Sticky Places in Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial Districts

TLDR

Advances in transportation and information technology erode geographic distance, making it harder for cities and regions to anchor income‑generating activities. This paper investigates the conditions that allow some places to remain sticky in slippery space, rejecting the new industrial district as the dominant paradigm. The authors identify three additional industrial district types—hub‑and‑spoke, satellite platform, and state‑anchored—distinguished by firm configurations, orientations, and governance structures. The study reviews the strengths and weaknesses of each type, finding that hub‑and‑spoke and satellite platform variants are more prominent in the United States than the state‑anchored district.

Abstract

AbstractAs advances in transportation and information obliterate distance, cities and regions face a tougher time anchoring income-generating activities. In probing the conditions under which some manage to remain “sticky” places in “slippery” space, this paper rejects the “new industrial district,” in either its Marshallian or more recent Italianate form, as the dominant paradigmatic solution. I identify three additional types of industrial districts, with quite disparate firm configurations, internal versus external orientations, and governance structures: a hub-and-spoke industrial district, revolving around one or more dominant, externally oriented firms; a satellite platform, an assemblage of unconnected branch plants embedded in external organization links; and the state-anchored district, focused on one or more public-sector institutions. The strengths and weaknesses of each are reviewed. The hub-and-spoke and satellite platform variants are argued to be more prominent in the United States than the...