Trajectories of Industrial Districts

Impact of Strategic Intervention in Medical Districts

Bibliographic Data

ID4040657
AuthorsJoseph T Llobrera, Joseph Llobrera (Urban Institute), David R Meyer (Brown University), Gregory Nammacher
Year2000
Volume76
Issue1
Pages68
Publication date2000-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEconomic Geography (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0013-0095 • E-ISSN: 1944-8287
PublisherJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/144541
OpenAlexW4242810318
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited45

Actors employ strategic intervention to alter the trajectory of an industrial district because they are dissatisfied with an existing or expected trajectory. In this study we examine two medical industrial districts. In the Philadelphia biotechnology district, strategic intervention altered its trajectory; and in the Minneapolis biomedical technology district, the trajectory of the district has altered but no strategic intervention emerged to redirect the trajectory. The structure and functioning of social networks within each district had an impact on the strategic interventions. Philadelphia housed a larger array of powerful firms and institutions than Minneapolis, but no pharmaceutical giant dominated the spawning of spin-offs in Philadelphia comparable to the dominance of Medtronic in Minneapolis. Diverse medical facilities in Philadelphia diffuse technological information and contacts about starting firms, whereas the University of Minnesota Medical School and its research institutes create a centralized source of information and contacts. The venture-capital sector of Philadelphia draws on diverse pools of capital, with no dominant vested interest to defend sectors of biotechnology; however, in Minneapolis, a few financial actors and large firms direct that allocation of capital. Philadelphia contains numerous public-private partnerships; Minneapolis does not have that diversity. As increased FDA regulation and pressure from managed care firms create conditions that favor large firms, the Philadelphia region continues to support small firms, whereas the Minneapolis region is withdrawing support. Philadelphia's wide-ranging social networks provide a more supportive framework for small firms than exists in Minneapolis, where the social networks have greater centralization and redundancy

Business · Dominance (genetics) · Economic geography · Economic growth · Economics · Economy · Environmental planning · Geography · Industrial district · Intervention (counseling) · Political science · Psychological intervention · Social capital · Socioeconomics · Venture capital · Finance · Global Health Workforce Issues · Innovation and Knowledge Management · Law · Management and Organizational Studies · Medicine · Nursing · Occupational and Professional Licensing Regulation

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub