Leapfrogging of Peripheral Regions in the Global Emerging Green Industry Space
- Huiwen Gong – Eawag – Huiwen.Gong@eawag.ch
- Markus Grillitsch – Lund University
- Pierre-Alexandre Balland – Utrecht Univerisity
- Shengjun Zhu – Peking University
In recent years, the discussion on the development of green technologies in regions has gained popularity in economic geography as scholars increasingly agree on the urgency of exploring opportunities for regional green growth under various challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and natural resource depletion (Grillitsch and Hansen, 2019). The window of opportunity for green growth relates to changes in institutions, markets and technologies at different spatial scales. It suggests some degree of locational freedom for many of the emerging green industries because pre-existing locational conditions tend not to meet their unique requirements (Storper and Walker, 1989; Boschma and Loombay, 1999; Lema et al., 2020). Against this background, peripheral regions possess both advantages (e.g., the existence of institutional voids, no negative lock-ins, access to natural resources) and disadvantages (e.g., lacking endogenous innovation capabilities, and poor resource endowments for developing high-growth economic activities) in developing green industrial paths.
Recently, resonating with the discussion on unrelated diversification and smart specialization strategies in peripheral regions (Balland et al., 2019; Boschma, 2021), studies have shown both conceptually and empirically that peripheral regions may leapfrog in the global emerging (green) industry space and develop high-complexity economic activities that are unrelated to their pre-existing industrial structures, given sufficient agency from different actor groups (Asheim 2019; Binz and Anadon, 2018; Carvalho and Vale, 2018; Dawley, 2014; Grillitsch and Hansen, 2019; Trippl et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2017, 2021).
While these studies have revealed more promising development opportunities for peripheral regions than the prevailing related diversification theory would suggest, such success stories have not yet been comprehensively theorized to derive generic patterns or mechanisms for peripheral regions seeking to pursue the "high risk, high reward" casino strategy in developing emerging green industries (Balland et al 2019). Moreover, little insight has been generated on how peripheral regions can even go one step further and turn such a casino strategy into the most ideal ‘high-road’ strategy (low risk, high reward) suggested by Balland et al (2019), and thus form industrial leadership in the global emerging green industry space.
Against this backdrop, the aim of this special session is to theorize about the emerging phenomenon of green path development in peripheral regions from an economic-geographic perspective. We welcome both conceptual and empirical contributions that address, but are not limited to, the following topics:
- The dynamic and multiscalar nature of the green windows of opportunity and their impact on green path development in peripheral regions
- Industry/technology characteristics (e.g., knowledge bases, life cycle) and the multiscalar agency in developing green industries in peripheral regions
- Smart specialization strategies and the entrepreneurial discovery process of emerging green industries in peripheral regions
- Change and maintenance agency and leapfrogging in global green industry space
- The dark sides of green path development for peripheral regions
- The institutionalization process of green industrial path development in peripheral regions
- Opportunity scoping and the geographies of green path development in space
References
- Asheim, B. T. (2019). Smart specialisation, innovation policy and regional innovation systems: what about new path development in less innovative regions?. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 32(1), 8-25.
- Balland, P. A., Boschma, R., Crespo, J., & Rigby, D. L. (2019). Smart specialization policy in the European Union: relatedness, knowledge complexity and regional diversification. Regional Studies, 53(9), 1252-1268.
- Binz, C., & Anadon, L. D. (2018). Unrelated diversification in latecomer contexts: Emergence of the Chinese solar photovoltaics industry. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 28, 14-34.
- Boschma, R. (2021). Designing Smart Specialization Policy: relatedness, unrelatedness, or what? (No. 2128). Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography.
- Boschma, R. A., & Lambooy, J. G. (1999). Evolutionary economics and economic geography. Journal of evolutionary economics, 9(4), 411-429.
- Carvalho, L., & Vale, M. (2018). Biotech by bricolage? Agency, institutional relatedness and new path development in peripheral regions. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(2), 275-295.
- Dawley, S. (2014). Creating new paths? Offshore wind, policy activism, and peripheral region development. Economic geography, 90(1), 91-112.
- Grillitsch, M., & Hansen, T. (2019). Green industrial path development in different types of regions. European Planning Studies, 11.
- Pinheiro, F. L., Hartmann, D., Boschma, R., & Hidalgo, C. A. (2021). The time and frequency of unrelated diversification. Research Policy, 104323.
- Storper, M., & Walker, R.(1989). The capitalist imperative: territory, technology and industrial growth (Vol. 2). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- Trippl, M., Baumgartinger-Seiringer, S., Frangenheim, A., Isaksen, A., & Rypestøl, J. O. (2020). Unravelling green regional industrial path development: Regional preconditions, asset modification and agency. Geoforum, 111, 189-197.
- Zhu, S., He, C., & Zhou, Y. (2017). How to jump further and catch up? Path-breaking in an uneven industry space. Journal of Economic Geography, 17(3), 521-545.
- Zhu, S., Guo, Q., & He, C. (2021). Strong Links and Weak Links: How Do Unrelated Industries Survive in an Unfriendly Environment?. Economic Geography, 97(1), 66-88.
Submit