Many social science disciplines suffer from a tradition of tolerating vaguely formulated theoretical claims. The authors report a case study of the explanatory claims made in an emerging knowledge-based theory of clusters proposed by the economic geographers Malmberg and Maskell. In doing so they reinterpret and reconstruct Malmberg and Maskells's theory by applying what is called the ‘contrastive approach’ to explanation from contemporary philosophy of science literature. This approach is proposed as a means of enhancing explanatory clarity and thereby of fostering explanatory progress. The contrastive approach is useful in specifying the exact explanation-seeking questions, and answers to them. Specifying the explanatory claims of a theory also makes it easier to identify questions that are not posed and hence remain unanswered; those constitute a challenge for further theorizing. The case study supports the argument that the precise formulation of explanatory questions promotes explanatory progress.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarnesE, 1994, “Why P rather than Q? The curiosities of fact and foil”Philosophical Studies7335–53
2.
BarnesT, 2006, “Saying yes without saying yes to progress: comments on David Livingstone's 2005 Progress in Human Geography lecture”Progress in Human Geography30580–584
3.
BarnesTPeckJSheppardETickellA, 2007, “Methods matter: transformations in economic geography”, in Politics and Practice in Economic Geography Eds TickellASheppardEPeckJBarnesT (Sage, London) pp 1–24
4.
BassettK, 1999, “Is there progress in human geography? The problem of progress in the light of recent work in the philosophy and sociology of science”Progress in Human Geography2327–47
5.
BatheltHMalmbergAMaskellP, 2004, “Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation”Progress in Human Geography2831–56
6.
BeugelsdijkS, 2007, “The regional environment and a firm's innovative performance: a plea for a multilevel interactionist approach”Economic Geography83181–199
7.
CurryM R, 2005, “Meta-theory/many theories”, in Questioning Geography: Fundamental Debates Eds CastreeNRogersAShermanD J (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 167–186
8.
GarfinkelA, 1981Forms of Explanation (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT)
9.
GiulianiE, 2007, “The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: evidence from the wine industry”Journal of Economic Geography7139–168
10.
HákanssonL, 2005, “Epistemic communities and cluster dynamics: on the role of knowledge in industrial districts”Industry and Innovation23433–463
11.
KincaidH, 2006, “Functional explanation and evolutionary social science”, in Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. Volume 15: Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology Eds TurnerSRisjordM (Elsevier, Amsterdam) pp 213–248
12.
KitcherP, 1993The Advancement of Science (Oxford University Press, New York)
13.
LagendijkA, 2003, “Towards conceptual quality in regional studies: the need for subtle critique: a response to Markusen”Regional Studies37719–727
LiptonP, 1990, “Contrastive explanations”, in Explanation and its Limits Ed. KnowlesD (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 247–266
16.
LiptonP, 2004Inference to the Best Explanation2nd edition (Routledge, London)
17.
LivingstoneD, 2006, “Putting progress in its place”Progress in Human Geography30559–579
18.
MäkiU, 1992, “On the method of isolation in economics”Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities26319–354
19.
MäkiU, 2004, “Theoretical isolation and explanatory progress: transaction costs economics and the dynamics of dispute”Cambridge Journal of Economics28319–346
20.
MalmbergAMaskellP, 1997, “Towards an explanation of regional specialization and industry agglomeration”European Planning Studies525–41
21.
MalmbergAMaskellP, 2002, “The elusive concept of localization economies: towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering”Environment and Planning A34429–449
22.
MalmbergAMaskellP, 2006, “Localized learning revisited”Growth and Change371–18
23.
MarchionniC, 2006, “Contrastive explanation and unrealistic models: the case of the new economic geography”Journal of Economic Methodology13425–446
24.
MarkusenA, 1999, “Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: the case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies”Regional Studies33869–884
25.
MartinRSunleyP, 2003, “Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?”Journal of Economic Geography35–35
26.
MaskellP, 2001, “Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster”Industrial and Corporate Change10921–943
27.
MaskellPLorenzenM, 2004, “The cluster as market organisation”Urban Studies41991–1009
28.
MaskellPMalmbergA, 1999a“The competitiveness of firms and regions: ‘ubiquitification’ and the importance of localized learning”European Urban and Regional Studies69–25
29.
MaskellPMalmbergA, 1999b, “Localised learning and industrial competitiveness”Cambridge Journal of Economics23167–186
30.
MaskellPMalmbergA, 2007, “Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution”Journal of Economic Geography7603–618
31.
MortonA, 1990, “Mathematical modelling and contrastive explanation”Canadian Journal of Philosophy16251–270
32.
OinasP, 2002, “Competition and collaboration in interconnected places: towards a research agenda”Geografiska Annaler, Series B84 (2) 65–76
33.
PeckJ, 2003, “Fuzzy old world: a response to Markusen”Regional Studies37729–740
34.
PorterM E, 1990The Competitive Advantage of Nations (Macmillan, London)
35.
PorterM E, 1998, “Clusters and the new economics of competition”Harvard Business Review November/December, 77–90
36.
RisjordM, 1999, “No strings attached: functional and intentional action explanations”Philosophy of Science66 (Proceedings) S299–S313
37.
SaxenianA, 1994Regional Advantage. Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
38.
SnowdonBStonehouseG, 2006, “Competitiveness in a globalised world: Michael Porter on the microeconomic foundations of the competitiveness of nations, regions, and firms”Journal of Business Studies27163–175
39.
SunleyP, 2000, “Urban and regional growth”, in A Companion to Economic Geography Eds SheppardEBarnesT J (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 187–201
40.
WoodwardJ, 2003Making Things Happen (Oxford University Press, New York)
41.
YlikoskiP, 2007, “The idea of contrastive explanandum”, in Rethinking Explanation Eds PerssonJYlikoskiP (Springer, Dordrecht) pp 27–42
