2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1757-7802.2010.01015.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution of new spatial division of labour and spatial dynamics in Korea

Abstract: This paper aims to investigate the evolution of the spatial division of labour and spatial dynamics in Korea in relation to industrial restructuring and technological development. The two restructuring processes in the 1990s, which were related to the labour movement in the late 1980s and to the financial crisis in 1997, had considerable impact on the dynamics of the Capital Region in Korea. In the processes of spatial restructuring in the Capital Region, four factors have been significant: distance, density o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Even in the more developmental and 'organic' mode of 'indigenous innovation' in South Korea, the enormous state-sanctioned benefits received by leading chaebol or conglomerates (e.g., Samsung, LG and Hyundai) and their spatially concentrated production networks within South Korea have created some ruptures (e.g., political exclusion) and frictions (e.g., social and class conflicts) within the national economy. In globalized industries such as automobiles (e.g., Park 2003Park , 2005 and electronics (Lee 2009;Park and Koo 2010;Lee et al 2014), the highly spatially selective anchoring of the GPNs by these leading chaebol in the Seoul Metropolitan Area (e.g., Seoul, Incheon and Gyeonggi) and southeast region (e.g., Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam) has been shown to exacerbate seriously pre-existing regional differences and socio-economic inequalities. As these South Korean chaebols continue to reorganize and restructure their home region-embedded production networks, the degree of regional asset specificity -measured by the growing share and dependency of local suppliers on each chaebol -is likely to increase over time.…”
Section: Changing Modes Of Strategic Couplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even in the more developmental and 'organic' mode of 'indigenous innovation' in South Korea, the enormous state-sanctioned benefits received by leading chaebol or conglomerates (e.g., Samsung, LG and Hyundai) and their spatially concentrated production networks within South Korea have created some ruptures (e.g., political exclusion) and frictions (e.g., social and class conflicts) within the national economy. In globalized industries such as automobiles (e.g., Park 2003Park , 2005 and electronics (Lee 2009;Park and Koo 2010;Lee et al 2014), the highly spatially selective anchoring of the GPNs by these leading chaebol in the Seoul Metropolitan Area (e.g., Seoul, Incheon and Gyeonggi) and southeast region (e.g., Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam) has been shown to exacerbate seriously pre-existing regional differences and socio-economic inequalities. As these South Korean chaebols continue to reorganize and restructure their home region-embedded production networks, the degree of regional asset specificity -measured by the growing share and dependency of local suppliers on each chaebol -is likely to increase over time.…”
Section: Changing Modes Of Strategic Couplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proximity is thus the thread that promotes both internal production of new technologies and external spillovers. Distances, in fact, are found to play an important role in industrial restructuring and technological development in Korea (Park and Koo 2010). From here it seems reasonable to argue that information flows more fluidly within a crowded built environment than outside in the sparse open air.…”
Section: Survey Of Related Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second dimension is agglomeration, wherein similar firms cluster in specific regions to take advantage of territorial proximity (Porter 1990; Krugman 1991a, 1991b). The agglomeration forms the territorial basis for stimulating innovation in firms through collaboration and knowledge spillovers (Cooke 2001; Park and Koo 2009).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%