The author seeks to contribute to the debate on embeddedness, milieu, and innovation in industrial districts through a case study of high-technology firms in Richardson, an inner-ring suburban city of the Dallas–Fort Worth Metropolitan area. Richardson is important because it can be clearly defined as an industrial district, with over 600 high-technology firms and 70 000 employees. The results suggest that the district is robust and highly innovative with considerable capacity for self-sustaining growth. The firms are well integrated, locally and nationally. Despite extensive formal connections, firms' relationships are not very embedded locally. The link between embeddedness and innovation is subtle at best, and is confined to a small set of the most highly innovative firms. Similarly, evidence of a well-established industrial milieu was not forthcoming, although it may be emerging. The relationship between milieu and innovation was vague and was confined to the most innovative firms. The long-term viability of the district is closely tied to the economic health of the metropolitan economy, suggesting that development strategies focused on the district per se are likely to meet with limited success.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Directory Pubs, 1997Texas Business Directory (American Directory Pub, Omaha, NE)
2.
AminAThriftN J, 1994, “Living in the global”, in Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe Eds AminAThriftN J (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 1–21
3.
ArrowK, 1974The Limits of Organization (W W Norton, New York)
4.
AydalotPKeebleD, 1988High-technology Industry and Innovative Environments in Europe: An Overview (Routledge, London)
5.
Bureau of Business Research, 1997aDirectory of Texas ManufacturersBureau of Business Research, University of Texas, Austin, TX
6.
Bureau of Business Research, 1997bDirectory of Texas WholesalersBureau of Business Research, University of Texas, Austin, TX
CJS, 1997Dallas – Fort Worth Business Directory (CJS, Boulder, CO)
9.
CornishS, 1997, “Strategies for the acquisition of market intelligence and implications for the transferability of information inputs”Annals of the Association of American Geographers87451–470
10.
Dallas Morning News1998, “Wired for success”, 21 June, page 1A
11.
Dallas Morning News1999, “Ericsson move could signal Telecom Corridor breakup”, 26 February, page 12A
12.
DalumBVillumsenG, 1996, “Are OECD export specialisation patterns ‘sticky’? Relations to the convergence–divergence debate”, WP 96–3, Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics, Aalborg University, Aalborg
13.
de la MotheJPaquetG, 1998, “Local and regional systems of innovation as learning socioeconomics”, in Local and Regional Systems of Innovation Eds de la MotheJPaquetG (Kluwer–Nijhoff, Boston, MA) pp 1–16
14.
DillmanD, 1978Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method for Surveys (John Wiley, New York)
15.
Economic Development Partnership, 19971997 Richardson High Tech Industry ReportEconomic Development Partnership, 411 Belle Grove, Richardson, TX 75080
16.
FloridaR, 1998, “Calibrating the learning region, in Local and Regional Systems of Innovation Eds de la MotheJPaquetG (Kluwer–Nijhott, Boston, MA) pp 19–28
17.
FuellhartK, 1999, “Localization and the use of information sources: the case of the carpet industry”European Urban and Regional Studies639–58
18.
GarnseyECannon-BrookesA, 1993, “The Cambridge phenomenon revisited: aggregate change among Cambridge high tech firms since 1985”Entrepreneurship and Regional Development5179–207
19.
GertlerM, 1995, “‘Being there’: proximity, organization, and culture in the development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies”Economic Georgraphy711–26
20.
GlasmeierA, 1990, “The role of merchant wholesalers in industrial agglomeration formation”Annals of the Association of American Geographers80394–418
21.
GlasmeierA, 1999, “Territory-based regional development policy and planning in a learning economy: the case of ‘real service centers’ in industrial districts”European Urban and Regional Studies673–84
22.
GlasmeierAFuellhartK, 1996, “What do we know about how firms learn?”, paper presented at the Europen International Business Academy 22nd annual conference, Stockholm, 15–17 December; copy available from the author, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
23.
GordonRDiltsA, 1988, “High technology innovation and the global milieu: small and medium sized enterprises in Silicon Valley”, paper prepared for Colloque, GREM I II, Ascona, April
24.
GrabherG, 1997, “Rediscovering the social in the economics of interfirm relations”, in The Embedded Firm Ed. GrabherG (Routledge, London) pp 1–31
25.
GranovetterM, 1985, “Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness”American Journal of Sociology91481–510
26.
HadlockPHeckerDGannonJ, 1991, “High technology employment: another view”Monthly Labor Review114(7) 26–30
27.
HagedoornJ, 1997, “Strategic technology alliances and modes of cooperation in high-technology industries”, in The Embedded Firm Ed. GrabherG (Routledge, London) pp 116–137
28.
HahnRGaiserA, 1994, “Aktuelle Innovationsprozesse im Verabeitenden Gewerbe” [Actual innovation processes in the working trades]Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie3860–75
29.
HarrisonB, 1992, “Industrial districts: old wine in new bottles?”Regional Studies26469–483
30.
HarrisonBKelleyM RGantJ, 1996, “Innovative firm behaviour and local milieu: exploring the intersection of agglomeration, firm effects, and technological change”Economic Geography72233–258
31.
HeadKRiesJSwensonD, 1995, “Agglomeration benefits and location choice: evidence from Japanese manufacturing investments in the United States”Journal of International Economics38223–247
32.
HerrigelG, 1996, “Crisis in German decentralized production: unexpected rigidity and the challenge of an alternative form of flexible organization in Baden – Württemberg”European Urban and Regional Studies333–52
33.
HerrigelG B, 1997, “Power and the redefinition of industrial districts: the case of Baden–Württemberg”, in The Embedded Firm Ed. GrabherG (Routledge, London) pp 227–251
34.
HudsonR, 1999, “The learning economy, the learning firm and the learning region: a sympathetic critique of the limits to learning”European Urban and Regional Studies659–72
35.
KiratTLungY, 1999, “Innovation and proximity: territories as loci of collective learning processes”European Urban and Regional Studies627–38
36.
LazonickW, 1993, “Industry clusters versus global webs: organizational capabilities in the American economy”Industrial and Corporate Change21–24
37.
Leading Edge Communications, 1997Texas High Technology Directory (Leading Edge Communications, Aurora, CO)
38.
LukerBLyonsD, 1997, “Employment shifts in US high technology industries, 1988–1996”Monthly Labor Review120 (6) 12–26
39.
McArthurR, 1990, “Replacing the concept of high technology: towards a diffusion-based approach”Environment and Planning A22811–828
40.
MaillatD, 1991, “The innovation process and the role of the milieu”, in Regions Reconsidered: Economic Networks, Innovation and Local Development in Industrialized Countries Eds BergmanEMaierGTödtlingF (Cassel, London) pp 103–117
41.
MalmbergA, 1996, “Industrial geography: agglomeration and local milieu”Progress in Human Geography20392–403
42.
MalmbergA, 1997, “Industrial geography: location and learning”Progress in Human Geography21573–582
43.
MalmbergAMaskellP, 1997, “Towards an explanation of regional specialization and industry agglomeration”European Planning Studies525–41
44.
MalmbergASölvellÖZanderI, 1996, “Spatial clustering, local accumulation and knowledge and firm competitiveness”Geografiska Annaler78B85–97
45.
MarkusenA, 1996, “Sticky places in slippery space: a typology of industrial districts”Economic Geography72293–313
46.
MaskellPMalmbergA, 1999, “The competitiveness of firms and regions: ubiquitification and the importance of localized learning”European Urban and Regional Studies69–25
47.
PatchellJ, 1993, “From production systems to learning systems: lessons from Japan”Environment and Planning A25797–815
48.
ParkS O, 1996, “Networks and embeddedness in the dynamic types of new industrial districts”Progress in Human Geography20476–493
49.
ParkS OMarkusenA, 1995, “Generalizing new industrial districts: a theoretical agenda and an application from a non-Western economy”Environment and Planning A2781–104
50.
PorterM E, 1990The Competitive Advantage of Nations (Free Press, New York)
51.
RobinsonR, 1996, “The Telecom Corridor: linking the world to the 21st century”Richardson Magazine June, pages 8–14
52.
SaxenianA, 1994Regional Advantage. Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
53.
ScottA J, 1988Metropolis: From the Division of Labor to Urban Form (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
54.
SmithC L, 1990, “Texas: leading the way in high tech”Site Selection June, pages 3–8
55.
StaberU, 1996, “Accounting for variations in the performance of industrial districts: the case of Baden – Württemberg”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research20299–316
56.
StorperMHarrisonB, 1991, “Flexibility, hierarchy and regional development: the changing structure of industrial production systems and their forms of governance in the 1990s”Research Policy20407–422
TödtlingF, 1994, “The uneven landscape of innovation poles: local embeddedness and global networks”, in Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe Eds AminAThriftN J (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 1–21
59.
VoyerR, 1997, “Knowledge-based industrial clustering: international comparisons”, in The Embedded Firm Ed. GrabherG (Routledge, London) pp 81–110
60.
WilliamsonO, 1996The Mechanisms of Governance (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
61.
US Department of Commerce, 1990Census of Population and Housing (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
