Table 3
|
Cluster 1 |
Cluster 2 |
Cluster 3 |
Cluster 4 |
TOTAL | |
|
Food industries |
3 |
2 |
5 | ||
|
Textiles |
4 |
8 |
12 | ||
|
Leather and Footwear |
9 |
6 |
15 | ||
|
Wood and Cork |
3 |
3 | |||
|
Paper |
2 |
4 |
6 | ||
|
Edition and Printing |
1 |
1 |
2 | ||
|
Chemicals |
6 |
4 |
10 | ||
|
Rubber and Plastics |
3 |
1 |
1 |
5 | |
|
Non Metallic Minerals |
1 |
2 |
1 |
4 | |
|
Basic Metallurgy industries |
6 |
6 | |||
|
Metal Products |
1 |
1 | |||
|
Machinery and Equipment |
1 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
7 |
|
Machinery and Electronic Appliances |
1 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
12 |
|
Medical and Precision Appliances |
1 |
1 | |||
|
Other Transport Material |
1 |
1 | |||
|
Furniture and other industries |
3 |
13 |
16 | ||
|
TOTAL |
2 |
39 |
60 |
5 |
106 |
Finally, Table 3 presents the distribution of firms by sectors of activity and clusters.
While the minority innovative clusters (1 and 4) concentrates in Machinery sectors,
Rubber and Plastics and Non Metallic Minerals, the majority clusters (2 and 3) has a
diversified productive structure which show that these investment profiles are not
determined by sector characteristics but by a cognitive framework about
competitiveness that crosses all sectors.
3. CONCLUSION
How actively are SME of Norte-Litoral innovating under the competitive pressure of a
globalising economy? From our research we have materialised the following
conclusions:
• A slow move of the small firm population from a ‘production centred’ concept of
competitiveness towards a ‘client centred’ one;
• A minority of firms (those included in clusters 1 and 4 of this study summed up with
a group of 20 supported by SME-CI ‘measure for technological competence
acquisition’) is engaged in a process of building competitive advantages upon
dynamic factors, including R&D activities within more radical innovating networks;