The Glassworks Region in South-Eastern Sweden: Long-Term Change of a Low-Tech Agglomeration A)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324128622 The Glassworks Region in South-Eastern Sweden: Long-Term Change of a Low-Tech Agglomeration a) Preprint · March 2018 CITATIONS READS 0 68 1 author: Olle Krantz Umeå University 40 PUBLICATIONS 227 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Swedish Glassmaking and Glassworks in an economic historical perspective View project Swedish Economic Growth since the Middle Ages View project All content following this page was uploaded by Olle Krantz on 31 March 2018. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. 1 Olle Krantz The Glassworks Region in South-Eastern Sweden: Long-Term Change of a Low-Tech Agglomerationa) The Swedish household and ornamental glass industry1 expanded from the mid-19th century as part of the general industrialization. Gradually the glass industry became more and more agglomerated into a small region in the south-eastern part of Småland, a county in southern Sweden. In the present paper this region will be referred to as the glass district or the glassworks region.2 The location is shown in chart 1 and it will be further presented below. Figure 1 shows the number of glassworks3 in Sweden, Småland4 and the glass district 1860- 2013. The shape of the curves is rather distinct. Up to the early 20th century, the number of factories increased and the glass district was formed. After about 1910 there were short-term fluctuations but very small long-term changes until the 1960s. The concentration to Småland is obvious. In the 1960s a downward tendency started and two steep falls are particularly spectacular, one in the 1970s and one from the turn of the century 2000. The pattern is similar to an S-curve with four phases, infancy, expansion, maturity with the addition of decline. Thus, in these 150-odd years, a glassworks agglomeration was established and practically disrupted and this paper deals with this course of events i.e. how this industrial district evolved, was renewed and declined. First, a short overview of some theoretical approaches to clusters and industrial districts is given. The Smalandish5 glass agglomeration has been a) This is a preliminary draft. 1 In this paper, the term “glass industry” is used for the industry based on handicraft production in the first hand comprising the household and ornamental glass industry. The flat glass and bottle and container glass industries are also included before they were mechanized in the first half of the 20th century. 2 The district is not identical with what is nowadays known as the “Kingdom of Crystal”, a designation which was introduced in the 1960s, mainly to attract tourists. It was first identified as the entire county of Småland. Later it has been confined to four municipalities, Uppvidinge, Lessebo, Emmaboda, and Nybro. See also below. 3 By a glassworks is meant a factory with at least five workers who make handmade glass. In the factory there is at least a blowing room and a grindery. This makes a difference to the glass studios, i.e. very small workshops with only one or two glass-blowers. The studios will be briefly dealt with below. 4 Småland consists of three counties, Jönköping, Kronoberg and Kalmar. These counties differed as to geographic and economic features. The county of Jönköping was more industrialized than Kronoberg and Kalmar. Kronoberg was poorer than Kalmar, where the southern part was more similar to Kronoberg than the northern one. This was important for the location of the glass industry. 5 The word “Smalandish” is derived from the county name Småland. It is for instance used in advertisements for IKEA: https://dilipnaidu.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/ikea-a-global-leader/. 2 characterized in different ways. Lindqvist (2009) defines it in the following way: “One of our oldest clusters, the glass-blowing region of Småland”. Furthermore he notes that it “survives in a renewed form”.6 Malmberg, on the other hand, argues that when firms in a certain subindustry, for instance glassblowing in Småland, agglomerate, this is an archetype of the industrial district.7 Hence, a short discussion on different kinds of agglomerations is justified. Then, the special technology of glassmaking is described as this is at the center of what happened. After that, the formation of the glass district, i.e. its growth, how it changed and why it declined, will be discussed. Finally, the questions of what remains today of this, once very active agglomeration, and whether the glass district has survived “in a renewed form” are dealt with.8 [Chart 1 about here.] [Figure 1 about here.] I The term “cluster” has been popular for many years, not only in academic circles, where economists and geographers in particular have taken an interest in the field, but also in other contexts, for instance national and regional policy making and among journalists. This broad attention has tended to make the concept fuzzy.9 A short discussion on this term and the related one, “industrial district”, which is preferred in the present context, is thus, appropriate.10 A cluster has been defined as “a group of firms, related economic actors, and institutions that are located near each other and have reached a sufficient scale to develop specialized expertise, services, resources, suppliers and skills.” The relations between the firms should be close and well-defined to constitute a “true cluster”, which among other things is said to make the firms more resistant to shocks and strains than firms outside the cluster. 11 This definition is close to Porter’s: Clusters are “geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions 6 Lindqvist (2009), p 124. See also Lindqvist et al (2002), p 10. 7 Malmberg (2001), p 30f. 8 Thus, in principle, the glass district differs from the agglomeration of glassworks since the former has to do both with glass production and associated activities. 9 See e.g. Ortega-Colomer et al. (2016). 10 On these issues, see also Olsson (2007), ch 2. 11 Europe INNOVA / PRO INNO Europe paper N° 9. 3 /…/ in particular fields that compete but also cooperate”.12 Furthermore, according to Porter, a cluster may not only be restricted to a small area. It can also be country-wide and even international. However, in the present context only regional clusters are dealt with. It is also important to note that not only the firms themselves constitute a cluster but also suppliers and institutions. These characteristics are said to distinguish the cluster from agglomerations in general.13 Another feature that is often connected to cluster is the well-known diamond model created by Porter, where four driving forces interact with clustering as a result. The forces are a) factor conditions, b) firm strategy, structure and rivalry, c) demand conditions, and d) related and supporting industries. When these factors work together and strengthen each other a cluster can be dynamic.14 This will not, however, be dealt with in the present paper. A cluster is very similar to an industrial district, a term that was coined by the well-known economist Alfred Marshall. By this he meant a gathering of a large number of similar firms in a certain area. He was primarily interested in the functions and properties of the district. According to Marshall industrial districts are formed, due mainly to the physical conditions in the area. Key factors are climate and soil conditions, the existence of mining and quarrying, and fuel supply, by which he mainly meant charcoal and coal. A strong demand for the company's products through the concentration of population in cities or elsewhere, can also give rise to a certain location.15 Thus, he considered factors that were decisive for the location of industrial districts to certain places. According to Krugman's interpretation of Marshall's thoughts, important characteristics of industrial districts and the reasons for their existence are:16 1) An industrial center generates a single labor market for skilled workers. Such a market will be an advantage both for employees and the company. 2) An industrial center creates a cheaper and more diverse range of production factors that are specific to a particular industry. Subcontractors will be present and can provide the industry with accessories and materials, organize the traffic, et cetera. Where appropriate, they can keep expensive special equipment in constant use and thus make them profitable. 3) An industrial center generates so called technological knowledge effects because information flows more easily in a small place than over great distances. 12 Porter (1998), p 197. 13 See also Wolfe/Gertler (2004), s 1085. 14 See e.g. Malmberg (2001). 15 Marshall (1920), chapter X. 16 Krugman (1996), s 40-41. 4 In Marshall’s districts tacit knowledge is a constituent factor based on practical experience. Other terms with similar meaning are implicit knowledge, idiosyncratic knowledge and uncodified knowledge. It has been pointed out that "the transfer of tacit knowledge requires personal contact and physical proximity" and that "networking interactions in close geographic space of firms and persons with different types of 'idiosyncratic' tacit knowledge may promote innovation.”17 The interaction between the firms can include information, social relationships and other things in the industrial atmosphere; in other words informal institutions – to use North’s terminology – become important. Furthermore, agreements regarding various issues are reached in which also sanctions are stipulated; they are formal institutions. Organizations may be formed for different purposes and become actors at the side of the firms.18 The economic historical background and change of clusters and industrial districts, i.e.