The Concept of the Firm in Economic Geography

By Michael Taylor, Bjørn T. Asheim. 2001

184 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1bed6210d2a6db2744a6305728a58c364742c2b3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Sociology and Political Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Advanced Producer Service Firms as Strategic Networks, Global Cities as Strategic Places (2014, methodology): “In the specific case of the contemporary world city network, these are the global economy; important cities across the world, including Sassen’s global cities; and leading APS firms (Taylor 2001).”
The Firm as Social Networks: An Organisational Perspective (2005, background): “Given these different developments in the theory of the firm in neoclassical and institutional economics, how then is the firm conceived in economic geography today (see also Barnes 1996; Dicken and Malmberg 2001; Dicken and Thrift 1992; Taylor and Asheim 2001; Yeung 1998a, 2000a, 2001, 2002a)? Re”
Sectoral Differentiation and Network Structure Within Contemporary Worldwide Corporate Networks (2011, background): “…the advanced producer service sector, which is justified as representing cutting-edge global economic activity because producer service firms have become multinationals in their own right, creating an essential “interlocking” (Knoke and Kuklinski 1982; P. J. Taylor 2001) global network of offices.”
Practicing New Economic Geographies: A Methodological Examination (2003, background): “For example, insights from the above review of the literature show that even such a crucial analytical category as ‘‘the firm’’ can no longer be conceived as a ‘‘black box’’ stabilized by purely economic transactions (see also Yeung 2000c, 2002d; Dicken and Malmberg 2001; Taylor and Asheim 2001 ).”
Rethinking relational economic geography (2005, background): “This emphasis on networks and their associated power relations has also facilitated the rediscovery of the firm in economic geography (Yeung 2000; Taylor and Asheim 2001 ), in part because it establishes an alternative analytical path between the methodological individualism of narrowly firmcentric”
Multilevel Approaches and the Firm‐Agglomeration Ambiguity in Economic Growth Studies (2012, unknown): “Although early studies examined the importance of firm-level performance in agglomerated contexts (Taylor and Asheim 2001, Dicken and Malmberg 2001), until recently, the firm-level has not been treated systematically in urban economics and spatial econometrics.”
Why Butterflies Don’t Leave: Locational Behavior of Entrepreneurial Firms (2007, background): “This situation makes them highly interesting subjects for research at both the macro- and microlevels—that is, at the levels of regional economic development (Markusen 1996; Glasmeier 2000) and of entrepreneurship (Kenney and Patton 2005) and the firm (Maskell 2001; Taylor and Asheim 2001).”
Learning in Projects, Remembering in Networks? (2004, background): “The integrity of this corner stone of inquiry remains largely untouched, the firm being rather universally invoked as an atomic crystallization of commercial agency, universalized as a ‘stylised fact’ (Maskell, 2001; Taylor and Asheim, 2001).”
The Regional Environment and a Firm’s Innovative Performance: A Plea for a Multilevel Interactionist Approach (2007, background): “This observation fits the current critical debate on the theoretical and empirical orientation of the field of economic geography (Bathelt and Glückler 2003; Martin and Sunley 2003; Maskell 2001; Overman 2004; Scott 2004; Taylor and Asheim 2001).”