ABSTRACT

Among the questions that have arisen in the course of our collaboration some have seemed important enough to merit further examination at the international level. Those questions are enumerated below in a list which cannot however claim to be exhaustive.

Should there be a radical improvement in the range and quality of regional economic data?

Does the concept of the region retain validity for modern business development?

Have regional cultures exerted a major influence upon the pattern of recent business development?

Has regional dualism within states declined or increased since Jeffrey G. Williamson’s incisive global analysis of 1965? 1

Which of the two regions surveyed has been the more innovative? Which has been the more successful in achieving self-sustained growth?

Which region has made the transition more effectively from mass-production to flexible specialisation?

If a counter-factual assumption be made, distributing economic resources evenly throughout each state, would either region still have made a distinctive impact upon their respective national economy?

How do immigrant communities influence the commercial development of their host-regions?

Does the pattern of business start-ups, whether by small and medium-sized enterprises or by management buy-outs, differ fundamentally between the two regions?

What benefits have accrued, and what costs have been incurred, from the presence of big business within each of the two regions?

Do the means whereby leading firms emerge as regional champions differ between the two regions?

Which region has made the transition from manufacturing to services most effectively?

Which region has proved most successful in mobilising national resources, both public and private, for regional restructuring?

In which ways has regional policy improved the performance and the prospects of the two regions?