Journal of the Korean Geographical Society (대한지리학회지)

The Korean Geographical Society (대한지리학회)
권호 표지

Concept and Range of Industrial Cluster

산업클러스터의 개념과 범위

  • Kwon, Ohyeok (Division of Economics, Pukyong National University)
  • Received : 2017.02.03
  • Accepted : 2017.02.27
  • Published : 2017.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper points out the semantic unclearness of the jargon "cluster" and suggests the substitution of "industrial cluster" for "cluster". Industrial cluster is the intersection of industrial agglomeration and cluster phenomenon while the actual concept of cluster includes not only industry cluster but also political administration cluster, science research cluster, art cluster, religion cluster, education cluster, etc. Partially reconstructing the concept and significance of industry cluster, industrial cluster is a geographic agglomeration of interconnected productional businesses in a particular industry, forming close industrial networks. The advantage of the agglomeration includes reducing the transaction cost between the businesses, promoting technological innovation and dispersion, facilitating the utilization of the professional workforce, sharing and connecting the external customer. Moreover, this paper discusses the range of the industrial cluster and its distinctness from the other similar concepts. There is a need to discriminate it from the other related jargons and to clarify their relationship. In particular, there is a task to eradicate the mixed usage of industrial cluster with the jargons related to space for learning and innovation.

이 논문은 산업클러스터의 개념과 요건을 밝히고 이러한 요건에 비추어 산업클러스터의 범위를 구체화 하는데 목적을 두고 있다. 나아가 산업클러스터와 관련된 용어들을 전반적으로 비교 검토하여 그것들의 의미를 명확히 하고 그 차이를 규명하려 한다. 필자는 M. Porter의 클러스터 개념이 전문화된 산업집적지를 설명하는 가장 간명하고 적실한 개념으로서, 산업지구와 신산업지구, 유연적 생산집적지를 포괄하는 광의적 개념이라고 파악한다. 하지만 그것이 집적과 동일한 의미나 범주를 갖는다고는 보지 않는바, 클러스터 현상은 집적 중에서 산업집적에 해당하며 산업집적 중에서 동종 혹은 연관 산업의 집적과 연계를 의미하는 것이다. 한편으로 필자는 이 특징적인 산업집적 현상에 대해 클러스터 보다는 산업클러스터라는 용어가 적실하다고 판단한다. 클러스터라는 용어는 그 개념에 비해 지나치게 포괄적이어서 오해와 오용의 소지가 적지 않은 것이다. 클러스터는 산업클러스터 이외에 정치 행정클러스터, 예술클러스터, 과학연구클러스터 등을 포함할 수 있다. 더하여 본 연구는 산업클러스터와 비산업클러스터 사이에 준산업클러스터 개념을 도입하여 산업클러스터의 범주를 보다 구체화하려 하였으며 이러한 관점에서 다양한 산업클러스터 사례들을 분석하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 권오혁, 2004, "광역적 산업클러스터 구축을 위한 제도적 지원체계 연구," 한국경제지리학회지, 7(2), 315-328.
  2. 김선배, 2004, "도시경제의 혁신방향과 과제," 도시문제, 2004년 1월호, 24-39.
  3. 김영수, 2012, "우리나라 클러스터정책의 특징과 지역 산업생태계론으로의 진화 필요성," 지역연구, 28 (4), 23-43.
  4. 남기범, 2004, "클러스터 정책실패의 교훈," 한국경제지리학회지, 7(3), 407-432.
  5. 남기범, 2016, "선택과 집중의 종언: 포스트클러스터 지역산업정책의 논거와 방향," 19(4), 764-781. https://doi.org/10.23841/egsk.2016.19.4.764
  6. 박삼옥, 1994, "첨단산업발전과 신산업지구 형성: 이론과 사례," 대한지리학회지, 29(2), 117-136.
  7. 이종호, 2005, "실천적 지역발전 패러다임으로서 지역혁신체제론에 대한 소고," 지리과교육, 8, 115-127.
  8. 이종호.이철우, 2008, "집적과 클러스터: 개념과 유형 그리고 관련 이론에 대한 비판적 검토," 한국경제지리학회지, 11(3), 302-318.
  9. 이철우, 2007, "참여정부 지역혁신 및 혁신클러스터 정책추진의 평가와 과제," 한국경제지리학회지, 10(4), 377-393.
  10. 주성재, 2013, "산업클러스터, 창조경제를 위한 정책수단으로의 가능성," 한국경제지리학회지, 16(4), 551-566.
  11. Boyer R. (ed.), 1988, Technical Change and the Theory of 'Regulation', in Dosi G., Freeman C., Nelson R., Silverberg G., Soete L(eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London, Pinter.
  12. Cooke, P., 1992, Regional Innovation System: competitive regulation in the new Europe, Geoforum, 23(3), 365-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7185(92)90048-9
  13. Cooke, P., 2001, Regional Innovation System, Clusters, and the Knowledge Economy, Industrial Corporate Change, 10(4), 945-974. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.945
  14. Cumbers, A. & MacKinnon, D., 2003, Introduction: cluster in urban and regional development, in Cumbers, A. & MacKinnon, D. (eds.), Clusters in Urban and Regional Development, Routledge, London.
  15. Etzkowitz, H., 2012, Triple helix clusters: boundary permeability at university-industry-government interfaces as a regional innovation strategy, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30(5), 766-779. https://doi.org/10.1068/c1182
  16. European Commission, 2012, Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS 3), European Union.
  17. European Commission, 2013, The role of Clusters in Smart Specialisation Strategies, European Union.
  18. European Commission, 2016, Smart Guide to Cluster Policy, European Union.
  19. Foray, D., 2015, Smart Specialisation: Opportunities and Challenges for Regional Innovation Policy, Routledge, New York.
  20. Goodman E., 1989, Introduction: the Political Economy of the Small Firm in Italy, in Goodman E. Bamford (eds.), Small Firms and Industrial Districts in Italy, Routledge, UK.
  21. Harrison B., 1992, Industrial Districts: Old Wine in New Bottles?, Regional Studies. 26(5), 107-121.
  22. Jessop B., 1992, Post-Fordism and Flexible Specialisation, in Ernste H., Meier V. (eds.), Regional Development and Contemporary Industrial Response: Extending Flexible Specialisation, London, Belhaven Press.
  23. Jessop, B., 1988, Regulation Theory, Post-Fordism and the State, Capital and Class 34, 146-168.
  24. Krugman, P., 1991, Geography and Trade, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  25. Lovering, J., 1990, Fordism's Unknown Successor: a Comment on Scott's Theory of Flexible Accumulation and the Re-emergence of Regional Economies, IJURR, 14(1), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1990.tb00825.x
  26. Malecki E. J., 1991, Technology and Economic Development: The Dynamic of Local, Regional, and National Change, Longman.
  27. Marshall, A., 1920, Principles of Economics (8th edn.), Macmillan, London.
  28. Martin, R. and Sunley, P., 2003, Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?, Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.5
  29. Martinelli, F. & E. Schoenberger, 1991, Oligopoly is alive and well: Notes for a Broader Discussion of Flexible Accumulation, G. Benko and M. Dunford(eds.), Industrial Change and Regional Development: The Transformation of New Industrial Spaces, Belhaven Press, 122-126.
  30. McCann, P., 2001, Urban and Regional Economics, Oxford University Press, UK.
  31. Moulaert, F. & Sekia, F., 2003, Territorial innovation models: a critic survey, Regional Studies, 37(3), 289-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340032000065442
  32. Newlands, D., 2003, Competition and Cooperation, in Industrial Cluster: the implication for Public Policy, European Planning Studies, 11(5), 521-532. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310303649
  33. Park, S. O. & A Markusen, A., Generalizing New Industrial Districts: A Theoretical Agenda and an Application from a Non-Western Economy, Environment and Planning A, 27(1), 81-104. https://doi.org/10.1068/a270081
  34. Piore M. J. & Sabel C. F., 1984, The Second Industrial Divide: Possibilities for Prosperity, Basic Books, New York.
  35. Porter, M., 1990, The Competitive Advantage of Nations, The Free Press, New York.
  36. Porter, M., 1998, Cluster and the New Economics of Competition, Harvard Business Review, November-December, 77-90.
  37. Porter, M., 1998, On Competition, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.
  38. Scott, A. J., 1988, Flexible Production System and Regional Development: the Rise of new Industrial Space in North America and Western Europe, IJURR, 14, 171-185.
  39. Scott, A. J., 1991, Flexible Production System: Analytical Tasks and Theoretical Horizons - A Reply to Lovering, IJURR, 15(1), 130-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1991.tb00691.x
  40. Sforzi F., 1989, The geography of industrial districts in Italy, in Goodman E. Bamford (eds.), Small Firms and Industrial Districts in Italy, Routledge, UK.
  41. Storper M., 1992, The limit to globalization: technology district and international trade, Economic Geography, 68(1), 60-93. https://doi.org/10.2307/144041
  42. Storper M., 1993, Regional world of production: learning and innovation in the technology district of France, Italy and the U.S.A., Regional Studies, 27 (5), 433-455. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409312331347675
  43. Storper, M. & Harrison, B., 1991, Flexibility, hierarchy and regional development: The changing structure of industrial production systems and their forms of governance in the 1990s, Research Policy, 20(5), 407-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90066-Y
  44. Swann, G. M. P., 2002, The implication of clusters: the case of the ship-building industry in the Nothern Netherlands, TESG, 92(4), 449-463.
  45. Vilanova, M. R. & Leydesdorff, 2001, Why Catalonia cannot be considered as regional innovation system, Ecientometrics, 50(2), 215-240. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010517505793