The Cluster as Market Organization

    Research output: Working paperResearch

    Abstract

    The many competing schools of thought concerning themselves with industrial clusters have atleast one thing in common: they all agree that clusters are real life phenomena characterized bythe co-localization of separate economic entities, which are in some sense related, but not joinedtogether by any common ownership or management. So hierarchies they are certainly not.Yet, it is usually taken for granted that clusters, almost regardless of how they are defined, allexpatriate the 'swollen middle' of various hybrid 'forms of long-term contracting, reciprocaltrading, regulation, franchising and the like' residing somewhere between hierarchies andmarkets. This fundamental (but usually implicit) assumption would, perhaps, be justified ifmarkets could be reduced to events of exchange of property rights, between large numbers ofprice-taking anonymous buyers and sellers supplied with perfect information as they arecommonly conceived in mainstream economics. One of the original attractions of Neoclassicalprice theory was precisely that it promised a way of analysing the economy in general andmarket exchange in particular independently of specific institutional settings.However, introducing transaction costs as more than fees paid to intermediaries leads inevitablyto comparative institutional analysis and, not to be forgotten, to the perception of markets asinstitutions with specific characteristics of their own. Some sets of characteristics are so commonthat they represent a specific market organization or market form. The cluster is one suchspecific market organization that is structured along territorial lines because this enables thebuilding of a set of institutions that are helpful in conducting certain kinds of economicactivities.
    The many competing schools of thought concerning themselves with industrial clusters have atleast one thing in common: they all agree that clusters are real life phenomena characterized bythe co-localization of separate economic entities, which are in some sense related, but not joinedtogether by any common ownership or management. So hierarchies they are certainly not.Yet, it is usually taken for granted that clusters, almost regardless of how they are defined, allexpatriate the 'swollen middle' of various hybrid 'forms of long-term contracting, reciprocaltrading, regulation, franchising and the like' residing somewhere between hierarchies andmarkets. This fundamental (but usually implicit) assumption would, perhaps, be justified ifmarkets could be reduced to events of exchange of property rights, between large numbers ofprice-taking anonymous buyers and sellers supplied with perfect information as they arecommonly conceived in mainstream economics. One of the original attractions of Neoclassicalprice theory was precisely that it promised a way of analysing the economy in general andmarket exchange in particular independently of specific institutional settings.However, introducing transaction costs as more than fees paid to intermediaries leads inevitablyto comparative institutional analysis and, not to be forgotten, to the perception of markets asinstitutions with specific characteristics of their own. Some sets of characteristics are so commonthat they represent a specific market organization or market form. The cluster is one suchspecific market organization that is structured along territorial lines because this enables thebuilding of a set of institutions that are helpful in conducting certain kinds of economicactivities.
    LanguageEnglish
    Place of PublicationKøbenhavn
    Number of pages29
    StatePublished - 2003

    Keywords

      Cite this

      @techreport{e793d2c0c02111db9769000ea68e967b,
      title = "The Cluster as Market Organization",
      abstract = "The many competing schools of thought concerning themselves with industrial clusters have atleast one thing in common: they all agree that clusters are real life phenomena characterized bythe co-localization of separate economic entities, which are in some sense related, but not joinedtogether by any common ownership or management. So hierarchies they are certainly not.Yet, it is usually taken for granted that clusters, almost regardless of how they are defined, allexpatriate the 'swollen middle' of various hybrid 'forms of long-term contracting, reciprocaltrading, regulation, franchising and the like' residing somewhere between hierarchies andmarkets. This fundamental (but usually implicit) assumption would, perhaps, be justified ifmarkets could be reduced to events of exchange of property rights, between large numbers ofprice-taking anonymous buyers and sellers supplied with perfect information as they arecommonly conceived in mainstream economics. One of the original attractions of Neoclassicalprice theory was precisely that it promised a way of analysing the economy in general andmarket exchange in particular independently of specific institutional settings.However, introducing transaction costs as more than fees paid to intermediaries leads inevitablyto comparative institutional analysis and, not to be forgotten, to the perception of markets asinstitutions with specific characteristics of their own. Some sets of characteristics are so commonthat they represent a specific market organization or market form. The cluster is one suchspecific market organization that is structured along territorial lines because this enables thebuilding of a set of institutions that are helpful in conducting certain kinds of economicactivities.",
      keywords = "Industrielle klynger, Transaktionsomkostninger, Industrial organization, Industri{\o}konomi, videnoverf{\o}rsel",
      author = "Peter Maskell and Mark Lorenzen",
      year = "2003",
      language = "English",
      type = "WorkingPaper",

      }

      The Cluster as Market Organization. / Maskell, Peter; Lorenzen, Mark.

      København, 2003.

      Research output: Working paperResearch

      TY - UNPB

      T1 - The Cluster as Market Organization

      AU - Maskell,Peter

      AU - Lorenzen,Mark

      PY - 2003

      Y1 - 2003

      N2 - The many competing schools of thought concerning themselves with industrial clusters have atleast one thing in common: they all agree that clusters are real life phenomena characterized bythe co-localization of separate economic entities, which are in some sense related, but not joinedtogether by any common ownership or management. So hierarchies they are certainly not.Yet, it is usually taken for granted that clusters, almost regardless of how they are defined, allexpatriate the 'swollen middle' of various hybrid 'forms of long-term contracting, reciprocaltrading, regulation, franchising and the like' residing somewhere between hierarchies andmarkets. This fundamental (but usually implicit) assumption would, perhaps, be justified ifmarkets could be reduced to events of exchange of property rights, between large numbers ofprice-taking anonymous buyers and sellers supplied with perfect information as they arecommonly conceived in mainstream economics. One of the original attractions of Neoclassicalprice theory was precisely that it promised a way of analysing the economy in general andmarket exchange in particular independently of specific institutional settings.However, introducing transaction costs as more than fees paid to intermediaries leads inevitablyto comparative institutional analysis and, not to be forgotten, to the perception of markets asinstitutions with specific characteristics of their own. Some sets of characteristics are so commonthat they represent a specific market organization or market form. The cluster is one suchspecific market organization that is structured along territorial lines because this enables thebuilding of a set of institutions that are helpful in conducting certain kinds of economicactivities.

      AB - The many competing schools of thought concerning themselves with industrial clusters have atleast one thing in common: they all agree that clusters are real life phenomena characterized bythe co-localization of separate economic entities, which are in some sense related, but not joinedtogether by any common ownership or management. So hierarchies they are certainly not.Yet, it is usually taken for granted that clusters, almost regardless of how they are defined, allexpatriate the 'swollen middle' of various hybrid 'forms of long-term contracting, reciprocaltrading, regulation, franchising and the like' residing somewhere between hierarchies andmarkets. This fundamental (but usually implicit) assumption would, perhaps, be justified ifmarkets could be reduced to events of exchange of property rights, between large numbers ofprice-taking anonymous buyers and sellers supplied with perfect information as they arecommonly conceived in mainstream economics. One of the original attractions of Neoclassicalprice theory was precisely that it promised a way of analysing the economy in general andmarket exchange in particular independently of specific institutional settings.However, introducing transaction costs as more than fees paid to intermediaries leads inevitablyto comparative institutional analysis and, not to be forgotten, to the perception of markets asinstitutions with specific characteristics of their own. Some sets of characteristics are so commonthat they represent a specific market organization or market form. The cluster is one suchspecific market organization that is structured along territorial lines because this enables thebuilding of a set of institutions that are helpful in conducting certain kinds of economicactivities.

      KW - Industrielle klynger

      KW - Transaktionsomkostninger

      KW - Industrial organization

      KW - Industriøkonomi

      KW - videnoverførsel

      M3 - Working paper

      BT - The Cluster as Market Organization

      CY - København

      ER -