In this paper, we aim to reduce the ambiguity surrounding the agglomeration–performance relationship. We do so by taking firm-level and agglomeration-level heterogeneity into account simultaneously and focusing on the interactions between these two levels of analysis in explaining the effect of agglomeration on firm performance. Our central argument is that while some firms will benefit from agglomeration, others will be harmed by it. To assess our claims, we estimate multilevel models on firms’ productivity with nonlinear interaction effects between the agglomeration-level (urbanization, specialization, and knowledge intensity) and firm-level variables (size, internal knowledge base, and face-to-face contacts) using data from a sample of Dutch firms. Our results show that the effects of different dimensions of agglomeration on firm performance are strongly and nonlinearly moderated by firm characteristics. Moreover, the moderation effect is not uniform across the different agglomeration dimensions.
AppoldSJ (1995) Agglomeration, interorganizational networks, and competitive performance in the US metalworking sector. Economic Geography71: 27–54.
2.
ArikanAKnobenJ (2014) Sources of inter-firm heterogeneity in accessing knowledge-creation benefits within technology clusters. Industry and Innovation21: 476–493.
3.
ArikanAT (2009) Interfirm knowledge exchanges and the knowledge creation capability of clusters. Academy of Management Review34: 658–676.
4.
ArikanATSchillingMA (2011) Structure and governance in industrial districts: Implications for competitive advantage. Journal of Management Studies48: 772–803.
5.
BaldwinJRBrownWMRigbyDL (2010) Agglomeration economies: Microdata panel estimates from Canadian manufacturing. Journal of Regional Science50: 915–934.
6.
BaptistaRSwannP (1998) Do firms in clusters innovate more?Research Policy27: 525–540.
7.
BeaudryCBreschiS (2003) Are firms in clusters really more innovative. Economics of Innovation and New Technology12: 325–342.
8.
BeaudryCSchiffauerovaA (2009) Who’s right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate. Research Policy38: 318–337.
9.
BeaudryCSwannGMP (2009) Firm growth in industrial clusters of the United Kingdom. Small Business Economics32: 409–424.
BroersmaLvan DijkJ (2008) The effect of congestion and agglomeration on multifactor productivity growth in Dutch regions. Journal of Economic Geography8: 181–209.
14.
CassimanBVeugelersR (2006) In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science52: 68–82.
15.
ChungWKalninsA (2001) Agglomeration effects and performance: A test of the Texas lodging industry. Strategic Management Journal22: 969–988.
16.
CicconeA (2002) Agglomeration effects in Europe. European Economic Review46: 213–227.
17.
CohenWMKlepperS (1996) Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. The Review of Economics and Statistics78: 232–243.
18.
CohenWMLevinthalDA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly35: 128–152.
19.
DeCarolisDMDeedsDL (1999) The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal20: 953–968.
20.
DeedsDLRothaermelFT (2003) Honeymoons and liabilities: The relationship between age and performance in research and development alliances. Journal of Product Innovation Management20: 468–484.
21.
DruckerJFeserE (2012) Regional industrial structure and agglomeration economies: An analysis of productivity in three manufacturing industries. Regional Science and Urban Economics42: 1–14.
22.
FeserEJ (2002) Tracing the sources of local external economies. Urban Studies39: 2485–2506.
23.
FlyerFShaverJM (2003) Location choices under agglomeration externalities and strategic interaction. In: BaumJACSorensonO (eds) Advances in Strategic Management: Geography and Strategy, Amsterdam: Elsevier JAI, pp. 193–214.
24.
FoltaTBCooperACBaikY (2006) Geographic cluster size and firm performance. Journal of Business Venturing21: 217–242.
GiulianiEBellM (2005) The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: Evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy34: 47–68.
27.
GlaeserELKallalHDScheinkmanJA (1992) Growth in cities. Journal of Political Economy100: 1126–1152.
28.
GlasmeierAK (1991) Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the World Watch Industry. Research Policy20: 469–485.
29.
GordonIRMcCannP (2000) Industrial clusters: Complexes, agglomerations or social networks?Urban Studies37: 513–532.
30.
GrantRM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal17: 109–122.
31.
HagedoornJCloodtM (2003) Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?Research Policy32: 1365–1379.
32.
HendersonJV (2003) Marshall’s scale economies. Journal of Urban Economics53: 1–28.
33.
HoogstraGJvan DijkJ (2004) Explaining firm employment growth: Does location matter?Small Business Economics22: 179–192.
34.
IllerisS (1996) The Service Economy: A Geographical Approach, Chichester: John Wiley.
35.
JacobsJ (1969) The Economy of Cities, New York: Random House.
36.
KalePDyerJHSinghH (2002) Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal23: 747–767.
37.
KalninsAChungW (2004) Resource-seeking agglomeration: A study of market entry into the lodging industry. Strategic Management Journal25: 689–699.
38.
KnobenJOerlemansLAG (2006) Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews8: 71–89.
39.
KogutBZanderU (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combination capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science3: 383–397.
LavieD (2006) The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review31: 638–658.
42.
MalmbergAMaskellP (2002) The elusive concept of localization economies: Towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering. Environment and Planning A34: 429–449.
43.
McCannBTFoltaTB (2008) Location matters: Where we have been and where we might go in agglomeration research. Journal of Management34: 532–565.
44.
McCannBTFoltaTB (2011) Performance differentials within geographic clusters. Journal of Business Venturing26: 104–123.
45.
MenzelMPFornahlD (2009) Cluster life-cycles: Dimensions and rationales for cluster evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change19: 205–238.
46.
MillerDChenMJ (1994) Sources and consequences of competitive inertia—A study of the United-States airline industry. Administrative Science Quarterly39: 1–23.
47.
Molina-MoralesFXMartinez-FernandezMT (2003) The impact of industrial district affiliation on firm value creation. European Planning Studies11: 155–170.
48.
PouderRStJohnCH (1996) Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation. Academy of Management Review21: 1192–1225.
49.
Porter M (2000) Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly 14: 15–34.
50.
Porter ME and Stern S (2001) Innovation: Location matters. MIT Sloan Management Review 42: 28–36.
51.
RigbyDLBrownWM (2015) Who benefits from agglomeration?Regional Studies49: 28–43.
52.
RondePHusslerC (2005) Innovation in regions: What does really matter?Research Policy34: 1150–1172.
53.
SaxenianA (1994) Lessons from Silicon valley. Technology Review97: 42–51.
54.
ShaverJMFlyerF (2000) Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States. Strategic Management Journal21: 1175–1193.
55.
SohnJ (2004) Do birds of a feather flock together?: Economic linkage and geographic proximity. The Annals of Regional Science38: 47–73.
56.
Sorensen JB and Sorenson O (2003) From conception to birth: Opportunity perception and resource mobilization in entrepreneurship. In: Baum JAC and Soreson JB (eds) Geography and Strategy. Amsterdam: Jai-Elsevier Sci Bv, pp. 89–117.
57.
StaberU (1998) Inter-firm co-operation and competition in industrial districts. Organization Studies19: 701–724.
58.
StJohnCHPouderRW (2006) Technology clusters versus industry clusters: Resources, networks, and regional advantages. Growth and Change37: 141–171.
59.
StorperMVenablesAJ (2004) Buzz: Face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography4: 351–370.
60.
StuartTSorensonO (2003) The geography of opportunity: Spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms. Research Policy32: 229–253.
61.
van den BoschFAJVolberdaHWde BoerM (1999) Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organization Science10: 551–568.
62.
van OortFG (2015) Unity in variety? Agglomeration economics beyond the specialization-diversity controversy. In: KarlssonCAnderssonMNormanT (eds) Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Economic Geography, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 259–271.
63.
van OortFGvan BrusselJRaspeO (2006) Economische Netwerken in De Regio, The Hague: RPB.
64.
van Soest D, Gerking S and van Oort FG (2002) Knowledge externalities, agglomeration economies, and employment growth in Dutch cities. CENTER Discussion paper, Vol. 2002-41, Tilburg: Microeconomics.
65.
ZaheerAGeorgeVP (2004) Reach out or reach within? Performance implications of alliances and location in biotechnology. Managerial and Decision Economics25: 437–452.
