We explore the concept of regional industrial identity as an important missing component in our understanding of the development of metropolitan regions and the spatial arrangements of industries. While economists and sociologists have explained the location of industry clusters on the basis of unevenly distributed resources, and historians have provided rich descriptive insight into the developmental dynamics of particular metropolitan regions, little systematic theory has been advanced to explain cross-regional inflows and outflows of resources, especially with respect to patterns in cluster development. This paper examines the concept of regional industrial identity as a social code that (1) arises from the shared understandings of residents and external audiences about the suitability of a region for particular kinds of business activity and (2) influences decisions about where to locate investments. We argue that such understandings are principally informed by configurations of industry clusters that have already formed in a region. Clusters, which are the results of historical investments, are also important signals about the types of business that can thrive in the future. We develop theoretical propositions linking characteristics of regional industry cluster configurations, in particular cluster dominance and cluster interrelatedness, to the strength and focus of regional identity and, as a result, to the types and amounts of resources that will develop within and flow into and out of regions.

Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

At their core, markets are exchange structures between producers and consumers, and products are a key element that connects them together. Many new markets emerge in direct ideological opposition to incumbent industries. Yet, the ways in which ideology affects products in oppositional markets are not well understood. We propose that when audiences cannot easily differentiate between products based on physical attributes, they rely on ideological discourse about the production process. We argue that product names, by embodying linguistically the narrative of this discourse, shape the appeal of oppositional products to customers. When products have names that are congruent with the collective identity of an oppositional market, they have higher appeal. This beneficial effect is attenuated (1) when audience expectations about what type of product should have an oppositional name are violated and (2) when a firm develops a strong organizational identity and audiences rely on this identity to make inference about the firm’s production process. We find support for this theorizing in the longitudinal analyses of product appeal in the U.S. craft beer industry, 1996–2012.