Advancing Evolutionary Economic Geography by Engaged Pluralism

By G. Macleod. 2014

147 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d38a8feaa75777f26c6cecf2de9ae34aaad05caa

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

1. Markus Grillitsch
2. Michaela Trippl
3. Arne Isaksen
4. R. Hassink
5. Elena Zukauskaite
6. Monica Plechero
7. Ron A. Boschma
8. Franz Tödtling

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Arne Isaksen
2. Michaela Trippl
3. R. Hassink
4. Markus Grillitsch

Citations in the corpus

• Relatedness as driver of regional diversification: a research agenda (2017, unknown): “The time has come to make a serious effort to apply and integrate mixed methods into the study of regional diversi fi cation (Hassink, Klaerding, & Marques, 2014).”
• Exogenous sources of regional industrial change (2018, background): “…of actors in networks of social relations and institutions at various spatial scales (Bathelt and Glückler, 2003) and ‘considers formal and informal institutions as central influences on the evolution of industries and the development of regional economies’ (Hassink et al., 2014: 1302).”
• Towards a comprehensive understanding of new regional industrial path development (2019, background): “While EEG is currently arguably the most popular paradigm in economic geography, it has also been criticised for not paying enough attention to the role of the social, cultural and institutional environment of economic activities (MacKinnon et al., 2009; Hassink et al., 2014; Pike et al., 2016).”
• Institutional Thickness Revisited (2017, background): “…geography more broadly by informing current attempts that aim to bring together institutional and evolutionary perspectives to explain how institutions and organizations affect forms and directions of long-term regional industrial change (MacKinnon 2012; Hassink, Klaerding, and Marques 2014).”
• Regional industrial path development in different regional innovation systems: A conceptual analysis (2014, methodology): “Second, we go beyond micro-level and firm-based accounts of path development that are prevalent in evolutionary economic geography (see MacKinnon et al. 2009; Pike et al. 2009; Asheim et al. 2013; Hassink et al. 2014 for a critique of micro-level and firm-based approaches).”