Article thumbnail

Why is Economic Geography not an Evolutionary Science?

By Ron Boschma and Koen Frenken

Abstract

This paper explains the main commonalities and differences between neoclassical, institutional and evolutionary approaches that have been influential in economic geography during the last couple of decades. For all three approaches, we argue that they are in agreement in some respects and in conflict in other respects. While explaining to what extent and in what ways the Evolutionary Economic Geography approach differs from the Neoclassical (or ‘new’) Economic Geography and the Institutional Economic Geography, we can specify the value-added of economic geography as an evolutionary science. Finally, we briefly outline a research agenda of the Evolutionary Economic Geography we like to explore.

OAI identifier:

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1992). (eds.) The Sociology of Economic Life. Boulder etc.:
  2. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice.
  3. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change,
  4. (1939). Business cycles. A theoretical, historical and statistical Analysis of the capitalist process.
  5. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy.
  6. (1995). Co-evolution of industry structure, technology and supporting institutions, and the making of comparative advantage.
  7. (2002). Competition, variety and the geography of technology evolution, Paper presented at the 9th conference of the European Association of Evolutionary Political
  8. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness.
  9. (1993). Economics and evolution. Bringing life back into economics,
  10. (1988). Economics and Institutions
  11. (1999). Evolutionary Economics and Economic Geography.
  12. (2003). Evolutionary economics and industry location.
  13. (1999). Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: The case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies,
  14. (1991). Geography and Trade. Cambridge MA:
  15. (1975). Growth theory from an evolutionary perspective: the differential productivity growth puzzle,
  16. (2004). Hellervik A
  17. (2004). Innovation, Evolution and Complexity Theory
  18. (2002). Linked. The New Science of Networks. New York: Perseus Barabási AL, Albert R
  19. (2002). Mobility and Social networks: Localised Knowledge Spillovers Revisited.
  20. (1974). Neoclassical vs. evolutionary theories of economic growth: Critique and prospectus,
  21. (1997). New Industries and Windows of Locational Opportunity. A Long-Term Analysis of Belgium.
  22. (2002). On the units of geographical economics,
  23. (2002). Paper presented to the Workshop “Clusters in high-technology: Aerospace, biotechnology and software compared,
  24. (1997). Paradigmatic shifts in national innovation systems,
  25. (1995). Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change.
  26. (1994). Regional Advantage. Cambridge MA:
  27. (2001). Rethinking the "economic" in economic geography: Broadening our vision or losing our focus?
  28. (1984). Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes.
  29. (1984). Technical Change and Industrial Transformation, Basingstoke and London:
  30. (1993). Technopolis. High-technology industry and regional development in Southern California.
  31. (1998). The approach of institutional economics.
  32. (2004). The early development of the steam engine: An evolutionary interpretation using complexity theory,
  33. (2002). The Elusive Concept of Localization Economies: Towards a Knowledgebased Theory of Spatial Clustering. Environment and Planning A
  34. (2000). The geography of innovation: A cross-sector analysis,
  35. (1990). The Rise and Fall of Infrastructures
  36. (1966). The Spatial Dynamics of U.S. Urban-Industrial Growth, 1800-1914. Cambridge MA:
  37. (2001). The spatial economy: Cities, regions, and international trade. by
  38. (1950). Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory.