We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
By
Meric S. Gertler, Professor of Geography and Planning, Goldring Chair in Canadian Studies, and co-director of the Program on Globalization and Regional Innovation Systems University of Toronto
Within the field of innovation studies and technological change, the distinction between tacit and codified knowledge has recently been accorded great significance. Much of this interest was stimulated by Nelson and Winter (1982), whose classic work An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change made extensive use of the concept of tacit knowledge in their analysis of how organizational routines shape technological change. In so doing, these authors have helped revive widespread interest in the earlier work of Michael Polanyi (1958, 1966), to the point where tacit knowledge has come to be recognized as a central component of the learning economy (Lundvall and Johnson 1994) and a key to innovation and value creation.
Moreover, tacit knowledge has come to be acknowledged as a prime determinant of the geography of innovative activity, since its central role in the process of learning-through-interacting tends to reinforce the local over the global. Those interested in the geographical structure of production and innovation systems have argued that the strong tacit component of leading-edge technical knowledge induces (indeed, requires) spatial clustering for the purposes of knowledge sharing that leads to innovation (Cooke and Morgan 1998; Maskell and Malmberg 1999). For a growing number of scholars, this explains the perpetuation and deepening of geographical concentration in a world of expanding markets, weakening borders, and ever-cheaper and more pervasive communication technologies.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.