Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Storper, M.
Right arrow Articles by De Paolis, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow F14 - Country and Industry Studies of Trade
Right arrow F20 - General
Right arrow R14 - Land Use Patterns
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Economic Geography 2:73-107 (2002)
Copyright © 2002 Oxford University Press

Article

Trade and the location of industries in the OECD and European Union

Michael Storper*, Yun-chung Chen** and Fernando De Paolis***

*School of Public Policy and Social Research, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656, USA, and Social and Human Sciences, Université de Marne-la-Vallée, France. email <storper{at}ucla.edu>
**School of Public Policy and Social Research, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656, USA. email <ycchen{at}ucla.edu>
***School of Public Policy and Social Research, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656, USA. email <depaolis{at}ucla.edu>

Abstract

Trade and location theory identifies forces that could lead to locational dispersion (comparative advantage) or locational concentration (scale economies) in the face of globalizing markets, each with different consequences for specialization and the adjustment costs associated with integration. However, these forces can play themselves out in very complex ways if locational change principally affects intermediate production. Moreover, effects of history may be important, if locational patterns which exist prior to integration reflect either strong external economies or, as we argue, strong institutionalized capacities to respond to more open markets. This could especially be the case in the context of Europe, whose territories are generally less specialized than the states of the USA. To see how these different effects are operating today, empirical measurement is required. Using a data set which allows changes in locational distribution of manufacturing industries in the OECD to be measured, we show that Europe does not seem to be ‘Americanizing’ its economic geography. Many sectors are actually spreading out in Europe, implying that the effects of history have remained strong up to this point. Specialization increases are weak in most European economies as well. The OECD has a more complex picture of spread and concentration. Some of the implications for further research on agglomeration, intra-industry trade, and integration are brought out in the conclusion.

Keywords: trade, industrial location, intra-industry trade, specialization, economic geography, agglomeration, integration, globalization, European Union

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.