Industrial districts, innovation and I-district effect: territory or industrial specialization?

6. CONCLUSIONS

The I-district effect hypothesis establishes the existence of highly intense
innovation in the Marshallian industrial districts due to the presence of
external localization economies. However, industrial districts are
characterized by specific manufacturing specializations in such a way that
this effect could be due to these dominant specializations. The objective of
this research was to test whether the effect is explained by the conditions of
the territory or by the industrial specialization and to provide additional
evidence of the existence and causes of the highly intense innovation in
industrial districts (I-district effect). The most relevant conclusions are:

1. The I-district effect is related to the conditions of the territory
more than to the industrial specialization. The estimates for Spain of a fixed
effects model interacting territory and industry prove that industrial districts
maintain a higher innovative performance in most of the industries whereas
the industrial specialization behaves differently depending on the type of
local production system in which it is placed.

2. The territory is a key variable in explaining the processes of
innovation and should be considered a basic dimension in the design of
innovation and competitiveness policies. In most cases, innovation policies
centred on the sector might be not be appropriate because the heterogeneous
response of the different territorial profiles could cancel their effects. On the
other hand, horizontal policies focusing on the districts as completely
homogeneous entities could be misleading since different types of districts
produce different innovative responses.

3. Different responses suggest the provision of an adaptive
framework where each LPS, departing from its particular characteristics,
proposes its strategies or makes a differentiated use of the available
resources. An example of flexible strategy is the policy on “Innovative
Business Groups” (MITYC Order ITC/2691/2006 and Order ITC February
2007) issued by the Spanish Ministry of Industry on the basis of EU
recommendations (COM 2005-121; COM 2005-488) and which takes this
approach.

4. The research leaves open several questions and suggests that
further investigations should focus on three directions. First, the different
response of the several types of innovation to the territorial dimension, by
using other available indicators as designs, trademarks or new products.
Second, the relationship between territory, innovation, productivity and
competitiveness. Third, the impact of the different innovation policies
applied on the latter years on the innovative performance of the territory.

21

<<   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   >>

More intriguing information