Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Sanayi Kümelerinin Evriminde Kurumların ve Politik Ağların Rolü

Year 2021, Volume: 20 Issue: 1, 1 - 21, 31.01.2021
https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.823982

Abstract

Bu çalışma Uşak tekstil geri dönüşüm kümesi örneğinden hareketle evrimsel ekonomik coğrafya perspektifiyle bölgesel ve endüstriyel çatallanmayı ve dönüşümü incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yalnızca teknolojik ve sektörel benzerliği göz önüne alan ilişkili bağlantısallığa dayalı evrimsel çözümlemeyi eleştirmektedir. Sanayi kümelerini birer sosyo-kültürel sistem olarak kabul eden çalışma, evrime kaynaklık eden oto katalitik etkilerin ve süreçlerin yine kümelerin kendine içkin kurumlarla bağlantılı olduğunu savunmakta ve ileri sürmektedir. Bu bağlamda Uşak’ta endüstriyel evrimi tarihsel bir perspektifle ele alan çalışma, güncel kurumsal altyapının ve yeni politik network bağlantılarının bölgesel ekonomik evrim sürecinde nasıl yeni gelişme patikaları yarattığını ortaya koymaya çalışmaktadır. Çalışma, endüstriyel kümelerin evrimiyle ilgili literatüre sosyo-kültürel ve politik ağların rolünden kaynaklanan vurguyla katkı sunmaktadır. Kurumsal etkileri sosyo-politik ilişkilerin somutlaşmış bir sonucu olarak ele alan çalışma, değişik mekânsal ölçeklerden kaynaklanan bölgesel politik ağların ve ilişkilerin güncel endüstriyel çatallanmadaki rolü ve önemine değinmektedir

References

  • Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (1994). Living in the global. In A. Amin and N. Thrift (Ed), Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe, 1-22: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (1999). Institutional issues for the European regions: From markets and plans to socioeconomics and powers of association. In T.J. Barnes and M.S. Gertler (Ed), Industrial Geography: Regions, Regulation and Institutions, 292-314: London: Routledge.
  • Alberti, F. (1998). The Concept of Industrial District: main contributions. Paper for International Network for SMEs. Amsterdam: INSME.
  • Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2004). SMEs networks as new engines of economic development and innovativenesss. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Asheim, B. T. (1997). Industrial districts as ‘learning regions’: a condition for prosperity. European Planning Studies, 4, 379-397.
  • Asheim B. & Coenen, L. (2005). Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters. Research Policy, 34, 1173-1190.
  • Becattini G. (1990). The Marshallian Industrial District as a Socio-Economic Notion. In G. Becattini, F. Pyke and W. Sengerberger (Ed), Industrial Districts and Inter-firm Cooperation in Italy. 37-51: Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies-ILO.
  • Boschma, R. (2009). Evolutionary economic geography and its implications for regional innovation policy. Paris: OECD.
  • Boschma, R. & Frenken, K., (2009). Some Notes on Institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography. Economic Geography, 85, 151-158.
  • Boschma, R. & Wenting, R. (2007). The spatial evolution of the British automobile industry: Does location is matter?, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 213-238.
  • Brenner, T. (2004). Local Industrial Clusters, Existence, Emergence and Evolution. London, Routledge.
  • Buğra, A. (1998). Class, culture, and state: an analysis of interest representation by two Turkish business associations. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 30, 521-539.
  • Deliktaş, Ö., Önder, Ö.A. & Karadağ, M. (2009). The spillover effects of public capital on the Turkish private manufacturing industries in the geographical regions. The Annals of Regional Science, 43, 365-378.
  • Eraydın, A. (2002). The role of central government policies and the new form of local governance in the emergence of industrial districts. In M. Taylor, M. and S. Leonard (Ed), Embedded Enterprise and Social Capital: International perspectives, 269-289: Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Eraydın, A. & Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Innovation, networking and the new industrial clusters: the characteristics of networks and local innovation capabilities in the Turkish industry clusters. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 17, 237-266.
  • Erendil, A. (1998). Using Critical Realist Approach in Geographical Research: An Attempt to Analyze the Transforming Nature of Production and Reproduction in Denizli. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Ersin, T. (2007). Uşak İli. Ankara: Kültür Matbaası.
  • Frenken, K. & Boschma, R. (2007). A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process. Journal of Economic Geography, 7, 635–649.
  • Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of Creative Class. NewYork: Basic Books.
  • Gordon, I.R. & McCann, P. (2000). Industrial clusters: Complexes, agglomeration and/or social networks?. Urban Studies, 37, 513–532.
  • Gordon, I.R. & McCann, P. (2005). Innovation, Agglomeration and Regional Development. Journal of Economic Geography, 5, 523-543.
  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
  • Hodgson, G. (1993). Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back into Economics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Jessop, B. (2002). Globalization and the National State. In S. Aaronwitz and P. Bratsis (Ed), Rethinking the State: Miliband, Poulantzas and State Theory, 185-220: Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Kaygalak, İ. (2011). Türkiye’de Sanayi Kümelenmesi: Uşak Örneği, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ege Üniversitesi S.B.E., İzmir.
  • Keyder, Ç. (1996). Ulusal Kalkınmacılığın İflası. Ankara: Metis Yayınları.
  • De Landa, M. (2000). A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  • Martin, R. (2000). Institutional Approaches in Economic Geography. In E. Sheppard and T. J. Barnes (Ed) A Companion to Economic Geography, 77-94: London: Blackwell.
  • Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (2006). Path Dependence and Regional Economic Evolution. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, Utrecth, Utrecht University.
  • Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (2007). Complexity thinking and evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography. 7, 573-601.
  • Meyer, D. (2003). Karl Marx-an evolutionary social scientist?. In J.G. Backhaus (Ed), Evolutionary Economic Thought European Contributions and Concepts, 40-63: London: Edward Elgar.
  • Morgan, K. (1997). The Learning Region: Institution and Regional Renewal. Regional Studies, 31, 491-503.
  • Neffke, F., Henning, M., & Boschma, R. (2009). How do regions diversify over time? Industry relatedness and the development of new growth paths in regions. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, Utrecht, Utrecht University.
  • Öz, Ö. (2004). Clusters and Competitive Advantage: The Turkish Experience. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Özelçi, T. (2002). Institutional aspects of regional/local economic development. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Peck, J. (2005). Economic Sociologies in Space. Economic Geography, 81, 129-175.
  • Piorre, M. & Sabel, C. F. (1984). The second industrial divide. New York: Basic Books.
  • Scott, A. J. (2006). Geography and Economy:Three Lectures. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Storper, M. (1997). The Regional World. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Storper, M. (1999). The resurgence of regional economics. In T. J. Barnes and M. S. Gertler (Ed), The New Industrial Geography, 23-53: New York: Routledge.
  • Tümer, H. (1971). Uşak Tarihi. Uşak: Uşak Halk Eğitimine Yardım Derneği Yayınları.

The Role of Institutions and Politic Networks in Evolution of Industrial Clusters

Year 2021, Volume: 20 Issue: 1, 1 - 21, 31.01.2021
https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.823982

Abstract

Bu çalışma Uşak tekstil geri dönüşüm kümesi örneğinden hareketle evrimsel ekonomik coğrafya perspektifiyle bölgesel ve endüstriyel çatallanmayı ve dönüşümü incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yalnızca teknolojik ve sektörel benzerliği göz önüne alan ilişkili bağlantısallığa dayalı evrimsel çözümlemeyi eleştirmektedir. Sanayi kümelerini birer sosyo-kültürel sistem olarak kabul eden çalışma, evrime kaynaklık eden oto katalitik etkilerin ve süreçlerin yine kümelerin kendine içkin kurumlarla bağlantılı olduğunu savunmakta ve ileri sürmektedir. Bu bağlamda Uşak’ta endüstriyel evrimi tarihsel bir perspektifle ele alan çalışma, güncel kurumsal altyapının ve yeni politik network bağlantılarının bölgesel ekonomik evrim sürecinde nasıl yeni gelişme patikaları yarattığını ortaya koymaya çalışmaktadır. Çalışma, endüstriyel kümelerin evrimiyle ilgili literatüre sosyo-kültürel ve politik ağların rolünden kaynaklanan vurguyla katkı sunmaktadır. Kurumsal etkileri sosyo-politik ilişkilerin somutlaşmış bir sonucu olarak ele alan çalışma, değişik mekânsal ölçeklerden kaynaklanan bölgesel politik ağların ve ilişkilerin güncel endüstriyel çatallanmadaki rolü ve önemine değinmektedir.

References

  • Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (1994). Living in the global. In A. Amin and N. Thrift (Ed), Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe, 1-22: Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (1999). Institutional issues for the European regions: From markets and plans to socioeconomics and powers of association. In T.J. Barnes and M.S. Gertler (Ed), Industrial Geography: Regions, Regulation and Institutions, 292-314: London: Routledge.
  • Alberti, F. (1998). The Concept of Industrial District: main contributions. Paper for International Network for SMEs. Amsterdam: INSME.
  • Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2004). SMEs networks as new engines of economic development and innovativenesss. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Asheim, B. T. (1997). Industrial districts as ‘learning regions’: a condition for prosperity. European Planning Studies, 4, 379-397.
  • Asheim B. & Coenen, L. (2005). Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters. Research Policy, 34, 1173-1190.
  • Becattini G. (1990). The Marshallian Industrial District as a Socio-Economic Notion. In G. Becattini, F. Pyke and W. Sengerberger (Ed), Industrial Districts and Inter-firm Cooperation in Italy. 37-51: Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies-ILO.
  • Boschma, R. (2009). Evolutionary economic geography and its implications for regional innovation policy. Paris: OECD.
  • Boschma, R. & Frenken, K., (2009). Some Notes on Institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography. Economic Geography, 85, 151-158.
  • Boschma, R. & Wenting, R. (2007). The spatial evolution of the British automobile industry: Does location is matter?, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 213-238.
  • Brenner, T. (2004). Local Industrial Clusters, Existence, Emergence and Evolution. London, Routledge.
  • Buğra, A. (1998). Class, culture, and state: an analysis of interest representation by two Turkish business associations. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 30, 521-539.
  • Deliktaş, Ö., Önder, Ö.A. & Karadağ, M. (2009). The spillover effects of public capital on the Turkish private manufacturing industries in the geographical regions. The Annals of Regional Science, 43, 365-378.
  • Eraydın, A. (2002). The role of central government policies and the new form of local governance in the emergence of industrial districts. In M. Taylor, M. and S. Leonard (Ed), Embedded Enterprise and Social Capital: International perspectives, 269-289: Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Eraydın, A. & Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Innovation, networking and the new industrial clusters: the characteristics of networks and local innovation capabilities in the Turkish industry clusters. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 17, 237-266.
  • Erendil, A. (1998). Using Critical Realist Approach in Geographical Research: An Attempt to Analyze the Transforming Nature of Production and Reproduction in Denizli. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Ersin, T. (2007). Uşak İli. Ankara: Kültür Matbaası.
  • Frenken, K. & Boschma, R. (2007). A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process. Journal of Economic Geography, 7, 635–649.
  • Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of Creative Class. NewYork: Basic Books.
  • Gordon, I.R. & McCann, P. (2000). Industrial clusters: Complexes, agglomeration and/or social networks?. Urban Studies, 37, 513–532.
  • Gordon, I.R. & McCann, P. (2005). Innovation, Agglomeration and Regional Development. Journal of Economic Geography, 5, 523-543.
  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
  • Hodgson, G. (1993). Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back into Economics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Jessop, B. (2002). Globalization and the National State. In S. Aaronwitz and P. Bratsis (Ed), Rethinking the State: Miliband, Poulantzas and State Theory, 185-220: Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Kaygalak, İ. (2011). Türkiye’de Sanayi Kümelenmesi: Uşak Örneği, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ege Üniversitesi S.B.E., İzmir.
  • Keyder, Ç. (1996). Ulusal Kalkınmacılığın İflası. Ankara: Metis Yayınları.
  • De Landa, M. (2000). A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  • Martin, R. (2000). Institutional Approaches in Economic Geography. In E. Sheppard and T. J. Barnes (Ed) A Companion to Economic Geography, 77-94: London: Blackwell.
  • Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (2006). Path Dependence and Regional Economic Evolution. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, Utrecth, Utrecht University.
  • Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (2007). Complexity thinking and evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography. 7, 573-601.
  • Meyer, D. (2003). Karl Marx-an evolutionary social scientist?. In J.G. Backhaus (Ed), Evolutionary Economic Thought European Contributions and Concepts, 40-63: London: Edward Elgar.
  • Morgan, K. (1997). The Learning Region: Institution and Regional Renewal. Regional Studies, 31, 491-503.
  • Neffke, F., Henning, M., & Boschma, R. (2009). How do regions diversify over time? Industry relatedness and the development of new growth paths in regions. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography, Utrecht, Utrecht University.
  • Öz, Ö. (2004). Clusters and Competitive Advantage: The Turkish Experience. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Özelçi, T. (2002). Institutional aspects of regional/local economic development. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. ODTÜ, Ankara.
  • Peck, J. (2005). Economic Sociologies in Space. Economic Geography, 81, 129-175.
  • Piorre, M. & Sabel, C. F. (1984). The second industrial divide. New York: Basic Books.
  • Scott, A. J. (2006). Geography and Economy:Three Lectures. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Storper, M. (1997). The Regional World. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Storper, M. (1999). The resurgence of regional economics. In T. J. Barnes and M. S. Gertler (Ed), The New Industrial Geography, 23-53: New York: Routledge.
  • Tümer, H. (1971). Uşak Tarihi. Uşak: Uşak Halk Eğitimine Yardım Derneği Yayınları.
There are 41 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Human Geography
Journal Section Geography
Authors

İrfan Kaygalak 0000-0003-3051-6414

Publication Date January 31, 2021
Submission Date November 10, 2020
Acceptance Date January 11, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 20 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Kaygalak, İ. (2021). The Role of Institutions and Politic Networks in Evolution of Industrial Clusters. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 20(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.823982