ABSTRACT
Local economic-policy ideas are frequently based on the ‘enthusiastic borrowing’ of perceived best practice rather than detailed understanding of what works and when (Irwin 2003). Cluster policy is a pronounced case of this. In many industrial countries, efforts to promote business clusters are now a central part of regional, innovation and businessdevelopment policies administered by public agencies (Isaksen and Hauge 2002; Raines 2002). Indeed, at the start of the new century it could be claimed that few other ideas had the same level of appeal among local economic-development practitioners as did the promotion of clusters (Martin and Sunley 2003). One sign is the number of states and provinces in North America and Western Europe with ambition to build clusters in the same high-tech activities (Enright 1999). The aspiration to imitate Silicon Valley, the locality cited frequently as the model justifying intervention is reflected in the christening of valley projects around the world. In the United Kingdom, there is Motorsport Valley; in France, the Paris Optics Valley and the Mechanic Valley in Midi Pyrénées; in Belgium, Flanders Multimedia Valley and DSP Valley (microelectronics); in Germany, Materials Valley in the Rhein-Main area; in Sweden, Strängäs Biotech Valley and Dalarna Crystal Valley; in Denmark, Medicon Valley; in Poland, Plastics valley; in Lithuania, Sunrise Valley (lasers); in Japan, Sweet Valley (software) (Sölvell et al. 2003:16; Ecotech Research and Consulting 2004; Perry 2004b).
