Spatial Agglomeration, Human and Social Capital: The Case of Turkey Manufacturing Industry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2017.32Keywords:
Agglomeration, human capital, social capital, manufacturing industry, TurkeyAbstract
Over the last three decades, new economic theories explode the factors depending on space and spatial characteristics. In this process, it is developed the theories on social-cultural aspects and spatial characteristics of regions instead of traditional economic theories. These theories have been main strategy for economic development and growth. Economic development has not been considered independently from space by these theories and economic performance of a region was emphasized importance of economic actors, institutional and economic infrastructure as well as geographic features. Geography or spatial features contribute to increase not only skilled workforce, knowledge spillover and distribution but also social relations and interaction. In other words, the social-cultural and humanity factors relating with spatial and geography are major factors affecting on the development and also growing of economic activities. Especially, while industrialization as engine of regional development has been benefiting from the advantages offered by spatial features, clustering of economic activities and relationships among actors are shaped according to socio-cultural and human factors revealed spatial features. In this context, clustering of economic activities has been one of the new areas of interest in the theory of economic geography. Therefore, clustering of economic activities and human-social-spatial resources has been emphasized to play a major role in growth and development of regions by essays of the new economic geography.
In that context, the aim of this paper is to determine the effects of human and social capital in the spatial agglomeration of economic activities in case of Konya-Turkey. In this study, the agglomeration tendencies for manufacturing industry in Konya, which have major potentials in terms of human and social capital and manufacturing industry potential, is analysed comparatively depending on secondary resources and using statistical. In this paper, it is answered a question: can the spatial agglomeration tendency be more dominant in the regions with higher human and social capital potential than the regions with low human and social capital potential.
In this framework, the paper is composed of four chapters. At first, it is involved theoretical background including theoretical evaluating and also conceptual explaining about terminology such as new economic geography theories, agglomeration/clustering, human and social capital. Secondly, it is called methodological chapter that it involves the determination of variables, explanation analytic methods and techniques, and also giving information relating with the development of Konya manufacturing industry. Thirdly, it is evaluated data getting from analyse and methods techniques. And last, it presents results and evaluations relating with the study findings.
Metrics
References
Amin, A. (1999). An institutionalist perspective on regional economic development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23(2), 365-378.
Asheim, B. T. (1996). Industrial districts as ‘learning regions’: A condition for prosperity. European Planning Studies, 4(4), 379-401.
Belussi, F. (2006). In search of a useful theory of spatial clustering: agglomeration versus active clustering. In B. T. Asheim, P. Cooke, & R. Martin (Eds.), Clusters and regional development (pp. 69-89). UK: Routledge.
Clercq, D. D., & Dakhli, M. (2003). Human capital, social capital, and innovation: A multi-country study. Gent: Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
Crewe, L. (1996). Material culture: Embedded firms, organizational networks and the local economic development of a fashion quarter. Regional Studies, 30(3), 257-272.
Devine, F., & Roberts, J. M. (2003). Alternative approaches to researching social capital: A comment on van Deth's measuring social capital. International journal of research methodology, 6, 93-100.
Edwards, B., & Foley, M. (1999). Is it time to disinvest in social capital? Journal of Public Policy, 19(2), 141-173.
Eser, K., & Gokmen, C. E. (2009). Beşeri sermaye’nin ekonomik gelişme üzerindeki etkileri: Dünya deneyimi ve Türkiye üzerine gözlemler. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 1(2), 1309-8012.
Feser, E. J. (1998). Enterprises, external economies, and economic development. Journal of Planning Literature, 12(3), 283-302.
Field, J. (2006). Sosyal sermaye (B. Bilgen & B. Şen, Trans.). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London: Hamish Hamilton.
Grootaert, C., & Bastelaer, V. T. (2002). The role of social capital in development: An empirical assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Karagul, M., & Akcay, S. (2002). Ekonomik büyüme ve sosyal sermaye: Ampirik bir kanıt. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 17(198), 82-90.
Karakayacı, O. (2011). Role of social capital in success of industrial clusters: The case of mechanical engineering industry of Ankara and Konya. (PhD), Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul.
Malmberg, A. (1996). Industrial geography: Agglomeration and local milieu. Progress in Human Geography, 20(3), 392-403.
Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics. London: MacMillan.
Molina‐Morales, F. X. (2005). The territorial agglomerations of firms: A social capital perspective from the Spanish tile industry. Growth and Change, 36(1), 74-99.
OECD. (1998). Human capital investment. Paris: CERI Publishing.
Parts, E. (2003). Interrelationships between human capital and social capital: implications for economic development in transition economies. Tartu-Estonia: Tartu University Press.
Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Press.
Porter, M. (1998). On competition. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Rosenfeld, S. A. (1996). Does cooperation enhance competitiveness? Assessing the impacts of inter-firm collaboration. Research Policy, 25(2), 247-263.
Sabatini, F. (2005). Measuring social capital in Italy: An exploratory analysis: AICCON Working Paper Series.
Schmitz, H. (1999). Global competition and local cooperation: Success and failure in the Sinos Valley, Brazil. World Development, 27(9), 1503-1514.
Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American economic review, 51(1), 1-17.
Steiner, M. (1998). Clusters and regional specialisation: on geography technology and networks. Paper presented at the European Research in Regional Science 8, London.
TURKSTAT. (2012). İmalat Sanayi Sayımı. Ankara.
Woodhouse, A. (2006). Social capital and economic development in regional Australia: A case study. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 83-94.
Woolcock, M. (1998). Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and society, 27(2), 151-208.
Woolcock, M. (2002). Social capital in theory and practice: where do we stand? In J. Isham, T. Kelly, & S. Ramaswamy (Eds.), Social capital and economic development: Well-being in developing countries (pp. 18-39). New York: Edward Elgar.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Iconarp International Journal of Architecture and Planning
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 