University of Hertfordshire

Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperpeer-review

Standard

Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography. / Nicholson, John; Brennan, Ross; Tsagdis, Dimitrios.

2013. Paper presented at 29th Annual IMP Conference, Atlanta, United States.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperpeer-review

Harvard

Nicholson, J, Brennan, R & Tsagdis, D 2013, 'Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography', Paper presented at 29th Annual IMP Conference, Atlanta, United States, 30/08/13 - 2/09/13.

APA

Nicholson, J., Brennan, R., & Tsagdis, D. (2013). Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography. Paper presented at 29th Annual IMP Conference, Atlanta, United States.

Vancouver

Nicholson J, Brennan R, Tsagdis D. Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography. 2013. Paper presented at 29th Annual IMP Conference, Atlanta, United States.

Author

Nicholson, John ; Brennan, Ross ; Tsagdis, Dimitrios. / Common Territory? Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography. Paper presented at 29th Annual IMP Conference, Atlanta, United States.22 p.

Bibtex

@conference{9c3641f86a504cfb882fa850f11a18ea,
title = "Common Territory?: Comparing the IMP Approach with Economic Geography",
abstract = "The IMP research tradition has always been open to the cross-fertilisation of ideas with other social science disciplines that study similar phenomena. Recent years have seen a growing interest among IMP researchers in phenomena such as regional strategic networks, spatial clusters and innovation and new business development in networks. IMP papers published on these topics are increasingly citing conceptual frameworks and empirical findings from the field of economic geography. This paper discusses the development of IMP thought and thedevelopment of thought in economic geography (particularly evolutionary economic geography), and compares their approaches to the analysis of regional phenomena. The goal is to identify key ideas from economic geography that have been under-exploited in IMP research, in order to suggest original new approaches available to IMP researchers interested in these fields. Anumber of such ideas are explored: proximity as a multi-dimensional and multi-faceted concept; the distinction between, and relative importance of, learning activities arising automatically from being embedded in a community (local or regional buzz) and learning activities arising from positive investment in channels of communication (pipelines); the concept of relational capitaldeveloped by economic geographers; and, conceptualisations of externalities commonly used in the study of spatial clusters",
author = "John Nicholson and Ross Brennan and Dimitrios Tsagdis",
year = "2013",
month = aug,
language = "English",
note = "29th Annual IMP Conference ; Conference date: 30-08-2013 Through 02-09-2013",

}

RIS

TY - CONF

T1 - Common Territory?

T2 - 29th Annual IMP Conference

AU - Nicholson, John

AU - Brennan, Ross

AU - Tsagdis, Dimitrios

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - The IMP research tradition has always been open to the cross-fertilisation of ideas with other social science disciplines that study similar phenomena. Recent years have seen a growing interest among IMP researchers in phenomena such as regional strategic networks, spatial clusters and innovation and new business development in networks. IMP papers published on these topics are increasingly citing conceptual frameworks and empirical findings from the field of economic geography. This paper discusses the development of IMP thought and thedevelopment of thought in economic geography (particularly evolutionary economic geography), and compares their approaches to the analysis of regional phenomena. The goal is to identify key ideas from economic geography that have been under-exploited in IMP research, in order to suggest original new approaches available to IMP researchers interested in these fields. Anumber of such ideas are explored: proximity as a multi-dimensional and multi-faceted concept; the distinction between, and relative importance of, learning activities arising automatically from being embedded in a community (local or regional buzz) and learning activities arising from positive investment in channels of communication (pipelines); the concept of relational capitaldeveloped by economic geographers; and, conceptualisations of externalities commonly used in the study of spatial clusters

AB - The IMP research tradition has always been open to the cross-fertilisation of ideas with other social science disciplines that study similar phenomena. Recent years have seen a growing interest among IMP researchers in phenomena such as regional strategic networks, spatial clusters and innovation and new business development in networks. IMP papers published on these topics are increasingly citing conceptual frameworks and empirical findings from the field of economic geography. This paper discusses the development of IMP thought and thedevelopment of thought in economic geography (particularly evolutionary economic geography), and compares their approaches to the analysis of regional phenomena. The goal is to identify key ideas from economic geography that have been under-exploited in IMP research, in order to suggest original new approaches available to IMP researchers interested in these fields. Anumber of such ideas are explored: proximity as a multi-dimensional and multi-faceted concept; the distinction between, and relative importance of, learning activities arising automatically from being embedded in a community (local or regional buzz) and learning activities arising from positive investment in channels of communication (pipelines); the concept of relational capitaldeveloped by economic geographers; and, conceptualisations of externalities commonly used in the study of spatial clusters

M3 - Paper

Y2 - 30 August 2013 through 2 September 2013

ER -