EADI 10Th General Conference, 19-21 September 2002, Lubljana, Slovenia

EADI 10th General Conference, 19-21 September 2002, Lubljana, Slovenia.

“From Marshallian District to Localized Productive Systems. The Polish case”.

Dr Barbara A. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA1

”When an industry has chosen a locality for itself it is likely to stay there long: so great are the advantages which people following the same skilled trade get from near neighbourhood to one another”, Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics, Macmillan, London,1920, p.271.

Abstract. Using Ron Martin’s expression we face today “geographical turn” in economics which embraces three research programmes: 1/spatial agglomeration of economic activity; 2/dynamics of regional growth convergence; 3/ neo-Marshallian districts economics (Italian economist’s topic). The aim of this article is to offer initial reflection on the relevance of the “Marshallian District” concept in the analysis of regional development in Central Europe. The Marshallian industrial district is based on the external economies of agglomeration and the economics of urbanisation, and this kind of development we can see today in this part of Europe. The study concentrates on the positive development dynamics of “industrial districts” based on a network of small and medium-sized firms, in opposition with the decline of industrial centres of mass production. The crux of the matter is to establish whether or not industrial districts constitute a model for the regeneration of local and regional economies in Central European countries. The study of localized productive systems must be thorough and multidisciplinary and carried out through fieldwork. The aim is to understand how work, relationships and culture as well as material and immaterial infrastructures that give a place its original identity within the international division of labour regenerate in locally coherent forms. The work carried out

1 ROSES /CNRS-University of Paris 1, 106-112, Blvd de l’Hôpital, 75647 PARIS CEDEX 13, [email protected] ; tel. 33 1 44 07 81 88; fax 33 1 44 07 81 91.

1 on localized productive systems (LPS) should be followed up by field studies and a qualitative adaptation of statistical measurements These studies need to be carried out, surveying local players in order to observe future evolutions.

JEL Classification B3, R12, P2.

Introduction. In the context of future EU expansion eastwards is necessery to integrate candidate countries to the ESDP (European Spatial Development Perspective) with it’s polycentric coherent development. It’s three objectifs are : 1/ social and economic cohesion, 2/ soustainaible development, 3/ better competitiveness of european regions, with motto : « Non, for blue banana, yes for polycentric development of Europe « (SDEC, 2000). It seems that the "metropolis" scenario, renforced by location of FDI, would allow candidate countries to join the European Union, within the framework of "a multi-speed Europe" (DATAR, 1996). The problem now is to know, what are the assets held by central Europe for endogenous development. Regional production systems grouped together on the spatial level and integrated company networks at the regional level could serve to create local hubs of competition. Our study concentrates on this new possibility, looking for the possible birth of a localized competitive productive systems in Poland located in Free Economic Zones and in Euroregions. The paper concentrates on the positive development dynamics of « industrial districts » based on the network of small and medium-sized firms, in opposition with the decline of industrial centres of mass production in transition countries. The communist productive system involved the concentration of industry in highly specialised industrial districts with priority given to heavy industry at the expense of production of consumer goods (DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA, 1982). The experience of the industrial districts answers this new requirement : it is a type of industrialisation which is particulary well adopted to the need for flexibility and which could help industrialisation in emerging countries as well as in transition countries (COURLET, 1997). In the specific case of developing countries, the word “cluster” is often used, indicating a greater diversity of forms than industrial districts (REQUIER-DESJARDINS, 2000). Nevertheless, no author has defined the characteristics of new industrial districts in a way rigorous enough to make is possible to easily establish the perspectives of their incidence on growth over space and time (MARKUSEN, 2000). An important work has developed by OECD’s Programme on Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) to analyse local clusters in transition

2 economies (OECD, 2001). Five transition countries: Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia and Hungary are involved in. The paper has three sections. In section 1 I briefly recount the theories that form the subject of the paper. In section 2 I present the Central European development model after ten years transition. Section 3 is dedicated to analyse the emergence of first Localized Productive Systems in Poland. I. Theoretical Background. Regional research has proposed increasingly deep-rooted differentiation between the various types of regional development, in opposition with simple centre/periphery models. Faced with the revival of regional science in general and its links with industrial economics, the relevance of the latter models appears to be declining. The theoretical analysis of regional growth at the centre of our research has been given new life by progress made in understanding the mechanics of both economic growth and changes in the agglomeration of economic activities. The changes underway tend to transform the means of understanding industrialisation and development problems by integrating a territorial dimension as an explanatory variable of growth phenomena. Two theoretical currents are at the origin of this progress; the theories of endogenous growth initiated by P. ROMER (1986) and R. E. LUCAS (1988), and, with regard to the formation of agglomerations, the new geographic economics developed from P. KRUGMAN’s model (1991). These two theoretical schools of localisation and growth can be placed parallel to one another as they are both concerned with questions of spatial concentration and divergence. Since the mid-1980’s, growth theory has been rejuvenated by insight gained from studying the micro-economic foundations of the process of factor accumulation, from endogenous sources of growth. This new growth theory, in opposition with the neo-classic growth model, holds that economies follow divergent growth paths. Indeed, growth is not linear, it begins at certain growth points and is propagated, in an unbalanced way, to other points in space. The revival of growth economy is based on new industrial economy, like it was in case of the international economy in the beginning of the Eighties (GUELLEC&RALLE, 1995). The present study must be considered both from the point of view of macro-economic factors linked to transition in the 1990’s and to specific local features. The tenants of the first conception of the industrial district presented it as a productive complex whose operation is subject to the market’s behaviour and the rules of civil society (AZAIS, 1997). It is often presented as an alternative to

3 Fordism. According to GREMI2, Fordism opened the way to the new “territorial” type of development, based on an innovative capacity that is better able to carry out projects within social and industrial networks on a local level (GREMI, 1986; MAILLAT, 1988 ; PERRIN, 1989). Indeed, the local productive system notion appears alongside the term “flexible production” (PIORE & SABEL, 1984). Piore and Sabel argue that a new logic of production – “fexible specialization” – emerged as a challenge to mass production once markets for standarized goods were saturated, and higher quality and more specialized goods attracted consumers. This flexibility is based on small-sized production units, on the density of links between them and on the rapid reaction time of companies when faced with new internal and external conditions in the area (COURLET, 2000). This flexibility also implies the capacity to adapt to new technologies. One of many problems linked to the notion of flexibility is that the debate on this subject has centred on the organisation and spatial dynamics of the economic system in its role as a productive system. But, in the world of capitalist production, production is nothing more than a broader means of accumulating capital. Furthermore, the district phenomenon should be placed in a broad political economics’ framework: concerned with the nature of development and the transformation of capitalism. According to the American geographers Scott and Storper, there has been an “evolutionary tendency” towards flexible specialisation as a form of industrial organisation, but also towards flexible accumulation which they see as a new historic social era (SCOTT & STORPER, 1989). According to them, flexible specialisation and flexible localisation find their significance in the broader context of socio- historic processes. The question remaining unanswered is whether or not the new accumulation regime leads to a specific form of spatial organisation. The competitive advantage of flexible specialisation strategies and networks of small-sized companies relies on very specific conditions. It depends, on the one hand, on irregular and differentiated demand and on the other hand on low set- up costs (DUNFORT, 1992). Various factors may encourage a certain degree of regional reconcentration, such as, for example, certain sectors’ dependence on economies of agglomeration and the need for a faster and more flexible adaptation of the productive system, from the conception stage right through to the final manufacturing of a product; geographic proximity may thus help to fulfil this need. Spatial concentration may also be made easier by job insecurity

2 The GREMI (Groupe de Recherche Européen sur les Milieu Innovateur – European Research Group on Innovative Areas) has been based in Paris at University Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne since 1984 with the help of the Ministry of Urbanisation and Housing, at the time, and the Caisse de Dépôts et de Consignation.

4 in a number of traditional industrial zones, making it less pressing to search for more flexible, less costly labour (MARTINELLI & SCHOENBERGER, 1992). The flexible specialisation mode also brings about more flexible spatial relationships and competition between regions for industrial development, as the regions find themselves faced with the problematic development of underprivileged regions and the gap between the centre and the periphery. The experience of the industrial districts answers this new requirement; it is a type of industrialisation which is particularly well adapted to the need for flexibility and which could help industrialisation in emerging countries as well as in transition countries. I.1. The Marshallian Paradigm and Central European Development Model. The type of development observed in candidate countries today concerns economies of agglomeration and urbanisation (BRUNAT, 1996; SAMSON, 1996, BONLARON & BENSEBAA, 2001). BRUNAT refers to diffuse industrialisation, wherein the essentially familial relationship can be considered an informal type of relationship (BRUNAT, 1996). The notion of localised productive system (LPS) is based on the industrial districts model fathered by Alfred Marshall (MARSHALL, 1890). It was through his insistence on the question of the industrial localisation of companies that the notion of “territory” was integrated into economic discussion (AZAIS, 1997). He was the first to propose a new interpretation of the market, bypassing the perfect competition framework in favour of an analysis based on a group of companies gathered together in an “industrial district”. He described the specific socio-historic trajectory of a territory and the territorial stronghold of industrialisation. Alfred Marshall's work forms an instrumental starting point, a toolbox, which needs to be adapted in order to study companie’s behaviour, market structures and industrial performances. The revival of the industrial district concept was initiated by Beccatini in 1979 following the renewal of this type of local system in Italy, in particular, in the shape of a high level of concentration of small companies all active in the same sector within a given geographic area3. Another typical case is that of Silicon Valley in Santa Clara, although growth in this case was linked to the first stages of the life cycle of electronic components. The Marshallian districts of greater Los Angeles and the flexible industrial systems of Hong Kong should also be mentioned (SCOTT, 1992). On the macro-economic front, the problem is to decide whether or not LPS constitute a new form of industrialisation favouring the emergence of small and medium-sized companies.

3 Initial Italian research dates right back to the 1960’s and so Italy is now in possession of a great number of theoretical, historical and socio-economic studies on this subject.

5 The term “localized productive system” designates a collective way of living, thinking and producing that is characteristic of a given society, a space, and milieu. It is a socio-territorial entity characterised by the presence of an active community of people and a population of companies in a given geographical space. Alfred Marshall strongly emphasized the part played by human factors in his work, pointing out “mental and moral “qualities, such as integrity, self- confidence, patience temperance, honesty, loyalty, etc., (ARENA, 2000). The local productive system creates an “industrial atmosphere”, factor of osmosis and the transmission of know how over time (MARSHALL, 1919). Its most noticeable characteristic is its relatively homogeneous system of values and thought, which may be seen as the expression of a certain system of ethics concerning work, activity, family and reciprocity, all of which may be seen to condition the main aspects of life (BECCATINI, 1992). The industrial district is governed by a set of community and religious values or corporatist practices. It has its own specific forms of know-how, that are inimitable and deeply anchored in the territory (specific and general purpose artisan know-how).4 Individuals with common cultural backgrounds and experiences will share reasonably convergent mental models, ideologies, and institutions (DENZAU&NORTH, 1994). It seems that it will take a long time to establish a Marshallian “atmosphere” ( DALAGO, 1996; DUCHE, 2001). But, we may expect that the return to the culture of capitalisme in this part of Europe will be easier than in other former socialist countries, especially Russia. Cultural change under impact of economic change has been argued by Alfred Marshall more than a century ago. Marshall understood that customs making a part of what economists call today informal rules, are not immutable but “have been imperceptibly growing and dwindling again, to meet the changing exigencies of successive generations” (quoted in WINIECKI, 1998).

II. The Polish Case. Ten years of transition have not deleted the regional disparities in Poland, but on the contrary, have accentuated them. Those regional disparities in Poland are, above all, the legacy of a long history, based on the partition of the country among three bordering countries (Prussia, Russia and the Austro-Hungarian empire), a legacy reinforced by the border changes dating from 1945. In fact, the western and south parts of the country, under Prussian and austro-hungarian ccupation for over a century, called "Poland A", presents the characteristics of an industrially developed region, while the eastern regions (under Russian

4 An exception to this rule is undoubtably the reconstruction of an industrial district specialised in jewellerely established by Sudeten Germans forced to flee following World War II.

6 occupation), called "Poland B", carry the stigmata of a certain underdevelopment (little industry and infrastructure, parcelled and relatively unprofitable agriculture). During the communist period, the Polish authorities were not able to erase development gaps existing between regions, in spite of efforts undertaken (KUROWSKI, 1996). Foreign investors tend to target Polish urban areas with a well-developed infrastructure, a skilled labour force and easy access to office space and production facilities. In effect, for more than a century, economic growth in Poland has been linked to the expansion of industrial poles and cities. Poland is a multi-centred country: the network formed by the six largest cities, Warsaw, Gdansk, Szczecin, Poznan, Wroclaw and Krakow, form growth poles with a development influence on the outlying regions. The majors FDI are located in those cities. It has accentuated disparities between the cities and the countryside since the urban centres tend to concentrate financial activity, superior services and a greater opening on the international community. This more modern outlook found in the cities is a powerful factor of transformation (SAMSON&GOUTIN-BOURLAT, 1995). The regional contrasts are particulary striking in the case of greenfield investment. The metropolitan provice Mazovia (with Warsaw) has captured rougly 30% of the greenfield manufacturing FDI in Poland. The extreme east- west disparity is ilustrate by fact that greenfield FDI in the eastern voivodeships is from five to fifteen times smaller in per capita terms than in western regions (DOMANSKI, 1999). The activity of foreign investors in Poland ‘s western provinces is largely connected with with the presence of German investor (JAROSZ, 1997). II.1. The role of Small and Medium Seized Enterprises (SMEs). The Marshallian industrial district is based on the external economies of agglomerations and the economics of urbanisation. It is this type of localised productive system and diffused and spontaneous industrialisation context that can justly be applied to an analysis of regional development in Poland (BRUNAT, 1996). In effect, recent growth in Poland is closely linked to the dynamism of small and medium-sized emerging structures of a spontaneous nature. The country’s economic history and the capitalist culture that make up the national heritage have helped to establish a new commercial and entrepreneurial spirit in western Poland in particular. During the years of communist rule, Poland maintained a large private agricultural and significant retail and private crafts sectors. Furthermore in the 1980s, governments introduced several pro-market reform measures (economic self-government, relative autonomy for enterprises and partial price liberalization) as well as the fundamental law of 1988, which allowed the creation of private commercial

7 firms, and remained in force until the fall of 1989. In the 1980s one could also notice a growing social approval of entrepreneurship and of the role of financial incentives in economic behaviour—important social preconditions of a private market economy. The relations between the Centre and the enterprises were affected by introduction of some indirect control mechanisms (prices and taxation), during implementation of the 1982 economic reform. By the end of 1989, there were approximately 500,000 private enterprises outside agriculture, most of them created in the late 1980s (SURDEJ, 2000). But, the emergence of small and medium-sized industries and firms has been particularly visible since the beginning of transition (CHMIEL, 1997; GRUDZEWSKI & HEJDUK, 1998; DUCHENE & RUSIN, 2002). Small, private, spontaneously grown activities are the foundation stones of the Polish economic revival. The emergence of small and medium-sized companies acting as a motor for growth and job creation, this emergence being spatially determined: near German, Czech and Baltic borders (DESPINEY&BACZKO, 2001). Although the majority of small and medium-sized industries and firms were created in the commercial sector, new entrepreneurs are now beginning to orient capital accumulated in this sector towards manufacturing.

Table 1 : Estimate of the number of active micro-firms 1994-1999 (in thousands):

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Micro-firms 1 808 1 910 1 986 2 140 2 306 2904 3176 registered in REGON Of which are 1 035 1 057 1 255 1 493 1 634 1744 1766 active 57,2% 55,3% 63,2% 69,8% 70,9% 60,0% 55,6% (thousands) (in %)

Source : Duchêne & Rusin, « Innovation, mobilité du travail et croissance dans la transition. Le « miracle » polonais », ROSES, Paris, 2000, Raport o stanie sektora malych i srednich przedsiebiorstw w

8 Polsce w latach 1999-2000, PAED, Warszawa, 2001; Male i srednie przedsiebiorstwa w Polsce 2002, PAED, Warszawa, 2002.

Estimates carried out for the year 1990 alone refer to the creation of 140 000, of which the majority (126 000) ceased to exist, leaving the total number of existing firms at 518 000 at the end of the year (SURDEJ, 2000). In spite of a slight slowdown between 1993 and 1995, micro-firms represent a very dynamic demographic process; the number of active micro-firms has been increasing by around 200 000 a year, on average, since 1996.5 First important decrease (50 000) was noted in 2001, linked to recent Polish economic and budget crisis. In the space of ten years, between 1988 (the year the law concerning the liberalisation of economic activity came into effect) and 1998, the numbers of entrepreneurs grew from 700 000 to 1 600 000. In fact, the policy aimed at encouraging the development of small, private production and foreign companies does not date from the change of the political regime (ROGULSKA, 1985, 1988). There are 65 small and medium-sized firms for every 1000 inhabitants in Poland, as opposed to 51 in the European Union. The phenomenon of diffuse industrialisation has been reinforced by the creation of a multitude of small, mixed nationality companies and Polish-German companies represent the largest percentage of these firms in Poland. Unlike the case in Hungary and the Czech Republic, these joint firms tend to be small units in Poland. Estimating their number has proven difficult as ventures representing a value of less than one million dollars are not taken into account (according to certain sources, as little as 30-40% of German investment in Poland may have been registered). Between 1993 and 1998, the number of joint Polish-German firms grew from 2943 to 5177 (a growth of 75%).6 The proximity factor has been reinforced by aid made available by the German government to companies wishing to set up in the East.

II.2. The Emergence of Localized Productive Systems ( SPL) in Poland.

5 As far as the proportion of “ ghost ” firms in the register is concerned, their relative importance first increased, going from 30.5% in 1993 to 44.7% in 1995. Then, starting in 1998, the proportion began to fall, reaching 29.1% of the total. This turnabout can be explained by the adoption of a decree making it obligatory for firms to inform the REGON of any changes concerning their activity. Furthermore, the GUS has also started to “ clean up ” the register (cf.Duchêne&Rusin, 2000). 6 According to data from a PHARE Cross-Border Co-operation project entitled “ Development of analysis, information and promotional material regarding the status and opportunities for international co-operation in the Polish-German border region ” (PL 9701-03-01-L001).

9 The ESDP (European Spatial Development Perspective) accepts the role of the cities within development and Europe-wide development. There are cleary disparities between cities, and within cities themselves. In EU member countries, cities have the task of modernising and developing. The importance of good accesibility for the location of new factories often attracts them to the vicinity of major cities that enjoy the comparatively best road connections. II.2.1.Two dynamic clusters: Tarnowo and Kobierzyce. The Marshallian district is based on economies of urbanisation and agglomeration. Those agglomeration economies can be intra-industrial or inter- industrial. Urbanisation economies are external to the firm and to the branch, but internal to the urban region. They are linked to the diversity and quality of infrastructures. Many contemporary authors underline the innovative clusters are to be explain primarily in terms of urbanisation economies. In contrast, Porter argue that that district (cluster) in advanced capitalist economies are not the result of urbanisation economies (PORTER, 1998). In accord with the industrial district debate it may be impossible to explain all geographical clusters in terms of any single, universal theory (MARTIN, 2001). There are in Poland, characteristic clusters of foreign and domestic greenfield investment along future motorways and near two regional metropoles: west of Poznan (Tarnowo Podgorne) and south of Wroclaw (Kobierzyce). Kobierzyce and Tarnowo Podgorne has seen a concentration of foreign investments not met anywhere else in Poland outside of the largest cities. Our two municipalities are located on two major transport corridors : A2 (Paris- Berlin-Warsaw-Moscow) and A4 (Berlin-Wroclaw-Katowice-Krakow-Lvov), and near two airports : Wroclaw - Starachowice and Poznan – Lawica. These transport corridors remain the zones of growth in Poland measured by increase of industrial production by voivodships according old administrative divide during the first years of transition (1988-1993) (DOMANSKI, 1997). Before the transition process both typicaly agricultural municipalities are today on the two first positions on municipality’s ranking for 1999 and 2000 (DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA, 1993). The municipality of Tarnowo Podgorne has attracted more than $300 million worth of foreign capital already invested and further 300 million committed, which by far is the largest figure recorded by a rural municipality in Poland. There are 300 joint-ventures and between them Reetsma, Stoliwerck, Balma, Herlitz, Nico and Coca-Cola. In Tarnowo Podgorne the revenues per capita is 60 percent higher than average in Greit Poland voivodship (GORZELAK&JALOWIECKI, 1999). Good financial position of Municipality is seen especialy since 1996 (see Figure 1). Tarnowo Podgorne is located near

10 Poznan, on A2, European corridor Paris-Berlin-Poznan-Varsovie-Minsk- Moscou.

80 70 60 50 40 Total 30 Investissements 20 10 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Figure 1: Tarnowo Podgorne Gmina’s budget with investments expenditures (1990-2000). Source: Gmina’s Office.

The municipality of Kobierzyce benefits from its position on highway A4, near regional metropole Wroclaw. The nomber of investors, both foreign and domestic is today 1000 : i.a. Cargill, Cadbury, Coca-Cola Bottlers, Macro Cash & Carry, Castorama, OBI, Tesco, Office Depot (see Figure 2 in Annex).

11 Figure 3 : Zones of growth in Poland measured by increase of industrial production according old administrative divide during the first years of transition (1988-1993), P= Poznan ; Wr= Wroclaw ; W=Warsaw ; Kt= Katowice ; Kr =Krakow ; G=Gdansk ; L=Lodz Source : DOMANSKI, 1997 .

The majority of them are the small and medium-sized enterprises (20-100 employees). Location of Wrocław in regard to Poland and Europe is favourable. It is at a same distance from three European capitals: Berlin, Warsaw and Prague and is also relatively close to three other capitals: Vienna, Bratislava and Budapest. Furthermore Wrocław is situated at at transit point of some important transport routes: west-east - Berlin / Dresden - Wrocław - Kraków - Lviv - Kiev: south-north - Vienna - Brno - Wrocław - Poznań - Szczecin as well as on the route between Warsaw and Prague (see Figure 3). Geographical location is

12 promising for transit traffic. Furthermore Wrocław is located on the river Odra (connecting Upper and Lower Silesia with the Baltic-sea ports Szczecin and Świnoujście) and is located at a crossing-point of many important railroad connections. The new projected Integrated Logistic Centre in Wroclaw will play an important role for the future local development (PLATJE, 2001). This logistical center can play also an important role as an integral element in the new transport infrastructure creating conditions for the integration of the national logistical center to european system. The success of Kobierzyce and Tarnowo Podgorne rests not simply on their attractive conditions (location on the future highways near regional metropoles - the main routes to be constructed first are the A2 and A4 oriented to making Transeuropean links) but to a large extent on the activity of their local governments. As Plassard point aut, the impact of a new motorway depends very much on how it is integrated into the broader planning activity taking place in the region (PLASSARD, 1994). The role of local government is absolutely fundamental in the development of two municipalities. In fact, local government appears to be one of the most important factors in the post-communist transformation in Poland. Our two municipalities have proven that local governments are able to mobilize much local potential that has lain dormant under the socialist system. II.2.2. Special Economic Zones as Dynamic Clusters. The role of central government was fondamental in the creation of Special Economic Zones (SEZs). The concept of the FEZ as a potentially dynamic business cluster is broadly similar to the life cycle model. In this cluster model, the dynamic nature of the zone is twofold (NOWICKI, 1999). First of all, it is argued that free economic zones and economic processing (EPZ) zones can indeed contribute to the upgrading of the technological and skill levels of the zone-operating nation. Rather than constituting a distinct type of enterprise cluster, as suggested by UNCTAD (1998) in its typology of enterprise clustering, many zones in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and elsewhere in fact encompass two dynamic types of clustering: technology parks and shelter incubator programs for small and medium-sized firms. From the perspective of national and local business development, even the modest assembly activities of some traditional export processing zones need to be analyzed as a strategic first step prior to subsequent cluster upgrading. Drucker’s (1990) early analogy for dynamic clustering in Mexico’s “maquiladora” zones was the “ugly duckling” : many zone assembly plants employing essentially unskilled labor would be transformed over time into exemplary, integrated operations complete with research, design and extensive training facilities. Porter recognizes this same

13 potential for change when noting that in developing countries, “free trade zones and industrial parks act as powerful policy levers favoring cluster growth” (PORTER, 1998). Similarly, the OECD observes that the new economic processing zone is a rule-defined, “dynamic incubator,” “investment-intensive and management-driven”, a logical outgrowth of yesterday’s labor-intensive, incentive- driven export processing zone (OECD, 2001). The idea to create SEZ is relatively new in Eastern Europe7 (DESPINEY, 1998). This project is most promising for a country like Poland having an important transport and transit system. The fiftheen existing zones occupy 2,670 ha of land and according to forecasts could provide 90 000 new jobs in a few years. Almost all of them located along the major Polish motorways (the zone’s creation is closely related with necessity to make important capital investments by host coutry governement in zone’s infrastructure, among them transportation infrastructure). Some of these zones thus qualify as innovative clusters on the basis of the criteria developed by Porter (1998), UNCTAD and others: general technology levels and degree of change within the cluster over time, and the level of coordination and networking achieved with related firms over time. In Poland, it appears that in some cases, the influence of Special Economic Zones on the location of FDI is starting to be seen. For exemple, for the first SEZ created in 1995 in Mielec it means pretty good position in ranking of medium-sized cities (Class “B” in terms of investment atractiveness). With another city Pulawy, Mielec is performing better than other medium-sized cities on the whole territory of the “East Belt “ voivodship. Gliwice a large city situated in Upper Silesia, has made a considerable improvement in this field thanks to Special economic zone, established in 1996. Ten-year tax exemption plus 50% relief for another ten years are incentives for companies investing at least 2 000 000 ECU or employing 40 or 50 people. But the influence of SEZ on the position of all cities involved in this experience is neither automatic nor immediate. The important problem in liks with EU enlargement is the problem of competition, which is under discussion beetwen Polish Government and European Commission. The concept of special economic zones has drawn critisism, especially with regard to international competition and impact of unequal growth across a national territory. Companies that displayed interest in investing in SEZs received tax breaks: exemptions from corporate tax for the

7 After the breakup of the USSR, a second decree in favor of special economic zones was signed on 4 June 1992. It set export taxes on raw materials at 50% of the taxes enforced in the Federation. Yeltsin's decisions confirmed the existence of twelve such zones across the country, but only two of them, Kaliningrad and Nakhodka, seemed viable. It is no accident that these two zones lies in sea borders. The others, never came into operation.

14 first 10 years, and 50 percent exemptions for following 10 years if the companies meet investment-value and employment conditions (for exemple, companies investing at least 2 000 000 euros or employing 40 or 50 people in the case of Mielec SEZ). The European Commission was encouraged to treat them as specific subsidies, but in fact, investors which have been invested in Polish special Economic Zones will leave an important part of benefices accorded by Polish autorities. Concern for SMEs invested in SEZ the last dispositions maintain their privileges during the first five years and similar exemptions like for big companies after this period. II.3. Localisation economies within an industry. The sector of cloths and textiles was choosen to study economies of localisation within an industry. Our decision is based on the fact that the experience of the Third Italy initially concerned traditional activities such as textiles, clothing, leather goods and shoes (MARTINELLI & SCHOENBERGER, 1992). Indeed, the majority of Italian districts are situated close to agricultural centres and about 50 of them are specialised in textile-clothing and shoes. These districts represent 42.5% of industrial employment and insure 1/3 of Italian exports (VIDAL, 2001). According to the Italian authors, Marshall’s analysis could explain nearly all of the present regional dynamics of the Third Italy. Small firms have been unanimously pointed to as contributing to the renewal of activity, particularly with regard to equipment, a direct consequence of the use of intensive sub-contracting by medium and large firms (AMIN & ROBINS, 1992). In practice, Marshallian industrial districts cover various geographic scales. They may coincide with a neighbourhood of a given city or stretch across an entire metropolitan area (SCOTT, 1992). Certain studies appear to confirm the revival of local productive systems in three Polish cities: Poznan8, Lodz and Krakow (GRUCHMAN et al., 1993; KRATKE, 1997). II.3.1. Lokalized Productive System in Lodz? Somme interesting conclusions appear in the study carried out in Lodz, where a research project has been underway for eight years based on a sample of 142 small and medium-sized firms and using the combined efforts of the Université de Montpellier 3 and the University of Lodz. Traditional branches, i.e. textile- clothing, which have seen the greatest number of bankruptcies, have been reorganised as small and medium-sized family firms (JEWTUCHOWICZ, 1998; DUCHE, 2000). This took place following the restructuring of large socialist

8 The productive system in Poznan has been under observation by a team led by Professor Gruchman since 1985 within the framework of the GREMI. Surveys addressed to local firms and organisations provided the pool of information making it possible to analyse the innovative aptitude of each region (the GREMI survey was adapted to take into account special conditions facing Polish firms) (GRUCHMAN & GLUGIEWICZ, 1986).

15 firms that sold their machines and equipment to their former workers. Today they represent a more 51% of firms surveyed in the city; “despecialisation” and diversification have thus taken place, and these two phenomena could announce a revival of LPS (GAROFOLI, 1993). The city’s old industrial tradition helped the city to place itself in a better position compared with other industrial regions in Poland. However, it would be excessive, at the present time, to allude to a “company culture”, the plethora of new small and medium-sized industries and firms still belonging to what is often referred to as the “grey economy”. The firms remain too numerous and isolated, carrying out their activity alone; there is no solidarity between them. The companies found in the sample are not innovative firms, and they have little inclination to co-operate with development organisations. According to DUCHE, it will take time to sort out the mutations underway in Central and Eastern Europe, and, for the time being, it is impossible to isolate a specific production mode (DUCHE, 2000). But, DUCHE on the base of her researches, asks whether or not it is reasonable to think of textile and clothing as a Marshallian district simply because they come from the past (DUCHE, 2000). II.3.2. The Neisse Euroregion9. European Union expansion eastward is indispensable. But waiting for this, cross-border co-operation appears to help to establish economies of scale and reduce production costs. Diseconomies of scale linked to disappaerance of eastern markets (ANDREFF, 1994) may, thus, have been compensated. The neighbourhood of western european countries with a long history of linkages between science and technology, had a huge influence on economic development of central european countries. Here are, at the present time, the chances of reviving a localised productive system that would give life to new forms of interregional co-operation. The redrawing of old national territories no longer seems to be the product of diplomacy and, in particular, wars; henceforth, it would appear to depend upon industrial economics (MICHALET, 1999). The principle of dissemination of localised activities is, thus, the only one retained for a more in-depth analysis, and it, too, must be confirmed in practice. One thing is certain, the joint territorialisation of the company system and the state system, insures the co-operation of institutions, and stability conditions which will make it possible to accumulate know-how in order to develop local capacities for technology creation.

9 There are 13 Euroregions in Poland, on western, eastern, south and north borders of the country (DESPINEY- ZOCHOWSKA, 1997).

16 In order to study the possible rebirth of LPS in the condition of globalisation precess we have concentrated on the case of the "Neisse" Euroregion, situated at the Polish-German-Czech border,10 which presents an inherited historical and regional continuity enabling us to observe the features that make up regional dynamism (see Figure 5).11 More than ever before, the recent development of local productive systems seems to confirm our hypothesis, made for the first time in November 1995 at the University of Wroclaw (DESPINEY- ZOCHOWSKA, 1999). This hypothesis on possible rebirth of a localized productive system there is based on the confirmation of ROSES's study for DATAR did in 1996: emergence of a dynamic peripheral crown in the western and south part of the country, along the German and Czech borders. The Polish latest researches confirme this phenomenon (GRUCHMAN et all, 2000; PAEP- Report, 2001 ; DESPINEY&BACZKO, 2001). Here it is a question of a preliminary task, confronted for the moment with the incompatibility of statistical measures in a transitional period for the Eastern

10 There exist in Poland, at the country's western border, four Euroregions: "Pomerania", "Pro-Europa Viadrina", Szprewa-Nysa-Bobr" et "Neisse”. This last was created in 1991, and made up of 6 Saxon Kreise (districts) on the German side, somme powiat of Lower Silesia woivodship and one of Lubuskie on the Polish, as well as the Czech administrative districts of Liberec, Jablonec, Semily, Ceska Lipa and Sluknov.

11Apart from textiles, Central Europe had occupied a leading position in mining and metallurgy from the mid- 15th to the mid-16th century. Its advancement in the technical aspects of extraction and processing of ores assured it of the leading rank in silver, cooper, lead, and tin production. Competition pitted the producers of Saxony, Bohemia, and Pomerania against one another. On this subject see JEANNIN (P.), "Dépendance et capacité de développement dans le cadre régional en Europe centrale à la fin de l'ancien régime", dans « Europe Centrale. Réalité, mythe, enjeu XVIII-XXème sieclès », Cahiers de Varsovie, N°22, 1991, pp.85-104.

17 economies, the quality and adaptability of these measures being basic. Polish statistics leave less to be desired compared with other Eastern countrie's sources. As concerns the Euroregions, they are part of a statistical programme called "PL- 14 Euroregions"made by the Office of Statistics at Jelenia Gora, and integrated by GUS in its plan for foreign cooperation. Since the beginning of transition, the role of border regions has made an about-face; the ease with which it can be crossed makes contact possible and this has led to the development of trade, migrations and even conflicts (BAFOIL, 1996). The border is now, thus, a “seam” in a contact zone, a place of competition and complementarity (COURLET, 1988). The question remains whether or not “local industrial culture” (a key element in the institutional framework of any local productive system based on local industrial tradition) was destroyed by this forty-five year split and to what extent the socialist heritage weighs on the area’s structure and on the reorganisation of relationships between organisations implanted in the border area. The incomplete market and institutional reforms in especially in three transitional countries contribute to hight level of risk in transborder economic relationships. Although certain studies indicate that the creation and diffusion of small and medium-sized firms is particularly noticeable along the German border, it is too early to point to the creation of a local productive system (KRATKE, 1997). But, we may expect that the return to the culture of capitalisme in those three parts of the Euroregion will be easier than in other former socialist countries, especially Russia. Cultural change under impact of economic change has been argued by Alfred Marshall more than a century ago. Marshall understood that customs making a part of what economists call today informal rules, are not immutable but “have been imperceptibly growing and dwindling again, to meet the changing exigencies of successive generations” ( quoted in WINIECKI, 1998). II.3.2. 1. Path dependency. The Marshallian dynamics tell us that the outcome depends on the initial conditions : history, as well as tastes, technology, and factor endowments, matters (Krugman, 1991). The economic and cultural links between eastern Germany, Silesia, and Bohemia are the heritage of a common history of the three neighbours, revolving round the presence of the Germans in these regions through the centuries. The era of the weaving industry's growth began in the 16th century on the initiative of High German traders, who ordered production through collective delivery contracts made with the guilds of the towns of Saxony,

18 Lusatia, Silesia and Bohemia.12 The strength of the textile secteur also asserted itself in the area of clothing, Silesia, Saxony and Bohemia selling to the East great quantities of woolen fabrics of middling quality but low- priced, until the mid-17th century. From the beginning of the 17th century weaving activity spilled over into the villages and ended up, along with spinning, occupying entire families by the 18th century. The impetus came from such urban centres as Hirschberg (today Jelenia Gora), distinguished by the wealth of its businessmen. This Kaufsystem allowed the manufacturer, who sold his own merchandise a formal independence, and in the end made him carry the full risk in any given situation. 13 It allowed a considerable extension of this proto-industry in a regional economy where it was the moving force. The positive follow on effects of a rural industry - job creation, stimulation of demographic growth, activation of the home food market- were reinforced by the fact that the weaving works took their place in a regional panoply rich in various industries.14 Silesia's economic development made it a remarkably advanced region in spite of its social order's feudal structures. This appreciation is based especially on the weaving works international importance, at a time when they were in competition with their French counterparts in the Spanish-American markets. One thing is certain: in the region bordering on Germany, belonging to the German cultural sphere, or clearly overlapping it, there are sure signs of advanced economic development, by the standards of the time. Central Europe's integration with the international economic system was achieved mainly through German channels. In Silesia as in other regions open to continental business, monetary circulation was plainly more lively than in the neighbouring Polish regions supplying Holland and England.15 II.3.2. 2. LPSs between decentralisation and globalization. The three inalienable conditions of a true revival of the local productive systems in Central european countries line are decentralisation, the resolution of the land dispute and the free movement of the populations. Although the first condition seems to have been touched upon by recent administrative reforms in Central

12JEANNIN (P.), . "Dépendance et capacités de développement dans le cadre régional en Europe Centrale à la fin de l'ancien régime", dans "L'Europe Centrale. Réalité, mythe, enjeu XVIII-XX ème sieclès", Cahiers de Varsovie, N°2, 1991p. 101.

13 ibidem, p. 104. 14 On the region's industrial development see HENDERSON (W.O.) Britain and Industrial Europe 1750- 1870. Studies in British Influence on the Industrial Revolution in Western Europe, Liverpool, The University Press, 1954, pp.139-167. 15 The textile industry has a very old tradition in Poland, it orginated in the Middle Ages. However, its greatest development took place in the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries.

19 Europe (LHOMEL, 1999) admission to the European Union seems increasingly vital in order to fulfil the second and third conditions. Localised productive systems can be an instrument for territorial development policies. The Polish experience of greenfield FDI and generally of SMEs location in the 1990s confirms the considerable role played by local institutions in the process of location choice. With the appearance of LPS, there has been a movement towards a new system of dialogue between the State (i.e. the fifteen members of the European Union) and local communities (COURLET, 2000). The industrial districts analysis used in Italy points to the first elements of local governance on this territory through the decisions of local government authorities, the private sector and civil society (REQUIER-DESJARDIN, 2000). The regions need autonomy, power and the capability to carry out theirs own policies, all of which depend on territorial decentralisation. The decentralisation process did not start with the transition , the same may be said of the economic decentralisation process (ROGULSKA, 1985; DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA, 1988 and 2001). In Central Europe, state territorial structures are now being decentralised, we must, thus, ask ourselves how the territorial element can help to orient this evolution towards improved productive organisation. Will the two processes, i.e. decentralisation presently underway in the East and the possible revival of LPS in this part of Europe, reinforce one another or follow different dynamics? For the moment it is difficult to answer this question, baring in mind that the process has only just begun. For example, there is no consensus on the role government authorities should play in the birth of LPS. For some, the revival of LPS will only take place with the active support of regional authorities (either owners or simple players) in developing a network of diffuse, non spontaneous industries (SAMSON & GOUTIN-BOURLAT, 1995). This is the case of the former GDR, where the transition process was not spontaneous and maintenance of economic activities depended on massive financial transfers and an active role by the German State. The Polish case is completely different. The majority of small and medium-sized industries and firms were created at the beginning of transition, with almost no help from the State (LIPOWSKI & DESPINEY, 1990). The productive traditions and experiences of a given local productive system may circulate in the global network, showing themselves either through products which are well-accepted in the marketplace or through ideas concerning the organisation of the production process, borrowed or imposed (standardisation, production lines, scientific organisation of work or subcontracting). If a given local experience (local know-how, special materials, etc.) fails to enter into the circuit, it becomes a part of folklore (BECCATINI &

20 RULLANI, 1995). According to A. AMIN and K. ROBINS (1992), recent changes in regional and local economies must be put back into their global perspective, at the heart of which multinational firms still constitute the main creative force. Some authors go even further, suggesting that the production rationalisation strategies of multinational firms consists in the international decomposition of production processes, signifying the loss of autonomy and the destruction of national (local) productive systems (ANDREFF, 1996). In the field of textile and clothing industry German firms use largely the subcontracting in order to improve international competitiveness. To cope with the competition of the Central Europen countries this sector has been protected by significant trade barriers. Poland, Czech Repubic and Hungary were the firsts German partners in Central Europe in the field of subcontracting from 1990 to 1995, but since 1996 the re-exports produced in the OPT ( Outward Processing Traffic) is decrasing. In fact, starting in 1995, the situation began to change, the rate of the rise in subcontracting the elaboration of finished products fell considerably. In 1997, for the first time since 1993, this country reorienting it’s OPT towards countries with lower wage levels, such as Rumania and Ukraine (ANDREFF&ANDREFF, BENSEBAA, 2000). Subcontracting certainly reinforced the competitive nature of Central European trade. It only did made-to-order contracts help a number a producers to better use their production capacities, but companies didn’t benefit from technological transfers from German companies. Nevertheless, subcontracted finishing stage work held another disadvantage: for instance, it further reduced outlets for intermediate products which were provided by the German placing the orders. In the specific case of subcontracting, we find ourselves in the presence of star-shaped relationships between firms, in other words, the relationships between players work two by two (COURLET & PECQUER, 1991). There are no horizontal relationships between partners in the same firm and this type of relationship can often create a form of dependence for small and medium-sized firms. Hence, the danger for the revival of the local productive system; the eventual disappearance of local production units’ independence and their transformation into subcontracting entities for larger firms looking for the necessary technical know-how, inexpensive labour and a pre-existing client network. But, the contribution of new flexible methods of production to local development and to the dynamics of regional integration is not as disappointing as often suggested (PELLEGRIN, 1999).

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

21 AMIN A. & TRIFT N., Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe, Oxford University Press, Oxford,1994. ANDREFF W., “ La déterritorialisation des multinationales. Firmes globales et firmes réseau ”, dans BADIE B., SMOUTS M.-C., Ed., International sans frontières, l'Harmattan, Paris, 1996, ANDREFF W., De la désintégration à une nouvelle intégration internationale de l’ex-URSS et de l’Europe de l’Est, dans Capitalisme à l’Est. Un accouchement difficile, coll. Economica, Paris, 1994, p.195. ANDREFF M. & ANDREFF W. & BOUDIER-BENSEBAA F., « La sous- traitance internationale de façonnage et trafic de perfectionnement passif entre les pays de l’UE et les pays de l’Europe de l’Est », RECEO, vol.32, N°2, 2001.. AMIN A. & ROBINS K., Le retour des économies régionales ? La géographie mythique de l’accumulation flexible, in Les régions qui gagnent. Districts et réseaux : les nouveaux paradigmes de la géographie économique, PUF, Paris, 1992. ANTONELLI C., "Technical districts and regional innovation capacity", Revue d'Economie Régionale et Urbaine, N°5/1986. ARENA R., « Institutions économiques et organisation sociale dans l’œuvre de Marshall : une interprétation évolutioniste », Colloque Organisations et institutions : Règles, coordination, évolution, Amiens, 25 –26 may 1992. AYDALOT P., Ed., Crise et espace, Economica, Paris, 1984. AYDALOT P., Economie régionale et urbaine, Economica, Paris, 1984. AYDALOT P., Ed., Milieux innovateurs en Europe, GREMI, Paris, 1986. AZAÏS Ch., “ Dynamiques territoriales, localisation et systèmes productifs locaux :quelques repères théoriques, in Palloix CH. &Rizopoulos Y., Ed., Firmes et économie industrielle, l’Harmatton, Paris, 1997. BADIE B., SMOUTS M.-C., Ed., International sans frontières, l'Harmattan, Paris, 1996, BAFOIL F., Entre mémoire et attentes : une approche sociologique de la frontière Neisse, dans Cahiers du ROSES, N°1/1995. BECCATINI G., Dal “ settore industriale ” al “ distretto industriale, dans Rivista di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol.2, 1979. BECCATINI G “ Le district marshallien : une notion socio-économique ”, dans Benko&Lipietz, Ed, 1992. BECCATINI G. “ & RULLANI E., "Système local et marché global. Le district industriel", dans Economie industrielle et économie spatiale, Economica, Paris, 1995. BENKO G.B. & LIPIETZ A., Les régions qui gagnent. Districts et réseaux: les nouveaux paradigmes de la géographie économique, PUF, Paris, 1992.

22 BENKO G.B. & LIPIETZ A., La richesse des Régions. La nouvelle géographie socio-économique, PUF, Paris, 2000. BENSAHEL L. & DONSIMONI M., Ed., Le tourisme, facteur de développement local, PUG ; Grenoble, 1999. BIALKOWSKA B. & KOCIUBINSKI K., “ Analiza sytuacji ludnosciowej i rynku pracy w polskiej czesci Euroregionu Nysa ”, Acta Uniwersitatis Wratislaviensis, N°2135, 1999. BOUDIER-BENSEBAA F., German relocation to Poland, communication a la IVème Conférence d'EACES, Grenoble, septembre 1996. BOURDEAU-LEPAGE L., Convergence-divergence dans une économie en transition : le cas de la Pologne, in Analyses économiques de la transition, W. Andreff, Ed., La Découverte, Paris, ROSES, 2002. BRUNAT E., Emergence régionale et dynamique territoriale : essai sur la transformation des économies de type soviétique à partir des exemples russes et polonais, Thèse de doctorat, Université de Grenoble, 1995. CHMIEL J., Male i srednie przedsiebiorstwa a rozwoj regionow, dans Studia i Prace ZBSE, zeszyt 243, 1997. COURLET C., La frontière, nécessité ou artifice?, dans Actes du Colloque franco-italien d'études alpines, Grenoble, du 8 au 10 octobre 1987, Université des Sciences sociales de Grenoble, pp.171-182. COURLET C., “ La frontière: coupure ou couture? ”, Economie et Humanisme, N°301, mai-juin 1988. COURLET C., & PECQUER B., “ Systèmes locaux d’entreprises et externalités : un essai de typologie ”, dans RERU,N°3/4, 1991. COURLET C., & PECQUER B., “ Le systèmes industriels localisés en France : un nouveau modèle de développement ”, dans Benko&Lipietz, Ed.,1992. COURLET C., & SOULAGE B., Industrial dynamics and territory, Note de travail N°14, IREPD, Grenoble, 1992. COURLET C., “ Systèmes productifs localisés et développement : le cas des économies émergentes et en transition ”, dans Firmes et économie industrielle, Palloix Ch. & Rizopoulos Y., Ed., l’Harmattan, Paris,1997. COURLET C., Districts industriels et systèmes productifs localisés (SPL) en France, DATAR, Paris, 2000. COURLET C.,& BENKO G., Commentaires sur le district industriel d’Alfred Marshall, Géographie, Economie, Société, vol.2, n°1/2000. DATAR: Pôles de croissance et de décision à l'Est. 1994-2015, (sous la direction d’Ivan Samson), ROSES-Grenoble, octobre 1996.

23 DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA B.A. Les pays socialistes face au Nouvel Ordre Economique International, Thèse de doctorat, sous la direction de Marie Lavigne, Université Paris1, 1982. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA B.A., “ La restructuration agricole dans les régions frontalières d’Oder-Neisse ”, Cahiers du ROSES, N°1/1995. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA (B.A.), L'effet de frontière et nouvelles formes d'organisation territoriale en Pologne, (The Border Effect and New Forms of Territorial Organisation In Poland), 3ème Conférence Internationale du Réseau PGV, Grenoble, May 1997. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA (B.A.), L'année économique en Pologne: vers la fin de la récession? (The Economic Year in Poland: Towards the End of the Recession?), in Edition 1993, Documentation Française, pp. 150-157. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA (B.A.), La restructuration industrielle – effets de proximité. Le cas de l'Eruoregion "Neisse" (Industrial restructuring – proximity effects. The case of the "Neisse" Euroregion), in Struktury przemyslowe w gospodarce. Aspekty ekonomiczne, spoleczno-kulturowe i polityczne, (headed by L. OLSZEWSKI and J. MOZRZYMAS), Acta Uniwersitatis Wratislaviensis, n°1/1997 DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA B.A., “ Le développement régional en Pologne à l’aube de l’adhésion à l’Union européenne, Ekonomia ”, N°6, 1999. DESPINEY-ZOCHOWSKA B.A., “ Dystrykt neomarshallowski, -proba interpretacji rozwoju regionalnego w Polsce. Studium przypadku ”, dans Strategiczne Problemy rozwoju miast i regionow, A.Jewtuchowicz, Ed, Université de Lodz, 2000. DESPINEY B. & PASLAWSKI J., « Facteurs déterminants le développement des transports en Pologne », in La Pologne, ses transformations économiques et institutionnelles et le processus de son intégration à l’Union européenne, Université Paul-Valéry, Montpellier, 2001. DESPINEY (B.) & BACZKO (T.), « Na pierwszej linii », in Magazyn Gospodarczy, Varsovie, septembre 2001. DOSI G., Innovation, organization and economics dynamics. Selected essayes, Edward Elgar, 2000. DREE, L’industrie textile et le secteur de la confection de Pologne, PEE, Varsovie, 1998. DRUCKER P., »Mexico’s Ugly Duckling , The Maquiladora », Wall Street Journal, 1990, october4.

24 DUCHE G., “ Vers la création d’un nouveau mode de production à Lodz (Pologne). Les freins au développement d’un milieu innovateur ”, RERU, N°1/2000. DUCHENE G. & RUSIN P., Les micro-entreprises innovantes dans la transition : le cas de la Pologne” in Analyses économiques de la transition postsocialiste, W. Andreff, Ed, ROSES, Paris, La Découverte&Syros, 2002. DUNFORD M., ”Trajectoires industrielles et relations sociales dans les régions de nouvelles croissance économique ”, dans BENKO&LIPIETZ, Ed, 1992. DUNNING J.H.,: Location and the Multinational Enterprise: A Neglected Factor?, in Journal of International Business Studies, First Quarter ,1998. GOLDHANG., L’eurorégion “ Neisse ”-définition de la partie allemande de l’eurorégion, ronéoté, Hochschule für Technik, Wirtschaft und Sozialwesen, Zittau/Görlitz, 1997. GRABHER G., The Disembedded Regional Economy : The Transformation of East German Industrial Complexes into Western Enclaves, in AMIN&TRIFT (1994), p177-195. GRUCHMAN B. & GLUGIEWICZ E., “ The Role of Innovation in Regional Economic Restructuring in Eastern Europe ”, in Aydalot & Keeble, Ed., High Technology Industry and Innovative Environments : The European Experience, Routledge, London-N.York, 1988. GRUCHMAN et all., Millieu innovateur dans une économie en transition, ronéoté, GREMI, Paris, 1993, 38p. GRUDZEWSKI W.M. & HEJDUK I.K., Male i srednie przedsiebiorstwa w gospodarce rynkowej w Polsce, WSHP, Warszawa, 1998. GUELLEC &RALLE, Les nouvelles théories de la croissance, La Découverte, 1995. HENDERSON , W.O.: Britain and Industrial Europe 1750-1870. Studies in British Influence on the Industrial Revolution in Western Europe, Liverpool, University Press, 1954. HOOVER M.,The location of economic activities, MC Grow, New York, 1948. ISARD W., Localisation and space economy. A general theory relating to industrial location, market areas, land use, trade and urban structure, MIT & J.Willey and Sons, New York, 1956. ISARD W., et al., Methods of Interregional and Regional Analysis, Ashgate, 1998. JEANNIN P., "Dépendance et capacités de développement dans le cadre régional en Europe Centrale à la fin de l'ancien régime", dans Cahiers de

25 Varsovie ,N°22/ 1991. JEWTUCHOWICZ A., Problèmes de développement des petites et moyennes entreprises dans la stratégie de développement régional (exemple de Lodz),ronéoté, Université de Lodz, 1998. KOZA (A.), Podstawowe problemy przemyslu tekstylnego i odziezowego w ER "Nysa", mémoire de maîtrise, Académie économique, Jelenia Gora, 1993. KRUGMAN P., Geography and Trade, Leuven University Press & The MIT Press, London, 1991. KRUGMAN (P.), The lessons of Massachusetts for EMU, in Ajustment and growth in the European Monetary Union, TORRES&GIAVAZZI, Ed, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1993. KRUGMAN (P.) et al. The Spatial Economy : Cities, Regions and International Trade, the MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1999. KRÄTKE S., “ Une approche régulationniste des études régionales ”, dans l’Année de la régulation.Economie, institutions, pouvoirs, la Découverte, Paris, Volume 1/1997. KRÄTKE S., Regional Integration or Fragmentation ?The german-Polish Border Region in a New Europe, papier présenté à la Conférence de Regional Sudies Association, les 20-23 septembre 1997, Frankfurt sur Oder. LACQUEMENT G., La restructuration de l'agriculture dans les nouveaux Länder, dans Les Cahiers de l'Obsérvatoire de Berlin, N°24/1993, pp.9-68. LIPOWSKI A. & DESPINEY (B).: Recession et changements structurels en Pologne, Revue des études slaves, N° 2/1990. LUCAS R.E., “ On the Merchants of Economic Development ”, dans Journal of Monetary Economics, XXII, 1988. MAILLAT D., « PME, Innovations et Développement territorial », IRER,Cahier n°18, 1988 MARKUSEN A., “ Des lieux-aimants dans un espace mouvant : une typologie des districts industriels ”, dans BENKO&LIPIETZ, Ed., 2000. MARSHALL A., Principles of economics, 8e édition, Macmillan, London 1920. MARSHALL A., Industry and Trade, Macmillan, London, 1919. MARTIN R., « The new geographical turn » in economics : some critical reflections » in Cambridge Journal of Economics, N°23/1999 MARTIN R., “Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?”, in Regionalising The Knowledge Economy, Conference Proceedings of the Regional Studies Association Annual Conference, November 2001. MARTINELLI F. & SCHOENBERGER S., “ Les oligopoles se portent bien, merci ! ” dans Benko&Lipietz, Ed.,1992.

26 MICHALET Ch.-A., La séduction des nations ou comment attirer les investisseurs, Economica, Paris, 2000. NOWICKI L., “Ruled-based Investment and Clustering in Primorsky Krai”, mimeo, The Institute of Policy Analysis, New York, 2001. OECD, LEED-Clusters in Transition Economies, DT/LEED/DC (2001)22, october 2002. PELLEGRIN J., German Production Networks in Central/Eastern Europe. Between Dependency and Globalisation, WZB discussion paper, January, 1999. PERRIN J.C., « Organisation industrielle, la composante territoriale », note ronéoté, CER, Aix-en-Provence, 1989. PERROUX F., L'économie du XXème siècle, PUF, Paris, 1961. PIORE M.J. & SABEL C.F., The seconde industrial Divide, traduction française Les chemins de la prospérité, de la production de masse à la spécialisation souple, Paris, Hachette,1989. PORTER M., Ed., On competition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1998. REQUIER-DESJARDINS D., “ Décentralisation et dynamiques locales de production dans les pays en développement ”, Cahiers du GEMDEV, 2001. ROGULSKA B., « La régulation indirecte ou les nouvelles relations Centre- entreprises en Pologne », in Economie et Sociétés, Cahiers de l’ISMEA, série G, N°41, 1985. ROMER P., “ Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth ”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol.XCIV, 1986. SAMSON (I.) & GOUTIN-BOURLAT (E.): Ouverture, transition et développement en Allemagne de l'Est, CGP, Paris, juillet 1995 SCHUMPETER J.A., Business cycles. A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist proces, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York and London, 1939. SCHUMPETER J. A., Capitalism, socialism and democracy, Allen and Unwin, London, 1947. SCOTT A.J & STORPER M., M.,Ed., Production; Work,Territory, Boston, Mass.Allen&Unvin, 1986. SCOTT A.J & STORPER M., “ Regional development reconsidered, ” in Regional development and contemporary industrial response : Extending flexible specialization, ERNSTE & MEIER, Ed., Londres, Belhaven, 1992. SCOTT A.J., “ L’économie métropolitaine : organisation industrielle et croissance urbaine ”, dans BENKO&LIPIETZ, Ed.,1992. SCOTT A.J., Regions and the World Economy. The coming shape of global production, competition and political order, Oxford University Press, 1998.

27 STAUFFER B., “ D’une société paysanne à un district industriel ”, in Socio- anthropologie, n°7/2000. SURDEJ A., Small-and Medium-Sized Entreprises Development in Poland after 1990, UNU/WIDER Working Paper, janvier 2001. SZLACHCICOWA I., “ Tozsamosc mieszkancow polsko-niemieckiego pogranicza w Euroregionie Nysa ”, Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, N°2135, 1999. VELTZ P.: “ Firmes globales et territoire: des rapports ambivalents ”, dans Economie globale et reinvention du local, DATAR/Editions de l`Aube, Paris,1995. VELTZ P., Mondialisation, villes et territoires. L’économie d’archipel, PUF, Paris, 1996. VIDAL F., “ Les districts italiens : lieux et milieux porteurs de l’initiative industrielle ”, communication au Congrès mondial des SPL, Paris la Villette, les 23 et 24 janvier 2001. WEBER A., Theory of the Location of Industries, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1929. WINIECKI J, “Formal and Informal Rules in Post-Communist Transition”, in Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice, Vol. XVI, N°1, 1998. ZICH F., Problème d’identité régionale de la population dans les régions tchèques proches des frontières, ronéoté, Technicka Univerzita, Liberec, 1997.

28 ANNEX: Figure 2: Kobierzyce : Foreign and Polish Majors Investors (1999).

MAKRO CASH & CARRY COCA-COLA BOTTLERS $ TESCO SAVIA, IKEA, OBI, CASTORAMA É É ) SANBET É Bielany ) OFFICE DEPOT A-4 CARGILL A-4 DRUKARNIA "DOM WYDAWNICZY" CADBURY ) ) PAOLA Tyniec Ma³y Domas³aw Ma³uszów ) GARDINIA $ FARM FOOD Ksiêgienice 5 Krzy¿owice Magnice KOBIERZYCE Królikowice ) NASIONA KOBIERZYC, FIOR, FATRO SCHOLLER $ Pe³czyce ) CUKROWNIA Pustków ¯urawski Kuklice Wierzbice ) KIM-LAN Solna Cieszyce 8 Szczepankowice Rolantowice Jaszowice

Pustków Wilczkowski

É centra handlowo-us³ugowe ) zak³ady produkcyjne Tyniec nad Œlê¿¹ $ sk³ady, centra dystrybucyjne, du¿e hurtownie