Search results

This paper aims to show that the business group – i.e. the set of firms under common ownership and control – is the most appropriate unit to study the behavior and organization of firms and define their boundaries. Particular emphasis is given to notions such as unitary direction – i.e. the influence over strategic decisions – and administrative co‐ordination which allow owners to exercise supervision and authority over the controlled companies.

Given these aims the paper adopts an interdisciplinary perspective that relies on economics, management and law. This multidisciplinary approach is necessary for analyzing the different aspects characterizing business groups in terms of ownership, control, economic synergies between firms and internal organizational mechanisms. To support the propositions, data and information from various sources are used, ranging from official statistics on the firm's population, to sample surveys, case studies and juridical evidence. The use of different sources is justified not only by the interdisciplinary nature of the problem but also by the lack of systematic statistical evidence on the phenomenon of business groups.

The authors suggest that when a company is part of a group, the business group rather than the individual company is the most appropriate “unit” for analyzing the organization and behavior of firms. This does not deny that in some cases it can be worthwhile using the legal boundary as the appropriate unit; however, most of the empirical analyses about firms consider the legal boundary without considering whether companies are independent or part of a business group.

The authors show that forms of unitary direction and administrative co‐ordination are common in business groups; these forms can be assimilated to the internal organization of firms. For this reason they propose that the group rather than the individual company is the appropriate unit to delimit the boundary of the firm. In this sense, their main conclusion is that not considering the business group underestimates the actual firm boundaries.

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive vision of the formation of intra-metropolitan clusters triggered by the deindustrialization of an urban area, namely, the district of Porto Marghera in the metropolitan area of Venice and propose possible regeneration scenarios based on intra-metropolitan clustering.

This paper adopts a multi-disciplinary approach and relies on both descriptive and qualitative evidence to show the economic transition occurred in the area of Porto Marghera in recent years.

Evidence shows the rise of two potential clusters in the KIBS and the creative industries in a well-delimited fringe area placed at the boundary between the urban centre and the core of the deindustrialized zone. Such clustering processes have been, however, characterized by two different and in some way alternative paths. The former stems from the combination of two autonomous entrepreneurial ideas that complemented one to each other. The latter relies on university-industry collaboration and on the presence of places of informal exchanges that proved to support personal networking, knowledge exchange and business opportunities.

This paper suggests that local development policies could leverage on the presence of social entrepreneurs to substitute the creation of amenities and the provision of public goods in fragile territories.

This paper shows that, in presence of specific spatial conditions, deindustrialization can stimulate the formation of new intra-metropolitan through both top-down and bottom-up agglomeration process.