• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>The Emerging Digital Economy: Entrepreneurship, Clusters, and Policy; Advances in Spatial Science >Growth Dynamics in a Municipal Market-Accessibility Hierarchy
【24h】

Growth Dynamics in a Municipal Market-Accessibility Hierarchy

机译：市政市场可及性层次结构中的增长动力

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The relationship between market-size and the location of economic activities is well established in the literature, both theoretically and empirically. In principle, this has been the major theme of the models of the new economic geography (NEG), starting with the seminal work of Krugman (1991a, b). Such models are based on increasing returns, which are necessary in order to explain geographical concentration (Johansson and Karlsson 2001). In the presence of increasing returns, market-size can be regarded as a measure of the 'competitiveness' of a region as regards its ability to attract firms and industries. Clearly, any firm with internal scale economies seeks closeness to large markets. However, the role of market-size is not constrained to be the supply of potential customers in a proximate geographical area, though this ought to be the major factor for service industries such as retail and wholesale, (c.f. Klaesson and Pettersson 2001). It should be noted, though, that the ideas behind the NEG-approach have a long history. Weber (1929), for example, maintained that regional location factors, i.e. those involved in the minimization of transport costs when choosing location, can create concentrations if similar firms find their individual optimal location to be in proximity to each other. Clearly, market-size is an excellent example of such a regional factor relevant for most types of firms. Furthermore, in his famous book on Location theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Hoover (1937) elaborated and popularised Ohlin's (1933) concepts of localization and urbanization economies. Hoover's definitions are used to this present day.
机译：从理论上和经验上，市场规模与经济活动地点之间的关系在文献中均已确立。原则上，从克鲁格曼（1991a，b）的开创性工作开始，这一直是新经济地理（NEG）模型的主要主题。这样的模型基于增加的收益，这对于解释地理集中度是必要的（Johansson和Karlsson 2001）。在回报不断增加的情况下，市场规模可以看作是该地区吸引公司和行业的能力的“竞争力”的一种度量。显然，任何具有内部规模经济的公司都希望与大型市场保持紧密联系。但是，市场规模的作用并不限于在邻近地理区域内提供潜在客户，尽管这应该是零售和批发等服务业的主要因素（参见Klaesson和Pettersson，2001年）。但是，应该指出的是，NEG方法背后的思想源远流长。例如，韦伯（Weber，1929）坚持认为，如果相似的公司发现各自的最佳地理位置彼此相邻，那么区域地理位置因素（即那些在选择地理位置时将运输成本降至最低的因素）便可以产生集中度。显然，市场规模是与大多数类型的公司相关的区域因素的一个很好的例子。此外，胡佛（Hoover，1937）在其关于位置理论和制鞋与皮革工业的著名著作中阐述并推广了奥林（1933）的本地化和城市化经济概念。到目前为止，胡佛的定义一直沿用至今。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号