Search

Byline: Colin Wren Many countries pursue competitiveness measures, but the proliferation of initiatives has given economic development policy an ad hoc appearance. This paper develops a framework in which this policy and these initiatives can be structured. It has at its heart the enterpreneurial process; the dissemination and take-up of new innovations; and the exploitation of the new industrial organisational forms. Recent advances in the digital ICT are considered in relation to the last of these stages. While no taxonomy of current economic development policy is undertaken, it is argued that the competitiveness measures represent a movement up these stages, from industrial development to entrepreneurship, and that there have been further policy shifts at the first stage.

The article offers insights on the industrial symbiosis an the field of ecology in the U.S. It introduces regional studies to industrial symbiosis and the field of ecology to which it belongs, and then summarizes each of the papers contributing to the issue. It presents conclusions about the potential overlapping between industrial symbiosis and regional development which claims that industrial symbiosis (IS) does have potential to generate regional environmental economic benefits. Nevertheless, increasing imperatives for regional sustainable economic development may dictate that IS system-scale approach to resource efficiency receive serious exploration.

This paper seeks to reconcile evaluative practice with theory, focusing on the micro-evaluation of UK regional industrial policy. Two issues are examined: the measurement of the pecuniary external effects, including displacement and linkages; and the concept of 'additionality', which is central to the industrial survey approach. It argues that current evaluative practice is at odds with theory, but while cost-benefit analysis simplifies the measurement of the external effects, it has other features that may limit its appeal. On 'additionality', the paper traces its evolution, and shows that it is a multi-dimensional concept. It argues that in practice the use of 'additionality' is deficient as it ignores the firm's private funds and all forms of deadweight transfer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]