CC BY
6Ученые записки Таврического национального университета имени В.И.Вернадского Серия «География». Том 24 (63). 2011 г. №2, часть 1. С. 49-55.
УДК 911.3
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS - AN OPPORTUNITY OR A THREAT TO GEOGRAPHIC STUDIES ON INDUSTRIAL SPACE ORGANISATION
Czaplinski P.
Pomeranian University in Slupsk, Institute of Geography and Regional Studies E-mail: [email protected]
In this article an attempt has been made to raise the question concerning the role of industrial economics and industrial geography in regional studies, as well as, and perhaps above all - concerning their place among disciplines researching economic processes, particularly those focusing on industrial structures. What industrial geography is deficient in, however, is a certain freshness of approach and its original, specifically developed (and not adopted) research methods.
Key words: industrial geography, industrial economics, mesoeconomy, regional studies.
INTRODUCTION
Currently, there are numerous premises which suggest the consideration of industrial geography as a scientific subdiscipline. The above-mentioned consideration would include questions concerning the role and place of industrial geography among geographic disciplines as well as the disciplines researching economic processes, particularly those focusing on industrial structures.
The first of those premises has been the observed rise in the economic literature of the number of publications since the early 90's of the 20th century; the publications in question have adopted mesoeconomy as the point of reference in their discussion of industry [1, 5, 8, 9].
From the point of view of industrial geography it is relevant in the fact that the very word of mesoeconomy undergoes a semantic extension. As a consequence it enters the field of interest of geographic research.
One of such positions is Zarys strategii rozwoju przemyslu by Wladyslaw Janasz, where as early as in the introductory section we can read that: mesoeconomy should broaden the scope of its analyses to include regional ones, utilizing in the process, among others, the methods of spatial analysis. In addition, the author emphasises the urgent need of taking up the research of economic phenomena (including industry) in regions by establishing mutual relations and connections with the environment. In reference to the nature of industry, Janasz claims that the exhaustive information concerning the state of industry is provided by: industrial economics, business economics, and economic analysis in a company, technique and technology of production. In a vast bibliography enclosed to his work (approximately 450 positions) he includes four positions of authors distinctly specialising in geography [3, 4, 8, 9]. In doing so, he clearly marginalises the scientific output of geography, including industrial geography and in relation to issues which could typically be classified as principles of industrial geography - such as spatial structures
The second premise provoking that the issue is taken up are the conclusions drawn from the discussion which is taking place in geographic magazines and scientific conferences concerning the issue of the role, significance, the methods and the future of geography. As it may be gathered from the general assessment of the state of geography -what is considered especially important is the resumption of regional studies and - apart from finding the answers to the questions of how and why - posing the question of where. It needs to be remembered that in the period of the last dozen or so years there have been considerable spatial displacements. In addition, one should realise that it is the very answer to the question of where that remains one of the most important competitive advantages of geography over other disciplines. It might seem that the geographers themselves fail to remember about this fact.
Finally, the third premise of the research carried out is the result of the survey concerning the perception of a graduate of geographical studies by the local community with the special focus on his or her chances on the work market [7].
1. INDUSTRIAL GEOGRAPHY AND INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS
As the results of the survey carried out by the author1 suggest - in the Polish society the stereotypical perception of a geographer as a teacher still prevails. Respondents of the research found it very difficult to name other potential places of employment for the graduates of geographic studies. Similarly difficult was the attempt to define usefulness -both practical and theoretical - of a geographer in a manufacturing or service company which could be a result of insufficient transparency of knowledge and skills of a graduate of geographic studies. In view of that it is hardly surprising that 69 percent of respondents believe that a geographer (as opposed to an economist) cannot possibly be an expert in the field of transformation of economy including the transformation of industrial structures. Thus, it appears to be important to pose a number of questions concerning the relations between geographic and economic disciplines including the range of research issues particularly in the field of industrial studies. As the starting point we might consider the definitions of industrial geography and industrial economics which determine and set a direction of the scope of research issues. As the universally accepted definition of industrial geography we might consider the one suggested by S. Misztal and Z. Ziolo, which proposes the following: industrial geography is a scientific discipline focusing on the research of spatial aspects (features and problems) of economic activity, consisting in natural resources extraction and their processing into production and consumer goods, as well as performing repair services [13]. Out of the definitions of industrial economics the one universally accepted is by W. Janasz, who claims that industrial economics examines phenomena, categories and economic regularities functioning in industry and its respective sections (divisions) and the environment [8].
In case of industrial geography the spatial aspect has been accepted as the distinguishing factor. However, it would be difficult not to agree with the assertion of S. Misztal and Z. Ziolo claiming that spatial aspects of industry are a field of interest not
1 The research was carried out by students of Geography of Pomeranian University in Slupsk under the supervision of P. Czaplinski in the period June-July 2006
only of geographers but also representatives of other scientific disciplines and many of them have made a contribution to the development of industrial geography which is hardly of smaller significance than the one made by the graduates of geographic studies [13].
This seems the right moment in the course of discussion to pose the question: how do we define a geographer of industry? Is a geographer of industry of permanent or temporary nature? And finally, what does the term of industrial geography encompass (or does not encompass)? The definition of industrial economics appears to be more comprehensive, although naturally also exceedingly general. In addition, what draws attention is its reference to the environment which might suggest spatial studies. This definition has currently acquired a slightly different shape, and its reference to regional and spatial studies, connections between the industry and relations with environment place industrial economics - currently identified with industrial mesoeconomy - very close to (if not within the scope of) industrial geography. Therefore, if both of those disciplines are so close to each other in their definitions, then their respective ranges of issues to be studied should also be very similar - and in fact they are. The results of research conducted in the scope of publications concerning economic and geographic sciences2 focusing on industry suggest a large resemblance of thematic perspectives and concepts.
The research issue of industry in geographic sciences as well as in economic ones encompasses in both cases twelve thematic areas3 out of which ten concerns the issue of industry in both disciplines, in reality becoming a common ground. It seems worthwhile, however, to take notice of the fact that while the representatives of economic sciences very efficiently and naturally operate virtually all over the presented field of studies, in many cases crossing over to the field traditionally considered geographic, the geographers are far less eager to take up the issues not only believed to be purely economic, but even those belonging to the above-mentioned common ground.
As it is suggested by the conducted studies, apart from similar research issues of industrial geography and industrial economics there are more examples of similarities. Among those similarities is, for example, the scale of studies. The studies in the range of industrial geography were and are being conducted on the local or regional scale. Far less prominent (although their number is on the rise) are the studies on the national or international scale. In the case of industrial economics micro- and macro- scale (which have been utilised so far) is currently complemented by mesoeconomic one. Thus, both of those disciplines are at the moment far less distinct from each other in relation to the scale of conducted studies than before.
Another crucial element remaining a point of comparisons are methodological establishments as it is the methodology of studies that is one of the most important elements of every scientific discipline. In recent years the geographers of industry have been characterised by a distinct emphasis they place on empirical interests rather than theoretical ones. This fact, however, does not imply there is a shortage of new theoretical
2 341 positions in the scope of economic sciences and 293 in the scope of geographic sciences from the years 1990-2006 were included in the research.
3 It should be emphasized that including particular publications into a given thematic area is very difficult. In many dissertations there are elements which make it possible to include them into two or more thematic areas.
establishments. According to T. Czyz as a novum among the research issues of industrial geography we may consider , among others, the assessment of transformation processes in the light of the post-Fordist model of flexible production, the theory of regulation or a concept of networking [2]. Another important line of study is based on a concept of spatial adaptation in the conditions of economic transformation or business geography, a science which focuses on the research of industrial company operating from the local to global scale [3].
In the industrial economics, as W. Janasz suggests, there is a certain balance between the works dealing with theory and empiricism which is a consequence of, among others, an easy access to the scientific output of theoretical economics, and in particular, to the economic laws and regularities of development this science has formulated [9]. The new methodological approach amounts to the reflection upon not only traditional direction of research which refers to respective phases of reproduction, but also to the process of popularising of the systemic direction which refers to the spatial and functional analysis of industrial systems. In industrial geography such analysis has functioned since the 70's of 20th century and has numerous supporters [3, 13, 14]. Thus, the systemic direction is yet another element with the potential to bring both disciplines closer in addition taking into consideration the increasing role of mathematical reasoning and information technology-related methods based upon the systemic paradigm. The third element which appears to connect the industrial research on the grounds of geography and economics is a considerable extent of access to subjects of studies remaining in the research field. Taking all of the above facts into consideration a question can be posed why - in spite of such large resemblance - it is the industrial economics and not industrial geography that might be considered as the more developmental discipline.
It appears that the cause of such situation can be connected with the phase of methodological development at which a specific sciences is to be found. If this indeed is true then it explains the privileged position of industrial economics which draws from a rich scientific output of theoretical economics. In geography elementary questions have been posed concerning the sense of this science. As S. Liszewski i A. Suliborski write: Faced with the shortage (...) of convincing or even compromise answers, it is hardly surprising that scientific and educational status of geography is subjected to constant decrease [11].
The above opinion entitles one to the assertion that the causes for a poor status of business geography need to be searched for at different research levels of this scientific discipline. At the elementary level - that of geography as a science - there is a number of doubts concerning, among others, questions whether geography is only one science, where we should draw the research models from, what the research foundation is. In an evident manner this should have its impact on the level of solutions in two fundamental geographic subdiscip lines (physical geography and socio-economic geography). Both of those subdisciplines are characterised by low transparency of benefits - mutual relations, which is apparent in theory but poorly taken advantage of in practice. Socio-economic geography without the permanent rooting in the tradition of cognitive-theoretical geography, or without the organisation of the internal structure and the mutual relations of specific subdisciplines is unable to become prodevelopmental.
2. MODERN WEAKNESSES OF INDUSTRIAL GEOGRAPHY
At the level of a specific subdiscipline, the most important weaknesses of industrial geography are:
1. Shortage of unambiguous methodological solutions which is a direct cause of the shortage of up-to-date methodological and didactic textbooks. Currently, on the market there is merely one position available in the field of industrial geography which can be classified as very useful in theoretical establishments. Unfortunately, there is no textbook which could give new or verified research tools and the foundations of methodological establishments4 [14].
2. Difficulties - which have been indicated for years - with the access to research materials caused by formal and cost-related factors. Not without certain relevance is the possibility to publish full data in accordance with, for example, the Personal Data Protection Act or Law on Protection of Classified Information. One also needs to pay attention to the problem of comparability of data published in different time periods, at different levels of aggregation and for different spatial units.
3. Turn of research on the part of numerous geographers traditionally connected with industrial geography in the direction of economic sciences, social ones, or other geographic subdisciplines. It seems worthwile to note here that the very decision to deal with a new (other) range of issues should not be judged negatively, particularly if one searches for junction elements, transpositions or analogies. Unfortunately, it frequently happens with the simultaneous abandonment of a part of previously dealt with research issues. Such phenomenon might result in the creation of a niche filled by specialists from other disciplines. Thus, it may very well come to the situation where the discipline in which industrial geographers are perceived as specialists is no longer pursued by them [2].
The above-mentioned considerations also have their reflection upon the process of education at the academic level, where a frequent practice is noticed to combine in the scope of one subject industrial geography with geography of transportation (communication) or/and geography of services, which naturally gives rise to considerable doubts. Simultaneously, it has an impact on the scope of knowledge in all of the considered specific subdisciplines. This process - in all likelihood caused by the demand for generalized knowledge and the complexity of research - is advancing as in certain Polish geographic centres the consolidation of economic geography has already been realised. Nevertheless, one might have doubts as to the motivation of those actions which, perhaps, are not exclusively caused by the attempt to popularise the comprehensive approach to the economic reality, but also by the above-indicated weaknesses of industrial geography and other specific subdisciplines. The comprehensive approach ought to have its place - but only as one of two approaches - because isn't it specialization that remains the foundation of progress in every branch of science? However, it is difficult to find a compromise between both of those approaches. It seems worthwhile to indicate that effective research and educating requires establishing balanced proportions between them.
4 Published in 1991 year. A guide to activities in industrial geography M. Troca does not allow a full research analysis.
CONCLUSION
In view of the above - what is the future of industrial geography? There appear to be several scenarios. The first of them presumes the preserving the status quo, which would imply the state of temporariness, and in a more distant perspective - a scientific non-existence. The second one presumes the consolidation of geographic subdisciplines in the scope of economic geography. It might, however, be a transitory state ultimately leading to the achieving by economic geography a scientific authorisation in the field of economy, perhaps on the foundation of the theory of new economic geography introduced by Paul Krugman [10].
To recapitulate, it needs to be emphasised that because of the research issues, the scale of studies and methodological establishments there is a significant resemblance of industrial geography and industrial economics. There is also, however, a considerable discrepancy in the perception of both of those sciences by the society and scientists themselves. Industrial economics drawing from the establishments of theoretical economics is at a higher level of methodological development. Industrial geography, on the other hand, while being clearly underappreciated, is able to offer a very similar range of research possibilities as industrial economics. It seems, however, that it is deficient in a certain freshness of approach and individually developed research methods which are a result of the problems of geography in general. In addition, not without meaning is the assessment of industrial geography from the point of view of its applicability and - related to it - the marketing of scientific-research services. Unfortunately, this assessment -especially in contrast to economic disciplines - leaves much to be desired [12]. This is why we need to broaden and promote the diagnostic function of industrial geography -and to an even larger extent: the prognostic one (which appears to be underappreciated by the geographers themselves). In conclusion, in order to enable the further development of industrial geography, we need to focus, above all, on a new definition of research priorities of this subdiscipline and its place not exclusively among geographic sciences. If we fail to accomplish that, then we might assume the geography has outlived its purpose [6].
Bibliography
1. Bywalec Cz. Mezoekonomia i megaekonomia - nowe wymiary / Bywalec Cz. - [w:] Rola mezoekonomii w rynkowym systemie zarz^dzania gospodarkq, Krakow. - 1996
2. Czyz T. Glowne problemy badawcze polskiej geografii spoleczno - ekonomicznej i ich ewolucj/ Czyz T. - [w:] Chojnicki Z. (red.), Geografia wobec problemow terazniejszosci i przyszlosci, Poznan. - 2004
3. Domanski B. Geografia przedsiqbiorstw—niedoceniany nurt badan w polskiej geografii ekonomicznej / Domanski B. - [w:] Geografia—Czlowiek—Gospodarka. Profesorowi Bronislawowi Kortusowi w 70. rocznice urodzin, Instytut Geografii UJ, Krakow. - 1997. - s. 101-112
4. Domanski R. Zasady geografii spoleczno-ekonomicznej / Domanski R. - Warszawa. - 1996
5. Gorka K. Ekonomika przemyslu oraz ekonomika ochrony srodowiska jako dyscypliny mezoekonomiczne / Gorka K. - [w:] Rola mezoekonomii w rynkowym systemie zarz^dzania gospodarkq, Krakow. - 1996
6. Horgan J. Koniec nauki / Horgan J. - Warszawa. - 1999
7. Jakobczyk-Gryszkiewicz J. Funkcje geografii w nowej rzeczywistosci polityczno-gospodarczej oraz kariery geografow na nowym rynku prac / Jakobczyk-Gryszkiewicz J., Lisowski A., Pawelska-Skrzypek G., Rudnicki R. - [w:] Domanski B., Widacki W. (red.) Geografia polska u progu trzeciego tysi^clecia, Krakow
8. Janasz W. Podstawy ekonomikiprzemyslu / Janasz W. - Warszawa. -1999
9. Janasz W. Zarys strategii rozwoju przemyslu / Janasz W. - Warszawa. - 2006
10. Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography / Krugman P. // Journal of Political Economy. vol. 99. No 3. - 1991. - pages 483-499
11. Liszewski S. Jednosc geografii a problem ksztalcenia akademickiego / Liszewski S., Suliborski A. // Czasopismo Geograficzne, 77 (1-2). - 2006. - pages. 3 - 22
12. Loboda J. Stan iperspektywy polskiej geografii w opinii geografów/ Loboda J. // Przegl^d Geograficzny, 76 (4). - 2004. - pages 389 - 414
13. Misztal S. Dorobek polskiej geografii przemyslu w badaniach osrodków akademickich / Misztal S., Ziolo Z. - Warszawa - Kraków. - 1998
14. Wielonski A. Geografía przemyslu / Wielonski A. - Warszawa. - 2005
Чаплинский П. Индустриальная экономика - возможность или угроза в географических исследованиях пространственной организации индустрии./ Чаплинский П. // Ученые записки Таврического национального университета имени В.И. Вернадского. Серия: География. - 2011. - Т. 24 (63). - №2, ч. 1 - С.49-55.
Таврического национального университета им. В. Вернадского. Серия География. - 2011. - Т. - С. В статье рассматривается попытка поднять вопрос относительно роли индустриальной экономики и индустриальной географии в региональных исследованиях, относительно их места среди дисциплин, исследующих экономические процессы, особенно те, которые сосредотачиваются на индустриальных структурах.
Ключевые слова- индустриальная география, индустриальная экономика, мезоекономика, региональные исследования.
Чаплшський П. 1ндустр1альна економжа - можливкть чи загроза в географ!чних дослвдженях npocTopoBo'i оргашзацй ¡ндустрН. / Чаплшський П. // Вчеш записки Тавршського нацюнального ушверситету ¿меш B.I. Вернадського. Сер1я: Географ1я. - 2011. - Т.24 (63). - № 2, ч. 1 - P. 49-55. В статп розглядаегься питания в1дносно poni шдустр1ально1 економши та шдустр1ально1 географй в регюнальних досл1дженнях, ix м1сця серед дисциплш, як1 досл1джують економ1чн1 процеси, особливо tí, яю зосереджен1 на шдустр1альних структурах.
Ключов1 слова: ¿ндустр1альна географ1я, ¿ндустр1альна економ1ка, мезоеконом1ка, рег1ональн1 дослвдження.
Поступила вредакцию 08.04.2011 г.
