The fall and the fragmentation of national clusters: Cluster evolution in the paper and pulp industry

Abstract A common expectation in evolutionary cluster studies is that national clusters engage in competitive interactions that lead to a continuous stream of changes in global dominance. Our fuzzy-set analysis on the evolution of the paper and pulp industry demonstrates that globalization has dramatically changed this situation. National clusters have largely faded away; the value chain dominance is now held by technology suppliers who are global hubs in majority of identifiable business activities in the focal industry. Our results imply that when industrial decline is accentuated by industrial concentration in some part of the value chain the national clusters may lose their importance.

[1]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences , 2001 .

[2]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[3]  Paul Pennings,et al.  Beyond dichotomous explanations: Explaining constitutional control of the executive with fuzzy-sets , 2003 .

[4]  Richard W. Pouder,et al.  Technology Clusters Versus Industry Clusters: Resources, Networks, and Regional Advantages , 2006 .

[5]  Christian H.M. Ketels,et al.  The Cluster Initiative Greenbook , 2003 .

[6]  B. Dousset.  Innovation and network structural dynamics: Study of the alliance network of a major sector of the biotechnology industry , 2005 .

[7]  John Paul MacDuffie,et al.  Prototypes and strategy: assigning causal credit using fuzzy sets , 2004 .

[8]  Aaron Katz,et al.  Explaining the Great Reversal in Spanish America , 2005 .

[9]  Toby E. Stuart.  Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates i , 2000 .

[10]  Max-Peter Menzel,et al.  Cluster life cycles—dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution , 2010 .

[11]  Ron Boschma,et al.  Co-evolution of Firms, Industries and Networks in Space , 2011 .

[12]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[13]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Sources of Industrial Leadership , 1999 .

[14]  Juha-Antti Lamberg,et al.  Alternative Paths to Competitive Advantage: A Fuzzy-Set Analysis of the Origins of Large Firms , 2009 .

[15]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage , 2006, Political Analysis.

[16]  W. Arthur,et al.  INCREASING RETURNS AND LOCK-IN BY HISTORICAL EVENTS , 1989 .

[17]  David E. Stout,et al.  Dynamics of Industrial Clustering: International Comparisons in Computing and Biotechnology , 1998 .

[18]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Fuzzy-Set Social Science , 2001 .

[19]  Pino G. Audia,et al.  Organizational Foundings in Community Context: Instruments Manufacturers and Their Interrelationship with Other Organizations , 2006 .

[20]  M. Jacobides,et al.  Benefiting from Innovation: Value Creation, Value Appropriation and the Role of Industry Architectures , 2006 .

[21]  S. Lenway,et al.  Knowledge and competitive advantage, the coevolution of firms, technology and national institutions , 2003 .

[22]  C. C. Snow,et al.  Research on Competitive Dynamics: Recent Accomplishments and Future Challenges , 2004 .

[23]  S. Winter,et al.  The Co-evolution of Capabilities and Transaction Costs: Explaining the Institutional Structure of Production , 2005 .

[24]  Rui Baptista,et al.  Do innovations diffuse faster within geographical clusters , 2000 .

[25]  Larry O'Connell,et al.  Industry Clusters in Ireland: An Application of Porter's Model of National Competitive Advantage to Three Sectors , 2001 .

[26]  Nick Henry,et al.  From ‘industrial districts’ to ‘knowledge clusters’: a model of knowledge dissemination and competitive advantage in industrial agglomerations , 2003 .

[27]  Brian Uzzi,et al.  TOWARDS A NETWORK PERSPECTIVE ON ORGANIZATIONAL DECLINE , 1997 .

[28]  Anders Melander,et al.  The Ephemera of Success: Strategy, Structure and Performance in the Forestry Industries , 2006 .

[29]  Michael Porter,et al.  The Economic Performance of Regions , 2003 .

[30]  R. Pouder,et al.  Hot Spots and Blind Spots: Geographical Clusters of Firms and Innovation , 1996 .

[31]  B. Kogut.  Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives , 1988 .

[32]  M. Porter.  Clusters and the new economics of competition. , 1998, Harvard business review.

[33]  M. Porter.  Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy , 2000 .

[34]  Peer C. Fiss.  A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations , 2007 .

[35]  P. Krugman,et al.  Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession , 1994 .

[36]  Kimmo Alajoutsijärvi,et al.  Customer relationship strategies and the smoothing of Industry-Specific Business Cycles : The Case of the Global Fine Paper Industry , 2001 .

[37]  Kalle Pajunen,et al.  Institutions and inflows of foreign direct investment: a fuzzy-set analysis , 2008 .

[38]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[39]  Juha-Antti Lamberg,et al.  Materializing the Societal Effect: Organizational Forms and Changing Patterns of Dominance in the Paper Industry , 2005 .

[40]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA) , 2008 .

[41]  Juha-Antti Lamberg,et al.  Evolution of Competitive Strategies in Global Forestry Industries: Introduction , 2006 .

[42]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Between Complexity and Parsimony: Limited Diversity, Counterfactual Cases, and Comparative Analysis. , 2005 .