County 

(WV). 

2.4 Supply-Chains and Dispersal Economies 

Supply Chain Development– Economic growth based on the development of 

businesses that are dispersed across a large distance but accessible to a single 

transportation corridor. This is typically a concentration of assembly, parts and 

distribution activities supporting a common set of industries. This arrangement takes 

advantage of “dispersal economies” that come from tapping different labor and 

material supplier markets, while serving a “just-in-time” supply chain made possible 

by transportation facilities. 

(A) Overview of Supply Chain Basis for Economic Growth. A supply chain is the 

network of producers, retailers, distributors, transporters, storage facilities and 

suppliers that participate in the production, delivery, assembly, and sale of a particular 

product. The supply-chain concept has its theoretical foundation in two sets of 

literature. First, the early regional development literature on industrial development 

and infrastructure planning, which deals with how firms make decisions on locating 

their activities based on the economies or diseconomies of dispersal over the supply 

chain. The second set of literature is based on logistics and supply-chain management 

in operations research, management and civil engineering, which deals with the 

optimization of the time and cost of managing the supply chain (Polenske, 2001). 

As supply transactions chains become more complex involving technological and 

logistical relationships between firms (e.g., firms connecting their inventory 

management systems, or firms creating long term preferred supplier networks), it 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 26

becomes important for a firm to be an integrated part of an established supply chain. 

Exhibit 2-8 illustrates the relationship between assembly, suppliers and distribution 

activities in a spatially-dispersed supply chain. 

Exhibit 2-8 Schematic of Dispersed Supply Chain Linkages 

(B) Dispersion of Business Location. Firms in different manufacturing sectors have 

different product characteristics, demand patterns, and require different service levels, 

so that they prefer different supply chains and logistic systems. Polenske (2003) 

developed the concept of “dispersion economies” to represent various cost and 

technology factors that are now causing some firms to move away (disperse) from 

concentrated centers of economic activity. 

A considerable amount of this dispersal occurs along supply chains. Glasmeier and 

Kibler (1996) examine the dispersing trend of wholesale and distribution industries in 

the United States. They find that locations of wholesale establishments and 

warehouses have shifted from urban areas to rural and adjacent suburban areas largely 

due to the technological improvements in inventory management, warehouse structure, 

as well as transportation deregulation, all of which are critical components of supplychain management. With dramatic advances in information technology, the expansion 

of globalization, and the decrease of transportation costs as a share in the total cost, 

some firms have larger scope and more flexibility in their supply-chain design. 

In terms of structural approaches in supply chain management, cost reduction by 

moving to lower labor-cost regions often outstrips increased delivery costs if 

transportation costs and duties are low. Additionally, improvement of the 

coordination mechanism makes it possible for an industry or a firm to access more 

sophisticated products and services at a greater distance with higher quality than 

before (Flaherty 1996). 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 27

(C) Dispersal through Organizational Networks and Transportation Corridors. 

Improved information flow and just-in-time transportation processes have facilitated 

industrial dispersal occur more rapidly than before. Teubal et al (1991) note that a 

network organization linking firms or economic agents represents an intermediate 

“system of governance” that lies between the firm and the market. Traditionally, there 

are different types of networks, including inter-firm networks, employment networks, 

social networks, and political networks. Analysts have viewed the scope of networks 

as extending from pure simple connections of similar characteristics to more complex 

relationships among all economic participants, including private firms, government 

agencies, universities, intermediary agencies, and communities (Harrison 1992). 

Linkages among those economic actors can occur at various levels, from local retail 

districts, which stay close to urban residential communities, to specialized auto-parts 

towns that serve regional auto-manufacturing factories, and to research and 

development (R&D) institutions that disseminate their newly developed technologies 

at state and world levels. Therefore, depending on the growth potential of an industry, 

patterns of activities, innovative capacity, and governmental structure, multilevel 

networks (local, regional, national, and international) lead to various dispersion 

tendencies of economic activities. In this case, policy makers should take into 

consideration the impacts of other economic players on firms’ location decision in 

addition to inter-firm networks. 

Auto parts industries are well represented in Appalachia and are also a source of 

income to the region, as their products are “exported” to the rest of the US and world. 

An important evolution in this industry over the past twenty years has been the 

evolution of parts manufacturing locations. While they were once located in the 

immediate vicinity of the assembly plants, today the plants are dispersed along several 

hundred miles of the “Auto Alley,” a manufacturing corridor along I-65 and I-75 (see 

Exhibit 2-9b). This firm location pattern was enabled by advanced information 

technologies that allowed just-in-time production processes to utilize parts plants 

located wherever they can reliably provide same-day delivery. 

Exhibit 2-9 shows the location of auto supply plants in and around the Appalachian 

Region. Exhibit 2-10 shows the key origins and port destinations of Appalachian auto 

parts that are exported beyond the US. Both maps illustrate the importance of 

highway corridors in enabling the growth of this industry in Appalachia. 

Case Study. An example of a dispersed supply chain is shown in Volume 2 focused 

on Alabama’s automotive assembly and parts economy. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 28

Exhibit 2-9 Maps of Dispersed Auto Assembly and Supplier Locations 

(A) AL Auto Assembly & Parts Plants (B) Southeast Auto Alley Corridors 

Exhibit 2-10 Major Flows of Auto Parts Exports from Appalachia 

(from state of origin to port of exit from the US) 

Note: key exit ports are Miami, Detroit and New York City 

Source: Jack Faucett Associates and Economic 

Development Research Group, 2004. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 29

2.5 Natural and Cultural Assets 

Natural Resource, Amenity and Cultural-Based Development -- Economic growth 

based on the natural and human-made assets of an area. The traditional form of assetbased development has been based on natural-resource assets that are tied to extractive 

activities such as mining and logging. Other natural amenity and cultural resources 

may attract eco-tourism, vacation and retirement industries and their supporting visitor 

services, as well as attract entrepreneurs. 

(A) Overview of Asset-Based Development. The Appalachian Regional commission 

has defined assets as the natural, cultural, and structural assets, and “the hospitality, 

work ethic and can-do attitude of its residents.” Asset-based economic development 

practices have been implemented in communities throughout Appalachia since the 

1960s. It is useful to divide the basis for asset-based development into two groups: 

a) natural and cultural-based development, which depend on an area’s preexisting features (including physical features, amenities and cultural/historical 

attributes), and 

b) learning-based development, which depends on cultivating worker skills and 

capabilities (including entrepreneurship, education, and research/development 

activities). 

This section (2.5) focuses on group “a”. The next section (2.6) focuses on group “b”. 

As discussed below, the theory of asset-based development draws upon aspects of 

Ricardo’s comparative advantage theory, Alfred Marshall’s concept of the “industrial 

district” and Porter’s interpretation of theory on cluster formation. Some of the recent 

economic-geography studies on asset-based development in Europe also provide 

insight to this study. The cultivation of entrepreneurship, social-capital formation, and 

local-knowledge spillovers are the overarching drivers for asset-based growth. 

• Natural amenity-based development: Kusmin et al. (1996) indicate that 

traditionally, there is evidence that natural amenities are a factor contributing to 

population and employment change, hence regional economic development, in 

the United States. In the 1990s, the Economic Research Service (ERS) staff of 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) conducted two studies, including a 

literature review and an empirical study to investigate factors that may have 

affected rural economic growth in the 1980s (Aldrich and Kusmin 1997). In the 

literature review, they identified temperature and precipitation as the two major 

factors facilitating rural economic growth. 

• Natural resource-based development: Land-based mineral and forest resources 

provided a comparative advantage that accounted for much of the initial 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 30

economic development of Appalachia in past centuries. However, natural 

endowments are sometimes regarded as a “curse” for long-term development. 

Today, those industries are seen as mature and in some cases declining sources 

of jobs. Most areas of Appalachia that have historically been dependent on those 

industries have been seeking to diversify their economic bases. Accordingly, the 

rest of this discussion focuses on the other four categories of asset-based 

development. 

• Culture-based development: Pratt (1997) defines cultural industries as products, 

performance, in the form of fine art and literature; their reproduction, as books, 

magazines, TV and radio programs, recordings and etc., and activities that link 

together art forms such as advertising. He includes also the production, 

distribution, and display processes of printing, and broadcasting, as well as 

museums, libraries, theatres, night clubs, and galleries. Andersson (1985) argues 

that there six key drivers to the growth of cultural industries, including (1) a 

sound financial basis, but without tight regulation; (2) basic original knowledge 

and competence; (3) an imbalance between need for cultural products and their 

actual provision as the new environment calls for new cultural products; (4) a 

diverse milieu; (5) good internal and external possibilities for personal transport 

and communications, and (6) an uncertainty about the future, which calls for 

creative change. In his overview article, Hall (1997) reviews other analysts’ 

work and stresses the importance of initial wealth effects and the randomness of 

the development. 

(B) Theoretical Foundation and Measurements. An asset-based strategy may have 

different effects on the economic upgrading of a region depending on the asset types. 

Tangible assets, such as coal or timber, may accelerate economic development only 

for a short period of time, but the development may not be sustainable, as shown by 

history in the Appalachian Region. However, smart use of the tangible assets can lift 

the region through the early growth stages and facilitate more sustainable growth if 

careful use is made of intangible assets, such as education or entrepreneurship. These 

intangible assets may be difficult to establish on a sustainable basis, but they are the 

backbone of healthy long-term economic development and link closely to the learningeconomy approach to development used in a number of northern European 

communities (Asheim 1996). 

An analyst can view an asset-based growth strategy as complementary to other growth 

strategies, and it often serves as a base for other development strategies. For example, 

the agglomeration of firms of a certain industry in a place is often decided by the 

availability of the labor force, which is highly related to educational requirements. In 

certain types of manufacturing industries may seek locations with lower-skilled 

workforce to avoid a wage premium. Another example is tourism: natural assets such 

as climate, topology, local culture, and geographic locations serve as a foundation for 

higher-level development strategies. In an environment of high bio-diversity, an ecotourism development strategy is more feasible than otherwise. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 31

In terms of methods analysts use to measure the presence or maturity of asset-based 

growth patterns related to tangible assets, they often use many variations of the inputoutput analysis and the economic-base analysis, including mix-and-share analysis and 

location quotients (Broadberry 1998; OhUallachain 1991; Riefler 1979). In the case 

of some intangible assets, such as entrepreneurship or culture, case studies, e.g. assetmapping, can be the first step to investigate the presence of such assets. 

Researchers can conduct multiplier analyses for regional development planning, but 

they must interpret the results of such calculations cautiously. As an example, they 

should not necessarily encourage the sector with the largest direct economic impact to 

expand in a region for several reasons, including that the benefits may not be retained 

in the local area, large multipliers for a sector do not always imply a large multiplier 

for sub-industries within a sector, and there are often significant differences between 

the employment, income, and output multiplier effects for a given industry in a given 

region (Miernyk et al., 1970; Schaeffer 1998; Smirov-Smirova 2000). 

(C) Resource Extraction. One of the potential big traps in asset-based development 

is resource extraction in the name of competitive advantage, which can result in local 

poverty and boom-and-bust cycles. There are two issues here: the local multiplier of 

the ensuing development and overspecialization of the economy. 

In terms of the local multiplier of the industry, the development of the coal industry in 

the ARC region is a good case example. Duncan (1992) concluded in her book that 

although the result of fierce competition in the coal industry was cheap energy to fuel 

industrialization in the Northeast and Midwest, the costs were severe for miners and 

their families. In the twenty-first century, with rising oil prices, the hope of profit 

from coal has resurfaced. At least 94 coal-fired electric power plants—with the 

capacity to power 62 million American homes—are now planned across 36 states. 

One industry observer commented that "the situation has changed 180 degrees in the 

last year, so that we're almost back to the point where we were in the 1970s with a 

slew of coal-fired plants on the drawing board." (The Christian Science Monitor 2004) 

Currently, Eastern spot prices for coal are hitting peak levels. Some urgent buying of 

Eastern compliance coal on the spot market can run $65 per ton, compared with the 

mid-$20 range of a few years ago. Alan Stagg, head of the West Virgina-based Stagg 

Resource Consultants, said that the current situation reminded him of the coal boom of 

1974. He also remembers that it took decades to wring out the excess mine capacity 

that came online and cure many of the bad habits that resulted from that brief boom 

period. Stagg told the EUCI (Electric Utility Consultants Inc.) conference on volatile 

coal markets that he sees many parallels between then and now. (Power Daily, 2005) 

With the current reentry of investors into the mining industry in the Appalachian 

region, policy makers need to evaluate the costs and benefits of the mining industry to 

the health of local economy, especially in terms of overall stability and the portion of 

benefit accruing to the local communities. In the next phase of development, the 

Appalachian region needs to think carefully about how to build a strong, diversified, 

and resilient economy based on local-assets with the local communities as the chief 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 32

beneficiary. Coal and timber, undoubtedly, could play an important role in this 

development phase, but as policy makers design development strategies, they should 

emphasize ways in which the change and/or expansion of these sectors can help the 

region grow as well as become sustainable. 

 (D) Natural Amenity-Based Development: the Retirement Industry. Asset-based 

development is a development strategy with wide applicability. Policy-makers start 

from within the economy, understanding and cultivating the local strengths. A 

prevalent form in recent years has emphasized natural-amenities of a region. The 

retirement industry is based on local amenities, and typically has a low intensity of use 

of natural resources. The migrant retirees spend locally, and the income usually 

circulates within the local area. The spending also has a direct impact on high jobcreating industries, such as hospitality, construction, and health care. For example, as 

the top retiree destination Florida, mature residents, while making up one-third of the 

state’s population, account for about one-half of all income and consumer spending 

(The Destination Florida Commission 2002). 

Although the retirement industry already began to gain favor among regional planners 

during the late 1980s and the early 1990s, its significance is likely to increase 

markedly in the future when the baby-boom generation retires. In 1995, the U.S. 

Census projected that 25 million people (pre-boomers) were in the 50-59 group who 

are currently planning retirement, among whom 17 to 38 percent may move from their 

home states to retire (Reeder 1998). This would represent a large and growing market 

for retirement destinations. 

Researchers have identified both advantages and disadvantages of the retirement 

industry to local communities. On the one hand, according to the USDA research, the 

retirement industry manifests its benefits by “population growth, increased family 

incomes, greater economic diversification, and reduced unemployment rates.” 

Contrasting sharply with income stagnation or decline in most other rural areas in the 

1980s, the median income in rural retirement-destination counties (15% or more net 

immigration of those age 60 and over) increased by 4 %. On the other hand, not all 

retiree impacts are positive. Retiree attractions can result in undesirable congestion 

and environmental strain and drive up housing prices and property taxes. Many of the 

jobs created by retirees are low-wage service jobs, and retirees may require more of 

the public health services, which drain local public-financial resources. (Reeder 1998) 

Many states have been actively promoting the retirement industry, adopting a wide 

variety of strategies. In Alabama, the State government has been an active agent for 

attracting retirees, including State marketing and retiree-related development 

investments. In Arkansas, the private sector, like real-estate associations, has taken 

the lead in developing a comprehensive attraction strategy. In South Carolina, new 

residential developments, including planned retirement communities, play a major role 

in attracting retirees. In North Dakota, the focus is on attracting former residents back 

into the community and filling existing vacant housing. In Washington, the state 

chose the relatively inexpensive community self-help model. For example, Chelewah, 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 33

population 2000, attracted 150 new residents, most of them retirees, in one year with a 

$10,000 promotion budget of distributing brochures and making videos. The 

marketing methods also vary from integration through tourism (North Carolina), to 

traditional marketing media, like newspapers, magazines, television, and radio 

(Alabama ), financial incentives like tax breaks (Michigan and Mississippi), and even 

word-of-mouth advertising (Idaho and North Dakota). (Reeder 1998) 

As summarized by Longino et al. (2005), there are three typical motivators behind the 

phenomenon of retiree migration: (a) move to warmer weather; (b) move down the 

metropolitan hierarchy to smaller cities and towns; and (c) move from higher to lower 

cost-of-living areas. Retirement migration has historically been concentrated in a 

relatively few states, but has shown tendency of seek out other locations. There are 

three challenges that Appalachia’s regional policy makers will face in order to develop 

along this path: first requires formulating a unique marketing position to win in an 

increasingly competitive retiree market; second involves building upon human-made 

amenities and natural amenities to make the latter even more attractive; third is 

knowing in advance what the long-term economic and environmental impacts are 

related to an established retiree industry. 

 (D) Recreation/Tourism Asset-based Development. In contrast to resource 

extraction, natural assets can also be utilized to develop a sustainable recreation and 

tourism sector. Conventionally, tourism builds on local natural assets, such as 

mountains and lakes; and plays an important role in economic development. The 

World Travel and Tourism Council estimates that travel and tourism is now the 

world's largest generator of jobs. In 1995, the industry provided direct and indirect 

employment accounting for 10% of the global work force and providing one in every 

nine jobs. Tourism is labor-intensive and provides immediate employment 

opportunities. Many tourism activities are within the reach of the small operator. As 

many of the natural beauties are not located in the city centers, but in the rural areas, 

tourism allows rural peoples to share in the benefits of tourism development, 

promoting more balanced and sustainable forms of development. 

Sustainable Tourism can be defined as the means to "... meet the needs of present 

tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future. It 

is envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way that economic, 

social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, 

essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems." (World 

Tourism Organization 1988, quoted by UNEP Report 2002 P2) Among the many 

forms of sustainable tourism, Ecotourism is one of the most prominent in recent years. 

Ecotourism is defined as a form of tourism whereby tourists travel to destinations 

where natural environment (flora and fauna) and cultural heritage are the primary 

attractions. Ecotourism emphasizes the support of the local economy and its 

indigenous atmosphere and the preservation of entire local ecosystems and promotion 

of the importance of conserving nature. 

Natural assets and tangible assets are not necessarily the determining factors in 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 34

recreation/tourism industry development. The importance of cultural heritage cannot 

be neglected in the development process. In the Appalachian region, “Cultural 

tourism is the type of ’asset-based development’ that can produce permanent jobs in 

the region, drawing on the region's music, history, environment and warmth of its 

people”, according to Governor Mark R. Warner and Anne B. Pope, federal co-chair 

of the Appalachian Regional Commission. As a joint effort by National Geographic 

and the Appalachian Regional Commission in 2005, more than 350 of Appalachia's 

top cultural tourism destinations are featured on a color map. Local music and crafts 

industry are important components of the cultural tourism industry. One of the ARC 

states, Virginia, ranks in the top 10 states in the nation as a cultural tourism 

destination. Cultural tourism is growing twice as fast as traditional tourism, and 

cultural tourists tend to spend more than others. (Richmond Times-Dispatch 2005) 

(E) Implications for Asset-Based Economic Development. From the discussion 

above, two important implications stand out for asset-based development: 

sustainability and local economy as the main beneficiary. 

Sustainability refers to sustaining the asset-based economic development without 

over-extracting the local resources, resulting in environmental deterioration. Success 

in asset-based economic development depends on long-term investment and a 

building-block process rather than a quick-fix approach. An important part of assetbased development is to build a foundation, such as infrastructure, for asset-based 

development and to enhance the local assets constantly instead of depleting them 

(ARC 2004). 

More importantly, how much of the benefit of the economic development can be 

retained and circulated in the community. Two of the most useful indexes are the 

local income multiplier and the local employment multiplier. As our earlier analysis 

exemplifies that coal mine workers suffered from low income when the mining 

business prospered. More questions should be asked for the sake of the real benefit of 

the local people. What is the quality of the created jobs? Are the jobs created at the 

expense of existing local jobs? How much lead time is there before the development 

can take off from the date of investment? To what extent do the extra jobs trigger 

multiplier benefits elsewhere in the ARC region? Local planners must fully explore 

these questions before undertaking the asset-based development initiatives.

On the execution level, asset-based development has two levels of implications for 

local policy, the industrial development level and the community revitalization level 

(Polenske 2001). On the industrial development side, policies should promote 

innovation and the evolution of an industrial network based on an evaluation of local 

assets. Perroux (1988) illustrated this point clearly by defining a growth pole as a set 

of economic activities that has the capacity to induce the growth of another set of 

economic activities in an innovative way. On the community-side, policies should 

focus more on building, appreciating, and mobilizing individual and community 

talents, skills, and assets rather than focusing on problems and needs. Also, the 

development process is supposed to be led by the community rather than driven by 

external agencies. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 35

Asset-based development strategy has the potential to be central to the Appalachian 

regional development as the area has rich natural, cultural, and human assets 

“sleeping” in the mountains. Joint government-community initiatives in the region 

have the potential in increase opportunities for development to take off through 

various mechanisms. They may include education-based, entrepreneurship-based, 

resource-based, culture-based, or natural-amenity-based processes. 

A remaining issue for asset based development is access to customer markets. Such 

access issues hold whether the customers themselves travel to the region to obtain the 

products (e.g., tourism) or the products are delivered directly to the customers (e.g., 

wood products). Exhibit 2-11 illustrates the key issue of topography and 

transportation links, which can affect the markets available for access to/from a 

region’s fixed assets. 

Case Studies. Examples of natural and cultural asset-based economic development 

are shown in the Volume 2 case studies of Southeastern TN and Southwestern NC, 

and also discussed in the case study of Chautauqua County (NY). 

Exhibit 2-11 Role of Market Access and Topography in 

Asset-Based Development 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 36

2.6 Learning-Based Development 

Learning-Based or Knowledge Asset-Based Development. Growth opportunities 

leveraged from the collective knowledge embodied in the region, including social 

capital, technical applications / commercialization, institutional assets (educational 

and financial), entrepreneurial start-ups. 

(A) Overview of Learning-Based Economic Development. Forms of economic 

development that are based on knowledge and learning are focused on the 

development of business-related skills among the local workforce. They include: 

• Education-based development: Education institutions contribute to economic 

development through “research, creation of human capital through teaching, 

technology development and transfer, and co-production of a favorable 

milieu.” (Goldstein and Renault 2004) According to their research, among 

these drivers, the spillover of university research and technology creation 

contributes most to regional economic development. There are two types of 

education assets-based counties: (1) counties that are the sources of welleducated people due to the location of universities, and (2) counties that absorb 

well-educated people in their labor market. 

• Entrepreneurship-based development: In a market with perfect information, 

the development of entrepreneurship would not be necessary. In reality, 

entrepreneurship contributes to development by overcoming uncertainties, 

factor-market imperfections, and externalities by individual initiatives and 

skills (Leff 1979). The key drivers of entrepreneurship-based development 

include the overall quality of human resources in the area, the cultivation of an 

entrepreneurial culture, the establishment of property rights to protect profits 

gained from entrepreneurial activities, and the establishment of supporting 

institutions, such as financial agencies targeting small businesses. 

Currently there are two parallel streams of thought and research about learning-based 

economies, both dating back at least a century. “Human capital” theories are top 

down, driven by public institutions and public policy. “Learning region” theories are 

bottom up, driven by social norms, associational structures, and workplace 

organization. The more traditional and widely accepted human capital view of 

learning is tightly linked to research on education and training—human resource 

development (Ross and Rosenfeld, 1988). This line of research focuses on 

demonstrating the value of education, educational attainment, and skill development to 

regional or national economic outcomes. The research that correlates measures of 

educational attainment or achievement to economic outcomes dates back to Horace 

Mann’s circulars, which asked business owners in Massachusetts to estimate the dollar 

value of educated workers to their profits. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 37

Newer (or, more accurately, rediscovered) learning theories assume that the economic 

development of regions is linked to the informal knowledge that is embodied in and 

transmitted through the social and organizational structures of businesses, 

communities, and societies. This idea that access to the non-codified, or tacit, 

knowledge that resides in people’s heads and organizations’ routines drives innovation 

dates back to the beginning of the 20th century. Alfred Marshall attributed the success 

of industrial districts to the informal flow of ideas and information. This hypothesis is 

more resistant to quantification, and generally demonstrated with anecdotal evidence. 

Both of these lines of research of research are investigated as they affect and are 

affected by non-metro conditions and industry agglomeration. The first is based on 

traditional human capital theory and focuses on the individual. The second is based on 

“learning” theories as applied to people, companies, and places, and requires some 

store of social capital. Human capital assumes rationality and transparency; learning 

occurs through socially determined values and norms (Schuller, 1998). 

(B) Theoretical Basis on Human Capital Development. Relationships between 

human capital and economic development in rural areas have been acknowledged and 

thoroughly studied for decades. The importance of education to economic 

development in rural areas was a significant part of Roosevelt’s Carnegie Commission 

Report on Rural Life highlighted the importance of education to rural economies. 

Human capital theory presumes that the knowledge and skills of the work force are 

contributing factors to economic growth. In conventional econometric models, human 

resource development accounts for anywhere from 20 to 80 percent of growth. 

Increased skill and knowledge, when applied to work situations, lead to higher 

productivity and increased innovation, which is used to justify public expenditures on 

training and induce businesses to invest more in education and training. Some 

economists have shown that the contribution of knowledge and education to 

productivity far exceeds that of capital (Carnevale, 1983). This suggests to both 

governments and businesses that investments that increase the value of human capital 

produce higher rates of return than investments in physical capital, and therefore they 

would be wise to invest in education and training (Schultz, 1981). 

Modern human capital concepts developed by Schultz and Gary Becker and, with 

respect to agglomeration, by Paul Krugman provide a theoretical basis for the 

importance of human capital, and Ray Marshall, Eli Ginzberg, Sar Levitan and many 

others have provided a more practical set of principles for human resource 

development policy. Schultz’s research led to the additional finding that “the supply 

of entrepreneurial ability is definitely increased by additional schooling.” 

There are basically three ways that human capital plus the system that develops it 

contribute to non-metro economies. The first is direct, the impact of a more skilled 

and creative workforce. The second is induced, the impact of better education on the 

location choices of employees and employers. The third is contributory, the impact of 

education and training institutions and organizations as a source of employment and 

external revenues. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 38

Incumbent and potential labor force. The more common means for assessing human 

capital is to estimate the scale and productivity of the workforce. Scale is measured in 

total numbers of people in the work force, diplomas, certificates, and degrees awarded, 

number completing relevant programs of study, and average levels of educational 

attainment in the population. The numbers of college graduates in the Appalachian 

counties of most ARC states is significantly below those in non-ARC counties (Haaga, 

2004). Occupational projections, however, suggest that about eighty percent of the 

work force over the next ten years will require some postsecondary education. 

In fact, one of the most serious human capital challenges for rural areas over the past 

century has been keeping youth, particularly the most educated youth, from leaving 

for urban amenities and better job opportunities. No one, however, has solved the 

persistent problem of rural out-migration. While educational attainments levels have 

been rising in the U.S. constantly, gains in metro counties far exceed gains in nonmetro counties, and non-metro non-adjacent counties fare the worst (Artz, 2003). 

Advocates for education and training argue that companies benefit from a more highly 

trained workforce but findings don’t fully support this hypothesis—at least for 

manufacturing. A study of the non-metro South in the 1980s found that a 10 percent 

increase in educational attainment resulted in a 3.8 percent increase in total 

employment—but a net loss in manufacturing employment (Rosenfeld et al, 1986). A 

review of the literature on plant locations conducted in 1994 concluded that 

“education levels of the local work force have not been important determinants of 

local employment growth in the rural areas of the United States (McGranahan, 1994). 

A more recent study on impacts of education discovered modest gains—that a five 

percent increase in share of population attending college in non-metro counties is 

associated with a 0.15 percent increased in annual income growth of $325 annually 

(Barkley, 2005). A concurrent study found that a one percent increase in high school 

completion rates among adults resulted in an additional $128/year per capita income. 

Business Decision-making. The historical finding of a weak relationship between 

education and traditional manufacturing is not really surprising, since traditional 

manufacturing has lower skill requirements and fewer requirements for technical 

expertise. Among rural manufacturers asked in 1996 to name the top five barriers to 

competitiveness, only those in the Southern region listed quality of primary and public 

schools, and there it was number five, well behind quality of labor, amenities, 

regulations, and taxes (Teixeira, 1998). 

But in today’s economy, with less labor intensive manufacturing and more knowledge 

based industry, conditions are very likely quite different. A recent USDA Economic 

Research Service study showed that the share of rural employment in rural low skilled 

jobs declined from 49.4 percent in 1980 to 42.2 percent in 2000 (still far above the US 

average of 35.5 percent). More of the decline was attributed to changes in skill needs 

due to technology within industries than to changes in industrial mix (Gibbs, 2003). 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 39

Direct Employment. The education and training institutions represent a large direct 

source of employment and, where concentrated, can constitute a sizable portion of 

total regional employment. About six percent of all employment in the United States 

is in the education sector, and the projected growth rate is almost 25 percent, which is 

67 percent above the overall national employment growth rate. In rural counties, the 

proportion working in education is usually even greater. Since most of the revenues 

are from state or federal sources, education is a value added industry from the local 

perspective. 

Agglomeration effects. Agglomeration has three impacts on human capital. The first 

is the effect first described by Alfred Marshall (1936) in industrial districts, of 

“workers by associating with one another teach one another." He argued that 

innovation is a collective experience and that "If one man starts a new idea, it is taken 

up by others and combined with suggestions of their own; and thus it becomes the 

source of further new ideas (Bellandi, 1988). Further, he hypothesized that association 

leads to learning. (Marshall, 1936). Marshall refers to processes of transmission of 

ideas that occur through inter-firm mobility of skilled workers, social institutions, and 

business organizations. 

Krugman later developed economic models to demonstrate Marshall’s theories that 

pooled markets for workers with specialized skills result in clusters. His model 

explains why the advantages associated with access to labor pools with specialized 

skills outweigh the disadvantages of potential poaching of employees by competitors 

(Krugman, 1992). Clusters should also benefit workers because they would be less 

dependent on fewer employers and also protected against fluctuations in demand. One 

study did indeed show that the presence of clusters (based on the most basic two-digit 

industry classifications) is associated with higher wages even after accounting for 

characteristics of workers (Bernat, 1998). 

A second agglomeration effect is in the increase in workforce development networks 

formed among companies with similar needs. A survey of 1,600 employers and 250 

community colleges in the rural U.S. found that employers rely heavily on networks. 

The author identified four structures for the networks: sole providers; hub-spoke, 

usually with a community-based organization (CBO) at the center; employer-centered 

networks; and sector- or cluster-oriented cluster networks (Green, 2003). The 

networks were most often industry specific (44 percent), community specific (38 

percent), and supply chain driven (26 percent). 

The third advantage of agglomeration is that the workforce is more likely to have 

learned special knowledge of the peculiarities of the structure and work environment 

common to the cluster, giving them context-specific skills they can apply more 

directly to the work environment of the cluster. This was the rationale behind the 

requirement that has been part of the federal Carl Perkins Act since 1984 to teach “all 

aspects of the industry,” that employees who understand the way their industry works 

are more productive and have more opportunities to advance. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 40

(C) Learning and Industry Clusters. Learning has always been, and remains, one of 

the most fundamentals reasons for, and value of, regional agglomerations of like and 

related companies, or clusters. Technological advances in communications have not, 

according to most analysts, replaced the Informal learning across a sector, or cluster, 

has a long tradition in rural America, with roots in the Grange, the Farmers Alliance, 

and the populist movement—all of which intentionally facilitated the free exchange of 

agricultural knowledge throughout the industry. In non-agricultural settings, much of 

Agglomeration Effects. Alfred Marshall’s work focused on learning as a critical 

factor in industry agglomeration. Contemporary concepts of learning regions are 

included within the recent deluge of literature on industry clusters, districts, and 

networks, especially out of Europe. It includes learning ranging from 

informal/unintentional to structured/ intentional and from what Peter Maskell calls 

“local buzz” to “global pipelines.” Much of the technology transfer literature focuses 

on creating opportunities and building structures for knowledge spillover. 

One of the leading economic advantages of clusters is the opportunities for knowledge 

spillover and know-how trading. The disadvantages associated with leaking 

proprietary knowledge are outweighed by the advantages of learning about new 

technologies and techniques, through both formal and informal means. Von Hippel’s 

research on informal know how trading in the U.S. steel industry found that exchange 

among competitors is most effective when know bow is proprietary only by virtue of 

secrecy and when its value is too small to justify an explicit contract (Von Hippel, 

1987). However, “sharing activity is not captured as a transaction in the firm’s 

financial records and therefore it is not reported as economic activity in the standard 

economic statistics.”(Cater, 1989). Krugman agreed, writing that “knowledge flows 

[in contract to labor pooling] are invisible; they leave no paper trail by which they may 

be measured and tracked, and there is nothing to prevent the theorist from assuming 

anything about them that she likes.” 

Learning occurs in clusters in a number of ways, some of which fall under the rubric 

of “networks” and up and down “supply chains” and other organized forums for 

associative behavior,” through gatekeepers, which can be lead firms of institutions, 

and some of which fall under the less intentional and formal “social capital.” These 

can include participation in local associations, networks of firms, mobility of 

personnel among firms, informal social activities or via “gatekeepers (local 

institutions, lead firms, or community leaders). 

Maskell (2000) developed a “learning-based theory” of clusters in which he contended 

that learning is an explanation existence, internal organization and boundary 

definitions of the cluster. The cluster and learning theory literature leads to the 

hypotheses that the more similar and/or complementary the company, the more likely 

companies are to interact, watch, discuss, and compare solutions to similar problems, 

and learn from each other and that proximity increases the likelihood of interaction 

and learning among companies. Learning occurs through both formal structures, such 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 41

as networks and associations and through informal social venues that depend on stocks 

of social capital. 

Networks, alliances, and associations. Four types of network arrangements have 

been found to facilitate learning but also to reduce the costs of training. One is an 

unintentional outcome—at least from, a policy perspective—of inter-firm 

collaboration for business purposes. One is the intentional formation of skills 

alliances among firms, which supplements formal human resource development with 

informal learning among members. Another is the top-down supply chain network, 

with information flowing from customer company/mentor, company to suppliers, but 

also back up the chain with the specialized knowledge of the suppliers and smaller 

companies. The last is the sector or cluster association that builds relationships of 

trust and provides venues for knowledge exchange. These networks are 

operationalized by supply chain associations, regional skills alliances, cluster 

associations or councils, or gatekeeper organizations. 

While most of the government strategies to encourage and support small and midsized businesses to work collaboratively through networks have targeted hard business 

outcomes, the companies themselves have been much more interested in learning as an 

outcome. Evaluations of network programs in the western region of the United States, 

Wales, and New South Wales in Australia all found that the highest ranked priority for 

company involvement in networks was learning. Michigan turned this into a state 

policy by funding Continuous User Improvement Networks of companies with similar 

interests. Similarly, the recent spurt of interest in forming cluster councils or 

associations has to do with sharing knowledge. 

• Supply chain learning associations - One form of inter-firm learning occurs 

though the supply chain learning and training networks, where original 

equipment manufacturers join with their suppliers or users to ensure that all 

have the skills required to meet efficiency and quality goals. This was the 

official innovation strategy for Wales, with supply chain associations formed 

around each of its multinational branch plants (Morgan, 1967). It’s important 

to bear in mind that knowledge chains are not simply captured by value chains 

compiled in input-output tables. Many of the companies in value chains are 

merely engaged in currency transactions while some companies not involved 

in currency transactions are engaged in knowledge transactions. 

• Regional skills alliances - Regional skill alliances (RSAs) are multi-employer 

worker training programs organized on the demand side of the labor market. 

They are by definition demand driven; they address employers’ training and 

skill development needs. An effective RSA gives each employer access to 

lower cost or higher quality training than would have been available to the 

individual firm. Broader-based RSAs include the public sector, education and 

training organizations, and frequently organized labor. The Southwestern 

Employers’ Training Consortium (Pittsburgh) links firms who have identified 

shared skill needs across industries and occupations. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 42

• Cluster associations - Cluster organizations that represent sectors or clusters, 

either formed by members spontaneously or by government agencies in 

response to cluster initiatives, are also venues for knowledge transfer. Some is 

transferred intentionally to benefit region collectively and some is transferred 

quietly, among colleagues and business partners and associates who expect that 

they will receive as much intelligence as they reveal. In an evaluation of four 

cluster associations in Washington and Minnesota (two in wood products, one 

in engineering, and one in crafts) members of the associations placed a much 

higher value on “access to information and learning” than they did on “hard” 

outcome such as new products or markets (Rosenfeld, 1996). 

• Gatekeepers - Within regions and clusters, certain lead firms, institutions, or 

specialized services function as gatekeepers and disseminators of knowledge 

and know how. In some clusters it’s the multi-nationals that are closer to 

global markets and new technologies. In other clusters it’s an institution—

usually a specific center or program faculty at a community college or 

university—that is responsible for generating and accumulating knowledge and 

know how and works with large numbers of companies. In still other regions, 

it’s a purchasing agent or exporter used by many firms or a sector based 

nonprofit. ARC sponsored an analysis of business intermediaries that fill this 

role but research was limited to the services provided, not as sources or 

disseminators of knowledge. 

Social capital and norms of reciprocity. Social capital has become a popular untraded asset of regions and assumed to influence economic development, despite the 

lack of any compelling studies. There have been, however, repeated observations on 

site that social capital produces learning and learning creates social capital—which in 

turn affects innovation and productivity (Maskell, 2001). A tight social fabric has 

been considered fundamental to the functioning of the classical Italian industrial 

districts. Brusco (1995) noted that “local know-how is passed on by doing things and 

seeing how other people do things through informal chit-chat” and workplace 

knowledge is rooted in places where “people are linked by the bonds of shared history 

or values...and where codes of behaviour, lifestyles, employment patterns and 

expectations are inextricably implicated in productive activity.” 

There are formal associations in Italian industrial districts. However, the social 

structure in northern Italy is embedded in the community and the associations appear 

to be valued more for their collective services than their contributions to social capital. 

In the United States, though, new urban centers lack the shared history and culture to 

form the same kinds of bonds that have supported the exchange of production-based 

knowledge in Italy. Further, as work becomes more knowledge based, the functions 

and skills become less transparent to the community at large. Therefore regions that 

want to build economic development policies around clusters try to create social 

settings that will encourage the learning that Brusco attributes to Italian industrial 

districts. In the U.S., much of the economic value of social capital may in fact be the 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 43

unintended consequence of something else—such informal chitchat at company 

bowling leagues. 

One form of social capital-based learning is the more general information that 

advantages the region without disadvantaging the firm. Those firms that are part of 

global pipelines have little to lose by sharing their knowledge, and strengthening their 

cluster may provide an advantage in the form of a recognized brand. The other social 

capital-based learning depends on reciprocity. 

Exhibit 2-2. Mechanisms for Learning 

Mechanism Units of 

Analysis

Form Constraints

Intra-firm Individuals Structured Resources and 

company policy 

Inter-firm 

Intentional

Networks & 

associations 

General & 

selective 

Time pressures and 

potential rivalry 

Inter-firm 

Unintentional

Clusters Unstructured Business isolation 

Casual Communities Unstructured Social isolation 

Perhaps the most widely cited researcher on social capital and clusters is Annalee 

Saxenian 1994). Her research on Silicon Valley led her to conclude that the "major 

purpose of these organizational structures was to facilitate the exchange of ideas and 

information." Entrepreneurs view social relationships and even gossip as a "crucial 

aspect of their business." "Entrepreneurs came to see social relationships and even 

gossip as a crucial aspect of their businesses....such informal communication was often 

of more value than more conventional but less timely forums such as industry 

journals." "In many cases, the flow of information between the two firms was 

continuous, occurring across different levels of the organization and different 

functional specializations." A more recent survey of 445 SMEs across Great Britain 

found that innovative companies were more likely to exchange information outside 

normal commercial relations, rate collaboration higher, and rate external information 

form other SMEs more highly than non-innovators (Cooke and Clifton, 2002). 

Limitations of social capital. While social capital bring economic benefits to regions, 

it can also restrict who has access to those benefits, and, if it becomes too inward 

directed and insular, be harmful to the region’s competitiveness. The social capital 

that serves a cluster does not automatically benefit all firms, people, and places 

equally. A report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 

hypothesizes that “the increasing importance of individual learning within the 

knowledge based economy produces new forms of social inequalities, through the 

intensification of the disadvantages experienced by those denied access to learning 

opportunities” (OECD, 2001). The Aspen Institute noted that cluster-based initiatives 

aimed at low-income populations are defined “not simply by absence of resources but 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 44

by the absence of marketplace relationships that can create opportunities of value to 

both participants and employers” (Clark and Dawson, 1995). Associations may have 

exclusionary guidelines. They may meet in places not easily accessible to everyone or 

operate internally as a “club” in which some insiders gain access to tacit knowledge 

while others do not. Tightly controlled associations can act as “gated communities” 

where those not considered part of the “business community” operate at a distinct 

disadvantage. 

Secondly, poorer and socially isolated regions and populations too often have 

insufficient access to benchmark practices, innovations, markets, and jobs outside of 

their region or neighboring regions. While social capital is the medium that transports 

information and accelerates imitation inside a cluster, competitiveness is highly 

dependent on new information and ideas outside the cluster. Successful regions have 

lead firms or associations that either attract or are part of global networks and markets 

and that employ people who are active in international professional associations and 

maintain extensive personal networks. 

(D) Implications for analyzing growth patterns. Efforts to build stronger 

economies in Appalachia since the establishment of the ARC have focused on human 

resource development. After infrastructure, nothing has received more attention or 

resources from the ARC. Human capital has long been a priority, and in support of a 

modern vocational education system the agency contributed to the construction of 

some 700 vocational-technical schools and community colleges in the region 

(Coulombe, 2004). 

However, the federal government is a small player in supporting public education and 

training (usually no more than about five percent), and the major burden falls on the 

state and local governments. The poorest ARC regions, which need good schools the 

most, have the lowest tax bases and are least able to keep youth in school and raise 

levels of human capital enough to support economic growth. Even with more money, 

diseconomies of scale and social and physical isolation make it difficult for many parts 

of the region to attract highly qualified teachers, provide specialized programs and 

services, and keep the highest performers and most talented graduates in the 

community. Therefore, the levels of education of adults in non-metro ARC counties 

are among the lowest in the nation. 

Decades of educational and school finance reform, the Internet, and innovative 

approaches plus the efforts of dedicated teachers and principals, and CBOs, have had 

positive results. Measures of human capital in rural areas have improved considerably 

and closed the gap with metro areas. But on average, they still fall well below those in 

the suburbs and cities, and the issues that keep rural areas behind haven’t changed 

much. They are: (a) limited financial resources, (b) inability to attract the best 

teachers. Higher pay and urban amenities attracts teachers to cities, (c) lack of school 

choices, and (d) out-migration of young adults. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 45

Networking is more common in rural places than in more impersonal cities. The real 

challenge for Appalachia is access to external knowledge. The “local buzz’ is strong 

but the “global pipelines” are weak. Rural places are generally more culturally 

homogeneous and have limited access to innovations, ideas, benchmarks, and market 

opportunities from other places, and major barrier to innovation and economic 

development. 

Case Studies. Examples of learning-based technology economic development based 

on technology and education centers are shown in the Volume 2 case studies of Pike 

County, KY and Monongalia, County, WV. 

2.7 References Cited 

(A) General Economic Development

Berry, Brian J. L. and William Garrison, 1958. “The Functional Bases of the Central Place 

Hierarchy,” Economic Geography, 34 (1958), pp. 145-54. 

Blumenfeld, Hans. 1955. “The Economic Base of the Metropolis.” Journal of the American 

Institute of Planners, Vol. 21, p. 114-32. 

Klosterman, Richard E. 1990. Community and Analysis Planning Techniques. Savage, 

Maryland: Rowmand and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 

Porter, Michael. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press. 

Enright, Michael J. (2001) ‘Regional Clusters: What we know and what we should know.’ 

Paper prepared for the Kiel Institute International Workshop on Innovation Clusters and 

Interregional Competition. 

Rocha, Hector O., (2002) “Entrepreneurship and Development: The Role of Clusters.” Small 

Business Economic Journal, 2002 

Weisbrod, Glen and Brett Piercy., (2006) “New Tools for Economic Development Targeting 

and Strategy”, Economic Development Research Group, September 2006. 

(B) Trade Center Development

Alberta Bureau of Economic-development and Tourism. 1992. Communities on the Grow: 

Economic-development Bulletins. Edmonton, Canada. 

Cromartie, J. and Linda Swanson, 1996. “Defining Metropolitan Areas and the Rural-Urban 

Continuum: A Comparison of Statistical Areas Based on County and Sub-county 

Geography.” Washington, DC: Rural Development Perspectives, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp31-39, 

June 1996. 

DTI (U.K. Department of Trade and Industry). 2003. A Practical Guide to Cluster 

Development. http://www.dti.gov.uk/clusters/ecotec-report/download.html. 

Economic Research Services (ERS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Measuring Rurality: 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 46

Micropolitan Areas.” http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Rurality/MicropolitanAreas 

Economic Research Services (ERS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Measuring Rurality: 

Urban Influence Codes.” http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/UrbanInf 

Engardio, P, Roberts, D., (2004) ‘The China Price.’ Business Week. December 6. Internet 

Retrieval. 

Edward J. Feser and Malizia. Emil. 1999. Understanding local economic development. New 

Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research. 

Grabowski, Richard. 1994. “Import Substitution, Export Promotion, and the State in 

Economic-development.” Journal of Developing Areas, Vol. 28, p. 535-54. 

Hoover, Edgar M. 1975. An Introduction to Regional Economics. New York: Alfred A. 

Knopf. 

Huskey, Lee. 1987. “Import Substitution in Frontier Regions.” Ch. 3 in Developing 

America’s Northern Frontier, ed. Lane, Theodore. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of 

America. 

Isard, Walter. 1956. Location and Space Economy. New York: John Willey & Sons. 

Isserman, Andrew M. 2005. “In the National Interest: Defining Rural Correctly in Research 

and Policy.” Forthcoming in International Regional Science Review, October 2005. 

Krugman, Paul. 1995. Development, Geography, and Economic Theory. Cambridge, MA: The 

MIT Press. 

Markusen, Ann R., Yong-Sook Lee, and Sean DiGiovanna (Ed.). 1999. Second-Tier Cities: 

Rapid Growth beyond the Metropolis. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. 

Norton R.D. and J. Rees. 1979. The Product Cycle and the Spatial Decentralization of 

American Manufacturing. Regional Studies. 13:141-151. 

Office of Management and Budget. 1998. “Alternative Approaches to Defining Metropolitan 

and Nonmetropolitan Areas,” Federal Register, 63 (244): 70526-70561. 

Office of Management and Budget. 2000. “Standards for Defining Metropolitan and 

Micropolitan Statistical Areas,” Federal Register, 65 (249): 82228-82238. 

Perroux, Francois. 1950. Economic Space, Theory and Application. Quarterly Journal of 

Economics. 64 (1): 89-104. 

Perroux, Francois. 1988. "The Pole of Development's New Place in a General Theory of 

Economic Activity" in B. Higgins and D. Savoie (Eds.), Regional Economic Development: 

Essays in Honour of Francois Perroux. Boston: Unwin Hyman 

Persky, J., Ranney, D., and Wiewel, W. 1993. “Import substitution and local economicdevelopment.” Economic-development Quarterly, Vol. 7, p. 18-29. 

Polenske, Karen. 2001. “Competitive Advantage of Regional Internal and External Supply 

Chains.” In Regional Science Perspectives in Economic Analysis, Benjamin H. Stevens, 

edited by Michael L. Lahr and Ronald E. Miller, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier 

Science, B.V., pp. 259-284. 

Polenske, Karen. 2003. Clustering in Space versus Dispersing over Space: Agglomeration 

versus Dispersal Economies, Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regional Development, and 

Public Policy in the Emerging Digital Economy. Trollhatten, Sweden. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 47

Polenske, Karen. 2003. Clustering in Space versus Dispersing over Space: Agglomeration 

versus Dispersal Economies, Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regional Development, and 

Public Policy in the Emerging Digital Economy. Trollhaätten, Sweden. 

Porter, Michael. 1996. “Competitive Advantage, Agglomeration Economies, and Regional 

Policy,” International Regional Science Review, 19(1-2) (including comments by Ann 

Markusen and Porter’s response): 85-94. 

Ratcliffe, Michael. “Creating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas.” 

http://srdc.msstate.edu/measuring/ratcliffe.pdf 

Smirnov, Oleg, and Alena Smirnova. 2000. “An Assessment of the Economic Base of 

Distressed and Near-Distressed Counties in Appalachia: A Report to the Appalachian 

Regional Commission.” Appalachia Regional Commission. 

United States Census Bureau. “About Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas,” 

http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html 

US Census Bureau. “Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas.” 

http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/metroarea.html (accessed April 1, 2005). 

Williams, Colin C. 1994. “Local sourcing initiatives in West Yorkshire: an evaluation of 

their effectiveness.” Ch. 2 in Reinventing a Region, ed. Haughton, Graham and Whitney, 

David. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Avebury. 

(C) Industry Agglomeration and Dispersal Economies

Bernard, A., Jensen, J.B., Schott, P.K. ‘Assessing the Impact of Trade Liberalization on 

Import-Competing Industries in the Appalachian Region.’ 2004. 

Darwent D F, 1969, "Growth poles and growth centers in regional planning -- a review" 

Environment and Planning A 1(1) 5–32 

Feser, Edward, and Harvey Goldstein. August 2002. “Regional Technology Assets and 

Opportunities: The Geographic Clustering of High-Tech Industry,” Science and Innovation 

in Appalachia. 

Feser, E. J., Koo, J., Renski, H., and Sweeney, S. H. 2001. ‘Incorporating spatial analysis in 

applied industry cluster studies.’ 

Flaherty, M. Therese. 1996. Global Operations Management. New York: McGraw-Hill 

Company. 

Glasmeier, Amy K. and Jeff Kibler. 1996. "Power Shift: The Rising Control of Distributors 

and Retailers in the Supply Chain for Manufactured Goods," Urban Geography, Vol. 17, pp. 

740-757. 

Harrison, Bennett. 1992. Industrial Districts: Old Wine in New Bottles. Regional Studies. 

26(5): 469-83. 

Hoover, E. M. 1937. Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries. Cambridge, MA: 

Harvard University Press. 

Isard, Walter. 1956. Location and Space Economy. New York: John Willey & Sons. 

Jack Faucett Associates and Economic Development Research Group. 2004. Analysis of 

Global Competitiveness of Selected Industries and Clusters in the Appalachian Region,

prepared for the Appalachian Regional Commission. 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 48

Kotkin, J. (2000). The New Geography: How the Digital Revolution is Reshaping the 

American Landscape. New York: Random House. 

Krugman, Paul. 1991. Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. Journal of Political 

Economy. 99(3): 483-499. 

Landabaso, M, Oughton, C and Morgan, K (2001) ‘Innovation Networks and Regional Policy 

in Europe', in Koschatzy, K, Kulicke, M and Zenker, A, Innovation Networks: Concepts and 

Challenges in the European Perspective , Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg and New York. 

Li, Yu, and Karen R. Polenske. 2004. “Measuring Dispersal Economies”. In 

Entrepreneurship, Spatial Industrial Clusters and Inter-Firm Networks. Trollhätten, 

Sweden: Universities of Trollhätten,/Uddevalla: 615-634 

Polenske, Karen R. 2001. “Competitive Advantage of Regional Internal and External Supply 

Chains.” Regional Science Perspectives in Economic Analysis. Edited by M.L. Lahr and 

R.E. Miller. New York: Elsevier. 

Polenske, Karen R. 2003. “Clustering in Space versus Dispersing over Space: Agglomeration 

versus Dispersal Economies,” Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Regional Development, and 

Public Policy in the Emerging Digital Economy. Trollhaätten, Sweden. 

Rosenfeld, Stuart A. 2001. “Networks and Clusters: The Yin and Yang of Rural Development. 

A report to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.” 

Teubal, Morris, Tamar Yinnon, and Ehud Zuscovitch. 1991. Networks and Market Creation. 

Research Policy. 20 (5): 381-392. 

Weber, Alfred. 1909. Theory of the Location of Industries. English translation: Chicago: The 

University of Chicago Press, 1929. 

(D) Natural and Cultural Asset-Based Development

Andersson,AÊ .E. 1985. “Creativity and Regional Development.” Papers of the [Regional 

Science] Association, 56: 5–20. 

Appalachian Regional Commission. 2004. “Appalachia: Turning Assets into Opportunities” 

Asheim, Björn T. 1996. "Industrial Districts as “Learning Regions”: A Conduction for 

Prosperity." European Planning Studies, 4(4): 379-400. 

Broadberry, Stephen 1998 “How Did the United States and Germany Overtake Britain? A 

Sectoral Analysis of Comparative Productivity Levels, 1870-1990” The Journal of 

Economic History Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 375-407 

Christian Science Monitor. 2004 “America's New Coal Rush.” February 24. 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0226/p01s04-sten.html 

Destination Florida Commission. 2002. Destination Florida Commission's final report with 

recommendations, http://www.ccfj.net/DestFlaFinRep.html 

Duncan, Cynthia M. 1992. “Persistent Poverty in Appalachia: Scarce Work and Rigid 

Stratification.” in Rural Poverty in America, edited by Cynthia M. Duncan, Auburn House 

Fingleton, Bernard, Danilo Igliori, Barry Moore, and Raakhi Odedra, forthcoming. 

“Employment Growth and Clusters Dynamics of Creative Industries in Great Britain.” In 

Geographies of Innovation, edited by Karen R. Polenske, publisher being selected) 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 49

Global Philanthropy and Foundation Building, 

http://www.synergos.org/globalphilanthropy/02/abcdoverview.htm 

Goldstein H., and C. Renault 2004. “Contributions of Universities to Regional Economic 

Development: A Quasi-experimental Approach.” Regional Studies: The Journal of the 

Regional Studies Association, 38 (7): 733 –746. 

Hall, Peter. 2000. “Creative Cities and Economic Development.” Urban Studies,37(4): 639–

649 

Kusmin, Lorin, D. Kusmin, J.M. Redman, and David W. Sears. 1996. Factors Associated with 

Rural Economic Growth: Lessons from the 1980s. Economic Research Service, United 

States Department of Agriculture–TB 1850. USDA: Washington, DC. 

Leff, N. H. 1979. Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: The Problem Revisited. 

Journal of Economic Literature, 17: 46-64. 

Longino and Bradley. 2003. “A First Look at Retirement Migration Trends in 2000, 

Gerontologist” 43: 904-907. 

Miernyk W. H., Shellhammer, K. L., Brown, D. M., Coccari, R. L., Gallagher, C. J., 

Wineman, W. H. 1970. Simulating Regional Economic Development, Heath Lexington 

Books, D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington, Massachusetts. 

Mytelka, Lynn K. 2001. “Mergers, Acquisitions, and Inter-firm Technology Agreements in 

the Global Learning Economy,” In The Globalizing Learning Economy, edited by Daniele 

Archibugi and Bengt-Åke Lundvall. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press:127-14 

OhUallachain, Breandan; Neil Reid. (1991) “The Location and Growth of Business and 

Professional Services in American Metropolitan Areas, 1976-1986.” Annals of the 

Association of American Geographers, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 254-270. 

Perroux, Francois. 1988. "The Pole of Development's New Place in a General Theory of 

Economic Activity" in B. Higgins and D. Savoie (Eds.), Regional Economic Development: 

Essays in Honour of Francois Perroux. Boston: Unwin Hyman 

Polenske, Karen R. 2001. “Taking Advantage of a Region’s Competitive Assets: An AssetBased Regional Economic-Development Strategy.” Entrepreneurship, Firm Growth, and 

Regional Development in the New Economic Geography. Trollhätten, Sweden: Uddevalla 

Symposium 2000: 527-544. 

Power Daily. 2005. “Industry Veterans See Potential Repeat of Coal Boom and Bust Cycle”, 

25 February. 

Pratt, A. C. 1997. The Cultural Industries Sector, Its Definition and Character from Secondary 

Sources on Employment and Trade, Britain 1984-91. Research Papers on Environmental 

and Spatial Analysis NO.41, London School of Economics 

Reeder. R. J. 1998 “Retiree-Attraction Policies for Rural Development.” Food and Rural 

Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

Agriculture Information Bulletin NO. 741. 

Richmond Times-Dispatch, 2005. “National Geographic puts Appalachia on the Map,” by 

Katherine Calos. March 22. 

Riefler, Roger F. 1979. “Nineteenth-Century Urbanization Patterns in the United States.” The 

Journal of Economic History. Vol. 39, No. 4 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 50

Schaffer, William A. 1998. A Survey of Regional Economic Models. Atlanta, GA: Georgia 

Institute of Technology: 48-83. 

http://www.rri.wvu.edu/WebBook/Schaffer/chap03.html#Heading25 

Smirnov, Oleg, and Alena Smirnova. 2000. An Assessment of the Economic Base of 

Distressed and Near-Distressed Counties in Appalachia: A Report to the Appalachian 

Regional Commission. Washington, DC: Appalachia Regional Commission. 

United Nations Environment Program. 2002. “International Year of Ecotourism 2002” 

Walker M., and Jourdan P. 2003. “Resource-based Sustainable Development: An Alternative 

Approach to Industrialisation in South Africa” Minerals and Energy—Raw Materials 

Report, Routledge, 18(3) 

(E) Learning-Based Development

Artz, Georgianne: “Rural Brain Drain: Is it reality?” Choices, 4th Quarter 2003. 

Barkley, David, Mark Henry, and Haizhen Li, “Does Human Capital Affect Rural Economic 

Growth? Evidence from the South,” The Role of Education, Mississippi State, MS: Southern 

Rural Development Center, 2005. 

Bellandi, 1988, p. 145 

Bernat Jr, G. Andrew. “Clusters and Rural Labor markets,” Bureau of Economic Analysis, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Paper prepared for Southern Rural Labor Force Conference, 

October 1-2, 1998. 

Brusco, Sebastiano. “Global Systems and Local Systems,” International Seminar on Local 

Systems of Small Firms and Job Creation, Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation 

and Development, June 1995. 

Carnevale, Anthony, 1983 

Carter, Ann. “Knowhow trading as economic exchange,” Research Policy, 18 (1989), 

155:163. 

Clark, Peggy and Steven L. Dawson, Jobs and the Urban Poor: Privately Initiated Sectoral 

Programs, Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. 1995. 

Cooke, Phil and Nick Clifton, “Social Capital and Small and Medium Enterprise Performance 

in the United Kingdom,” paper for workshop on Entrepreneurship in the Modern SpaceEconomy, Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, June 2002. 

Coulombe, Serge, Jean-Francois Tremblay, and Sylvie Marchand, “International Adult 

Literacy Survey: Literacy scores, human capital and growth across fourteen OECD 

countries.” (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2004). 

Gibbs, Robert, Lorion Kusmin, and John Cromartrie, “Low-Skill Jobs: A Shrinking Share of 

the Rural Economy,” Amber Waves 2 (Issue 5, 2003), Economic Research Service. 

Green, Gary Paul. “Workforce Development Networks in Rural Areas of the United States,” 

SRDC Policy Series. September 2003. 

Haaga, John: Educational Attainment in Appalachia, (Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional 

Commission, May 2004). 

Krugman, Paul Geography and Trade, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992). 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.2 Theories of Growth Paths

 Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 51

Marshall, Alfred. Principles of Economics. Eighth Edition. London: Macmillan, 1936). 

Maskell, Peter. “Towards a learning-based theory of the cluster,” paper presented at the World 

Conference on Economic Geography, Singapore, December 2000. 

Maskell, Peter “Knowledge creation and diffusion in geographic clusters,” International 

Journal of Innovation Management 5 (2, 2001): 213-237 

McGranahan, David: “Education and Rural Economic Development in the United States,” in J 

Norman Reid and Sara Mazie (Eds) Conceptual Frameworks for Understanding Rural 

Development, A report funded by the Aspen Institute, USDA, University of Guelph, and the 

Arkleton Trust, 1994 

Morgan, Kevin, “The Learning Region: Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal,” 

Regional Studies 31.5 (19967) 491:503. 

OECD, Innovative Clusters: Drivers of Innovation Systems, Paris: Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development, 2001. 

Rosenfeld, Stuart, Ed Bergman, and Sarah Rubin, After the Factories: Changing Employment 

Patterns in the Rural South, (Research Triangle Park, NC: Southern Growth Policies Board, 

December 1986). 

Rosenfeld, Stuart. Shotgun Weddings, Open Marriages, and Quickie Divorces: An Analysis of 

Education and Local Development in the United States. (Paris, France: Organization for 

Economic Cooperation and Development, 1980). 

Rosenfeld, Stuart. “Does cooperation enhance competitiveness? Assessing the impacts of 

inter-firm collaboration,” Research Policy 25(1996) 247:263 

Ross, Peggy and Stuart Rosenfeld, “Human Resource Policies and Economic Development,” 

in Rural Economic Development in The 1980’s: Prospects for the Future, (Washington, 

DC: US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Research Report Number 69, 1988. 

Rupasingha, Anil, Thomas W. Ilvento, and David Freshwater, “Demand for Skills Training in 

the Rural South,” Staff Paper 00-02, TVA Rural Studies Program (Lexington: University of 

Kentucky Department of Agricultural Economics, February 2000). 

Saxenian, AnnaLee. Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and 

Route 128, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994). 

Schuller, Tom. “Three Steps towards a learning society,” Studies in the Education of Adults

30 (Ni. 1 April, 1998), 11:20. 

Schultz, Theodor: Investing in People: The Economics of Population Quality, (Berkeley: 

University of California Press, 1981), p. 60. 

Teixeira, Ruy: “Rural and Urban Manufacturing Workers: Similar Problems, Similar 

Challenges,” ERS Agricultural Information Bulletin 736-02, January 1998. 

Thurow, Lester> Zero Sum Society: Distribution and the Possibilities for Economic Change, 

(New York: Basic Books, 1980), p. 56 

Von Hippel, Eric “Cooperation between rivals: Informal know-how trading,” Research Policy, 

16 (1987), 291:302. 

 
Vol.1 Project Background and Summary Ch.3 Spatial Dimension of Growth 

Sources of Growth in Non-Metro Appalachia page 52

3 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH 

AND PRACTICE

The background material presented in this volume represents just one small part of the 

Sources of Growth Study. However, the background research played an important 

role in defining the other parts of the study: 

The discussion of theory and research (in chapter 2 of this volume) identifies five key 

categories of economic development growth paths – asset-based development, 

learning-based development, manufacturing agglomeration growth, dispersed supply 

chain growth and trade center growth. Those categories guided the selection of case 

studies discussed in the separate Volume 2 document. The case studies provide 

examples of the complexities involved in pursuing each of the five major classes of 

growth path strategies. They also show examples of the types of institutional and 

policy actions required for those strategies, and factors affecting their success. 

The discussion of prior empirical research (in chapter 3 of this volume) also raises 

issues regarding the role of spatial location and access in affecting economic growth 

opportunities. This helped define the series of four research studies summarized in the 

separate Volume 3 document. Those statistical studies represent a step in a continuing 

process of research to further our understanding of the roles of spatial proximity to 

industry clusters and trade centers, the roles of transportation access improvements, 

and the impact of market scale on economic growth opportunities. 

Finally, the classification of major growth paths (in this volume), together with the 

case studies and additional statistical studies (discussed in separate volumes) together 

serve to define a series of tools and measures that can be of practical use for economic 

developers seeking to better target economic growth and business attraction 

opportunities.