CONCEPT OF PROXIMITY: FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND PROSPECTS OF APPLICATION IN RUSSIA
https://doi.org/10.7868/S037324441703001X
Abstract
The article is devoted to the relatively new concept of proximity, which was born at the turn of centuries in the European regional science (economic geography and regional economics), but relies on long traditions of spatial studies (starting with J. Thünen and ending with studies of regional clusters and urban agglomerations). Proximity is orientated on the evaluation and analysis of potential interaction between different objects with account of their relative position and similarity in various parameters (social, institutional, organizational, etc.). This concept has similarity with the concept of economic-geographical position; however, due to including in the concept of proximity much larger number of factors (spatial, cultural and axiological community, position in social networks, etc.) the authors define it as a multidimensional economic-geographical position. Abroad, the concept of proximity is used primarily within the geography of innovation. In Russia, the tools of this concept are promising to use for studying of the spatial organization not only in the Western tradition (for instance, in the study of territorial clusters and sectoral innovation processes), but also for the analysis of specific Russian phenomena (dacha migration, otkhodnichestvo, etc.). Furthermore, conditions of the vast Russian spaces force to review and develop the concept of proximity with account of dialectical combination with concept of remoteness used in Arctic researches. Particular relevance in the context of Russia, according to the authors, should be given to temporal proximity as a form of compensation of factors of remoteness.
About the Authors
N. Yu. Zamyatina
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow
Center of the Northern and Arctic economies, Council for the Study of Productive Forces, Moscow
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
A. N. Pilyasov
Center of the Northern and Arctic economies, Council for the Study of Productive Forces, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Alaev E.B. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskaia geografiia. Poniatiino-terminologicheskii slovar’ (Socioeconomic geography: Conceptual and Terminology Dictionary). Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., 1983, 350 p.
2. Baranskiy N.N. Stanovlenie sovetskoi ekonomicheskoi geografii. Izbrannye Trudy (Forming of Soviet Economic Geography. Selected Works). Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., 1980. 287 p.
3. Baranskiy N.N. Economic-geographical position. Geografiya v shkole, 1939, no. 4, pp. 24–34. (In Russ.).
4. Breshi S., Lissoni F. Localized knowledge flows and innovative environment: revision of “tacit” knowledge, in Sinergiia prostranstva: regional’nye innovatsionnye sistemy, klastery i peretoki znaniia (Synergy of Space: Regional Innovation Systems, Clusters and Knowledge Flows), A.N. Piliasov, Ed. Smolensk: Oikumena Publ., 2012, pp. 161–181. (In Russ.).
5. Vladimirova O.V. Regional factors of economic elites forming in contemporary Russia. Materialy XIV Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii studentov, aspirantov i molodykh uchenykh “Lomonosov” (Proceedings of the XIV Int. Conf. students, postgraduates and young scientists “Lomonosov”, I.A. Aleshkovskii, P.N. Kostylev, Eds. [Electronic resource]. Moscow: MSU, 2007. CD-ROM. (In Russ.).
6. Gladkiy Iu.N. A comparative approach to the assessment of the geographical position of the African countries, in Ekonomicheskaia i sotsial’naia geografiia: problemy i perspektivy (Economic and Social Geography: Problems and Prospectives). Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo geograficheskogo obshchestva SSSR, 1984, pp. 127–145. (In Russ.), 1984, pp. 127–145. (In Russ.).
7. Granovetter M. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Ekon. Sotsiol., 2002, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 44–58. (In Russ.).
8. Dziuina G.M. Development of organizational and economic model of interaction between innovative firms and major research centers. Extented Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Techn.) Dissertation. Barnaul, 2004, 24 p. (In Russ.).
9. Dmitrieva T.E. The periphery: content, assessment, economic tools, in Problemy prigranichnykh regionov Rossii (Problems of Cross-Border Russia’s Regions). St.-Petersburg–Moscow, 2004, pp. 43–49. (In Russ.).
10. Zamyatina N. Iu., Yashunskiy A.D. Migrations from the North: social networks and mental “proximity”, in Vneekonomicheskie faktory prostranstvennogo razvitiya (Non-Economic Factors of Spatial Development), V.N. Streletskiy, Ed. Moscow: Eslan Publ., 2015, pp. 147–173. (In Russ.).
11. How is Altai biopharmaceutical cluster developing. Sibnovosti.ru. 28 March, 2014. URL: http://barnaul.sibnovosti.ru/business/264556-kak-razvivaetsya-altayskiy-biofarmatsevticheskiy-klaster
12. Maergoiz I.M. Territorial’naya struktura khozyaistva (Territorial Structure of Economy). Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1986, 302 p.
13. Podvintsev O.B. Factors of rejection of the governors – the “Vikings” in federal subjects, in Sotsiokul’turnye i prirodno-resursnye faktory sbalansirovannosti modernizatsii regionov Rossii. Materialy Х Vseros. nauchno-prakt. konf. po programme “Sotsiokul’turnaia evoliutsiia Rossii i ee regionov (Sociocultural and Natural Resource Factors of a Balance of Modernization of Russian Regions). 2014, pp. 399–402. (In Russ.).
14. Polanyi M. Personal Knowledge. Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Univ. of Chicago Press, 1958.
15. Porter M. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press, 1990.
16. Pototskaya T.I. Mezhdunarodnye yuvelirnye vystavki 2004 g. (International Jewelry Exhibitions 2004). Smolensk: Madzhenta Publ., 2005, 160 p.
17. Sakharov A.D. Vospominaniya T. 1 (Memories. Vol. 1), E. Kholmogorova, Iu. Shikhanovich, Eds. Moscow: Prava Cheloveka Publ., 1996, 912 p.
18. 18. Slavin S.V. Promyshlennoe i transportnoe osvoenie Severa SSSR (Industrial and Transport Development of the USSR North). Moscow: Ekonomizdat Publ., 1961, 302 p.
19. Smirnyagin L.V. The Future of Geographical Space in Social Sciences. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2016, no. 4, pp. 7–19. (In Russ.).
20. Smirnyagin L.V. Place Instead of Location? (About Shifts in Basic Geographical Notions, in Geograficheskoe polozhenie i territorial’nye struktury: Pamyati I.M. Maergoiza (Geographical Position and Territorial Structures: In Memory of I.M. Maergoiz), P.M. Polyan, A.I. Treivish, Eds. Moscow: Novyi Khronograf Publ., 2012, pp. 421–456. (In Russ.).
21. Teplova I.G. Upravlenie vzaimodeistviem khoziaistvuiushchikh sub”ektov v integrirovannom nauchno-proizvodstvennom komplekse (na primere Federal’nogo nauchno-proizvodstvennogo tsentra “Altai’). Extended Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Econ.) Dissertation. Barnaul, 2004, 24 p. (In Russ.).
22. Treivish A.I. Geospace, information, mobility and modernization of society. Regional’nye issledovaniia, 2015, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 37–48. (In Russ.).
23. Treivish A.I. Dachevedenie as a science about the second home in the West and in Russia. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2014, no. 4, pp. 22–32. (In Russ.).
24. Friedman Th. The World is Flat. A Brief History of The Twenty-first Century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006.
25. Chirikova A.E. Moscow appointees in the Governor’s case: analysis of the Samara corps. Politiia, 2011, no. 4 (63), pp. 61–73. (In Russ.).
26. Iagol’nitser M.A., Markov L.S., Teplova I.G. Cooperative interaction in the cluster and their effectiveness (case of integrated research and production complex Altay). Vestn. NGU. Ser. Sots.-Ekon., 2008, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 68– 76. (In Russ.). Концепция близости: зарубежный опыт и перспективы применения 21 ИЗВЕСТИЯ РАН. СЕРИЯ ГЕОГРАФИЧЕСКАЯ № 3 2017
27. Audretsch B. Agglomeration and the Location of Innovative Activity, in Oxford Review of Economic Policy. Oxford Univ Press, 1998, pp. 18–29.
28. Basile R., Capello R., Caragliu A. Interregional Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth: The Role of Relational Proximity, in Drivers of Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Regional Dynamics, K. Kourtit et al., Eds. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 21–43.
29. Berman M. and Howe L. Remoteness, Transportation Infrastructure, and Urban-Rural Population Movements in the Arctic, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Urbanisation of the Arctic. Nuuk, Greenland, August 2012, Stockholm: Nordregio, 2012, pp. 108–122.
30. Boschma R.A. Proximity and Innovation: a Critical Assessment. Reg. Stud., 2005, no. 39, pp. 61–74.
31. Boschma R., Balland P.-A. and M. de Vaan. The formation of economic networks: a proximity approach, in Regional Development and Proximity Relations. A. Torre and F. Wallet, Eds. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar: 2014, pp. 243–266.
32. Broekel T. The Co-evolution of Proximities – A Network Level Study. Reg. Stud., 2015, vol. 49, no. 6, Special Is. Proximity and Innovation: Empirical Issues, pp. 921–935.
33. Capello R. Indivisibilities, Synergy and Proximity: The Need for an Integrated Approach to Agglomeration Economies. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geographie (TESG), 2009, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 145–159.
34. Feldman M. The Geography of Innovation. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994, 155 p.
35. Fetisov A.S. Distance and intensity of international socio-economic interactions, in Book of abstracts of IGU Reg. Conf. Geography, Culture and Society for Our Future Earth, 17–21 August 2015, Moscow, Russia, vol. 3701 of C12.09, pp. 464.
36. Hamelin L.-E. Canadian Nordicity: It’s Your North, Too. Montreal: Harvest House, 1979, 392 p.
37. Hodgson G.M. Evolution and Institutions. On Evolutionary Economics and the Evolution of Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1999, 345 p.
38. How did Silicon Valley become Silicon Valley? Three Surprising Lessons for Other Cities and Regions. A report from Endeavor Insight. Endeavor Insight. July 2014. URL: http://endeavor.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/How-SV-became-SV.pdf.
39. Huskey L. and Morehouse Th.A. Development in remote regions: What do we know? Arctic, 1992, no. 45 (2), pp. 128–137.
40. Morgan K. The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. J. Econ. Geogr., 2004, no. 4, pp. 3–21.
41. Porter M. Locations, clusters, and company strategy (Сhapter 13), in The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, G.L. Clark, M.S. Gertler and M.P. Feldman, Eds. Oxford Univ Press: 2000, pp. 253–274.
42. Regional Development and Proximity Relations, A. Torre and F. Wallet, Eds. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar: 2014, 376 p.
43. Saxenian A.-L. Regional advantage. Culture and Competition on Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard Univ. Press, 1994, 226 p.
44. Saxenian A.-L. The New Argonauts. Regional Advantage in a Global Economy. Harvard Univ. Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2006, 424 p.
45. Torre A. and Rallet A. Proximity and localization. Reg. Stud., 2005, no. 39, pp. 47–59.
46. Torre A. On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transmission. Reg. Stud., 2008, no. 42 (6), pp. 869–889.
47. Torre A. and Ségolène D. Land use and soils disposal: From competition to territorial governance (examples from land use conflicts in the greater Paris region). Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 2013, September, pp. 1–12.
Review
For citations:
Zamyatina N.Yu., Pilyasov A.N. CONCEPT OF PROXIMITY: FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND PROSPECTS OF APPLICATION IN RUSSIA. Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya. 2017;(3):8-21. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7868/S037324441703001X
Views:
843
Email this article 
