Abstract
There have been some important developments in the analysis of proximity relations since its origin. First introduced by a group of French economists (Kirat and Lung 1997; Torre and Gilly 1999), during the 1990s this approach was primarily confined to the analysis of industrial production relations and was specifically developed in the context of the study of innovation processes. Industrial relations, innovation, firm mobility, new technology, territorial resources, local productive systems… all have been studied, endlessly explored and brought back under the spotlight again by the confrontation between theoretical analysis and empirical research (Boschma 2005; Carrincazeaux et al. 2008; Rychen and Zimmermann 2008).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Different notions of proximity, like relational, cognitive or institutional proximities are referred in the literature. As we will show after these notions are encapsuled in our generic two notions of geographical and organised proximities, which offer also a simplified and more straightforward framework of analysis.
- 2.
One may be organized or one may organize an activity without necessarily referring to or belong to an organization, in the strict sense of the term.
- 3.
The type of mobility we are discussing here is a “long” mobility, one that is not “pendular”, for example. It consists of time consuming trips with high transport costs. “Short” mobility, within a local system shall be considered, in a conventional manner, as permanent proximity or co-location.
- 4.
This significant base in the greater Paris region is characterized by the establishment in 1999 of a structure to lead and promote the optics and photonics sector, Opticsvalley (http://www.opticsvalley.org/). Since 2005, Opticsvalley has also included branches of software engineering and electronics.
- 5.
See Annex 2.
- 6.
21 industrial firms, 6 economic development organizations, 5 local authorities, 3 financial institutions and 9 public research laboratories.
- 7.
The changes in the global economy and the new strategies developed by firms can be analysed by this method, using the basic factors that determine the evolution of an industry (intensity of competition, substitute products, presence of suppliers, customers and new entrants).
- 8.
One buyer group represents all firms that buy a given product. The firms are not necessarily part of a formal organization with a legal status.
- 9.
List and description of the NAF Codes can be find at the following address: http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/default.asp?page=nomenclatures/naf2003/naf2003.htm
References
Aggeri F, Segrestin B (2001) What is beyond multi-project management? A collective learning perspective on a recent automobile development project. Paper presented to the EIASM conference, University of Twente, Entschede
Arend RJ (2009) Defending against rival innovation. Small Bus Econ 33:189–206
Baptista R, Mendonça J (2009) Proximity to knowledge sources and the location of knowledge-based start-ups. Ann Reg Sci 45(1):5–29
Bathelt H, Schuldt N (2010) International trade fairs and global buzz, part I: ecology of global buzz. Eur Plan Stud 18(12):1957–1974
Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P (2004) Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Prog Hum Geogr 28:31–56
Biggiero L, Sammarra A (2010) Does geographical proximity enhance knowledge exchange? The case of the aerospace industrial cluster of Centre Italy. Int J Technol Transf Commer 9(4):283–305
Bonte W (2008) Inter-firm trust in buyer–supplier relations: are knowledge spillovers and geographical proximity relevant? J Econ Behav Organ 67:855–870
Boschma R (2005) Proximity and innovation. A critical assessment. Reg Stud 39(1):61–74
Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Vicente J (2008a) The scientific trajectory of the French School of Proximity: interaction- and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. Eur Plan Stud 16(5):617–628
Carrincazeaux C, Grossetti M, Talbot D (2008b) Clusters, proximities and networks. Special Issue of Eur Plan Stud 16(5):613–621
Dankbaar B (2007) Global sourcing and innovation: the consequences of losing both organizational and geographical proximity. Eur Plan Stud 15(2):271–288
Entwistle J, Rocamora A (2006) The field of fashion materialized: a study of London Fashion Week. Sociology 40:735–751
Freel MS (2003) Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Res Policy 32:751–770
Freire-Gibb LC, Lorentzen A (2011) A platform for local entrepreneurship: the case of the lighting festival of Frederikshavn. Local Econ 26:157–169
Gallie EP (2009) Is geographical proximity necessary for knowledge spillovers within a cooperative technological network? The case of the French biotechnology sector. Reg Stud 43(1):33–42
Giuliani E, Bell M (2005) The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Res Policy 34:47–68
Information Society Technologies Advisory Group (2006) Shaping Europe’s future through ICT. ISTAG, Brussels
Kechidi M, Talbot D (2010) Institutions and coordination: what is the contribution of a proximity-based analysis? The case of Airbus and its relations with the subcontracting network. Int J Technol Manag 50(3/4):285–299
Kirat T, Lung Y (1997) Innovation and proximity. Territories as loci of collective learning processes. Eur Urban Reg Stud 6(1):27–38
Laursen K, Reichsten T, Salter A (2010) Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university-industry collaboration in the UK. Reg Stud 45(4):507–523
Lazaric N, Longhi C, Thomas C (2008) Gatekeepers of knowledge versus platforms of knowledge: from potential to realized absorptive capacity. Reg Stud 42(6):837–852
Maskell P, Bathelt H, Malmberg A (2006) Building global knowledge pipelines: the role of temporary clusters. Eur Plan Stud 14:997–1013
Norcliffe G, Rendace O (2003) New geographies of comic book production in North America: the new artisan, distancing, and the periodic social economy. Econ Geogr 79(3):241–263
North DC (1991) Institutions. J Econ Perspect 5(1):97–112
Opticsvalley (2004) Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Eclairage-Affichage, Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Procédés industriels, Les marchés de l’optique-photonique: Santé et science du vivant. Optics Valley
Ponds R, Van Oort F, Frenken K (2007) The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Reg Sci 86(3):423–443
Porter M (1980) Competitive strategy: techniques for analysing industries and competitors. Free Press, New York
Porter M (1998) The role of geography in the process of innovation and sustainable competitive advantage of firms. In: Chandler AD, Hagström P, Sölvell Ö (eds) The dynamic firm. Oxford University Press, New York
RERU (2008) La Proximité, 15 ans déjà !, Special issue of the Revue d’Economie Régionale et Urbaine, 3
Rychen F, Zimmermann JB (2008) Clusters in the global knowledge-based economy: knowledge gatekeepers and temporary proximity. Special Issue of Reg Stud 42(6):767–776
Takeda Y, Kajikawa Y, Sakata I, Matsushima K (2008) An analysis of geographical agglomeration and modularized industrial networks in a regional cluster: a case study at Yamagata prefecture in Japan. Technovation 28(8):531–539
Torre A (2008) On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transfer. Reg Stud 42(6):869–889
Torre A (2011) The role of proximity during long-distance collaborative projects. Temporary geographical proximity helps. Int J Foresight Innov Policy 7(1–3):213–230
Torre A, Gilly JP (1999) On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Reg Stud 34(2):169–180
Torre A, Rallet A (2005) Proximity and localization. Reg Stud 39(1):47–60
Vaz T, Nijkamp P (2009) Knowledge and innovation: the strings between global and local dimensions of sustainable growth. Entrep Reg Dev 21(4):441–455
Walther JB, Loh T, Granka L (2005) Let me count the ways: the interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. J Lang Soc Psychol 24(1):36–65
Weterings A, Boschma R (2009) Does spatial proximity to customers matter for innovative performance? Evidence from the Dutch software sector. Res Policy 38(5):746–755
Weterings A, Ponds R (2008) Do regional and non-regional knowledge flows differ? An empirical study on clustered firms in the Dutch life sciences and computing services industry. Ind Innov 16(1):11–31
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Annexes
Annexes
1.1 Annex 1: Method of Identification of Optic-Photonic Firms
The identification of the optic-photonic firms took three steps.
First step: we used the most representative NAF codes of the optic-photonic activity as a starting point to identify the French located firms which produce, develop and/or put these technologies on the market (codes 331A, 332B, 333Z, 334A and 334B on the data bases Kompass, Astree and Coface). More than 2,500 firms declare their activity under these NAF Codes in the Greater Paris Region (NAF Code is one of the INSEE (French National Institute of Statistics) Codes. It aims at identifying the main activity of one firm or one association).Footnote 9
Second step: we identified the local firms whose activity is built upon optic-photonic technologies, based not only on the NAF Codes but also on various information (including web sites). The goal was to identify the firms which develop, produce or put on the market products and services based upon optic-photonic technologies.
Third step: this list was validated and completed by the extensive set of information collected through firms visits performed by Opticsvalley. This operation allowed us to integrate in the data base several firms which do not declare an activity related to the previous NAF Codes whereas optic-photonic technologies remain crucial in their activity.
Then, the identification by means of the only NAF Codes revealed to be incomplete. We subsequently incorporated some firms registered under the following NAF codes: 221J, 261C, 285D, 300A, 312A, 313Z, 321A, 331B, 334A, 511T, 722A, 722C, 731Z, 741G, 742C and 743B.
1.2 Annex 2: List of the Optic-Photonic Firms in the Greater Paris Region, on Which is Based Our Study
Company name | NAF code |
|---|---|
AA OPTO-ELECTRONIC | 311A |
ABSYS | 519A |
ACMEL INDUSTRIES | 311B |
ACOME | 313Z |
ADVEOTEC | 742C |
AGATEC France | 332B |
ALCTRA | 742C |
ALTAIR VISION | 722C |
AMPLITUDE TECHNOLOGIES | 334B |
AOIP INSTRUMENTATION | 332B |
APRIM VIDE | 332B |
APS | 285A |
ATI ELECTRONIQUE | 312A |
AXMO PRECISION | 518M |
BALOGH SA | 333Z |
BIORET | 731Z |
CAMECA | 332B |
CEDIP INFRARED SYTEMS | 742C |
CHIMIE METAL | 332B |
CLARA VISION | 511T |
CLO ELECTRONIQUE – GROUPE ACJH | 312A |
COKIN | 334B |
CONTRINEX | 518M |
CORNING SAS | 261J |
CORNING SAS | 742C |
COSE CONSEIL ET SERVICE | 742C |
CS DEVELOPPEMENTS | 742C |
D-LIGHTSYS | 334B |
EADS SODERN | 332A |
EGIDE | 312A |
ERECA | 322A |
ESSILOR INTERNATIONAL | 334A |
ESSILOR INTERNATIONAL | 334A |
ESSILOR INTERNATIONAL | 334A |
ESSILOR INTERNATIONAL | 334A |
FASTLITE | 518L |
FORT | 334B |
GAUTHIER PRECISIONS | 285D |
GENEWAVE | 731Z |
GENOPTICS | 332B |
GERAILP [CLFA] | NA |
GESEC | 743B |
GROUPE COUGET OPTICAL | 524T |
HAUSSER ET CIE | 285D |
HGH SYSTEMES INFRAROUGES | 334B |
HOLOGRAM INDUSTRIES | 221J |
HORIBA JOBIN YVON | 332B |
HORIBA JOBIN YVON | 332B |
IFRATEC | 323Z |
IMAGINE EYES | 331B |
IMSTAR SA | 722A |
IVEA SAS | 741G |
IXSEA | 332B |
JGB | 334B |
KALUTI SYSTEM | 518J |
KINOPTIK SYSTEMES | 742C |
KYLIA | 334B |
LASELEC IDF | 334B |
LASERLABS | 332B |
LASOPTIC | 742C |
LCI – LE CONTROLE INDUSTRIEL | 332B |
LEOSPHERE | 332B |
LHERITIER SAS | 331A |
L’OPTIQUE COMMERCIALE | 334B |
LORD INGENIERIE | 742C |
MAUNA KEA TECHNOLOGIES | 731Z |
MB OPTIQUE | 742C |
MC 2 | 334B |
MECAPROBE ENGINEERING | 285D |
MEIRI | 742C |
MENSI SA | 742C |
MICRONIC | 321A |
MICROVISION INSTRUMENTS | 742C |
NANOVATION | 742C |
NEMOPTIC | 742C |
NETTEST FRANCE | 741J |
NEW VISION TECHNOLOGIES | 743B |
NEXANS FRANCE | 313Z |
OMMIC | 321C |
OPA OPTICAD/OPTO SYSTEM | 742C |
OPTECTRON INDUSTRIE | 321A |
OPTEL-THEVON | 742C |
OPTIMASK SA | 321C |
OPTIPHIC | 334B |
OPTIQUE DE PRECISION J FICHOU | 334B |
OPTITECK | 334B |
OXALIS LASER | 742C |
PHASICS | 332B |
PHILIPS MEDIA FRANCE | 516J |
PICOGIGA INTERNATIONAL | 321C |
PLASSYS | 333Z |
QUANTEL SA | 334B |
R&D VISION | 731Z |
R2B – OPTIQUE DE PRECISION | 334B |
RADIALL | 312A |
RENAUD LASERS | 518A |
SAINT-GOBAIN RECHERCHE | 731Z |
SAMMODE | 315C |
SATIMAGE | 722C |
SCROME | 742C |
SDTIE INTERNATIONAL | 332B |
SEDI FIBRES OPTIQUES | 518J |
SOCIETE D’OPTIQUE MARIS DELFOUR | 334B |
SOPRA | 332B |
SOTIMI | 261J |
SOVIS OPTIQUE | 332B |
SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT | 410Z |
SYSTEME OPTRONIQUE INDUSTRIEL [SOI] | 742C |
TED TID | 527C |
THALES LASER SA | 334B |
THALES OPTRONIQUE SA | 332A |
THOMAS SINCLAIR LABORATOIRES | 731Z |
TOFICO | 334B |
TOPPAN PHOTOMASKS FRANCE | 321C |
TRANSLUX | 261J |
TRIBVN MEDICAL | 221J |
ULICE OPTRONIQUE | 332B |
UNITED VISION | 741G |
VERRE ET QUARTZ FLASHLAMPS | 315A |
VERRE INDUSTRIE | 261C |
VIPS FRANCE SARL | 300A |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Torre, A., Lourimi, S. (2014). Proximity Relations and Firms’ Innovative Behaviours: Different Proximities in the Optics Cluster of the Greater Paris Region. In: Kourtit, K., Nijkamp, P., Stimson, R. (eds) Applied Regional Growth and Innovation Models. Advances in Spatial Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37819-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37819-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37818-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37819-5
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)