A few recent papers have tried to systematically analyse the relationship between
industrial districts and business groups, also taking into account the characteristics of the
latter. BALLONI and IACOBUCCI (1997) analyse the characteristics of the main groups
in the industrial districts of the Marche region. BRIOSCHI et al. (2002) analyse the
presence and characteristics of business groups in the main districts of Emilia Romagna. As
in the abovementioned studies the latter also refer to specific areas, although they show an
explicit interest in analysing the characteristics of business groups, their role within the
district and their evolution over time. Specifically BRIOSCHI et al. (2002) hypothesize that
the presence and characteristics of business groups is influenced by their belonging to an
industrial district. For example, the acquisition of other firms within the district should be
facilitated by the familiarity of firms within the same district.
Although the latter contributions directly address the relationship between the presence
of business groups and the characteristics and evolution of industrial districts, they fail to
identify a general framework for the possible relationship between firms’ organization and
their belonging to a business cluster. Of course, the causal relationships can work in both
directions. On the one hand, the characteristics of the cluster and its internal structure can
have an impact on the presence and evolution of firms’ organization; on the other hand,
the evolution of firms’ organizational structures can modify the configuration of local
systems. Most studies on the evolution of Italian industrial districts have focused their
attention on the latter relationship, while little empirical and theoretical work has been
done on the former3.
The analysis of the relationships between firms’ organizational forms and business
clustering is closely associated with the identification of evolutionary patterns of business
clusters4. On this issue one can imagine the following scenario. In the initial phases the
systemic dimension is dominant and the firms in the system can be considered as
homogeneous units, none of which is able to influence the dynamics of the system as a
whole. In later phases the advantages of spatial agglomeration allow some of the firms to
develop and grow; eventually these firms become predominant and are able to influence
the evolution of the system.
With specific reference to industrial districts, we can imagine the following evolutionary
path. At the beginning agglomeration economies are mainly propelled by sharing and
matching mechanisms that allow firms to reduce production costs (DURANTON and
PUGA, 2003). The competitive advantage of firms belonging to the district favours their
rate of growth compared with firms outside the district. At later stages the learning