Advertisement

Between Location, Persistence and Relocation—Early Historical and Spatial Trajectories of the Polish Aviation Industry

  • Lech SuwalaEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The location, persistence and relocation of economic activities address one of the classical topics and certainly depict the raison d’être in economic geography. The Polish aviation industry illustrates an interesting case study due to its very dynamic nature and its affection by profound spatial ruptures in the past with regard to this complex relationship. The rationale of this chapter is to highlight the pervasive locational competition from a historical perspective by analysing the processes of location, persistence and relocation in the Polish aviation industry since its inception until 1945 and by reconstructing historical and spatial trajectories through an enterprise genealogy. In the first part, a general theoretical discussion of approaches to ‘location, persistence and relocation’ will be given. The very essence of the chapter in the second part, however, is the reconstruction of historical and spatial paths within the Polish aviation industry. To this extent, the discussion focuses on changing locational attributes, political circumstances, production logics, and targeted markets and their impact on the persistence and/or relocation of parts of the industry.

References

  1. Alderfer, E. B., & Michl, H. E. (1942). Economics of American industry. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  2. Arthur, W. B. (1988). Self-reinforcing mechanisms in economics (Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Science of Complexity, 5). Redwood City: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies and lock-in by historical small events. Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arthur, W. B. (1990). Industry location patterns and the importance of history. Mathematical Social Sciences, 19, 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arthur, W. B. (1994). Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2003). Evolutionary economics and industry location. International Review for Regional Research, 23, 183–200.Google Scholar
  7. Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2006). Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(3), 273–302.Google Scholar
  8. Brinkhoff, S., Suwala, L., & Kulke, E. (2012). What do you offer?: Interlinkages of universities and high-technology companies in science and technology parks in Berlin and Seville. In R. Capello, A. Olechnicka, & G. Gorzelak (Eds.), Universities—Cities—Regions (pp. p121–p146). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Brinkhoff, S., Suwala, L., & Kulke, E. (2015). Managing innovation in ‘localities of learning’ in Berlin and Seville. In G. Micek (Ed.), Understanding innovation in emerging economic spaces (pp. 11–31). Farmham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  10. Budraß, L. (1998). Flugzeugindustrie und Luftrüstung in Deutschland, 1918–1945. Düsseldorf: Droste.Google Scholar
  11. Cooke, P. (2012). Transversality and transition: Green innovation and new regional path creation. European Planning Studies, 20(5), 817–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cynk, J. B. (1971). Polish aircraft 1893–1939. London: Putman.Google Scholar
  13. David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75(5), 332–337.Google Scholar
  14. David, P. A. (1994). Why are institutions the ‘carriers of history’?: Path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 5(2), 205–220.Google Scholar
  15. David, P. A. (1997). Path dependence and the quest for historical economics: One more chorus of the ballad of QWERTY (Vol. 20). University of Oxford Discussion Papers in Economic and Social History (November).Google Scholar
  16. David, P. A. (2007). Path dependence: A foundational concept for historical social science. Cliometrica, 1(2), 91–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. David, P. A., & Foray, D. (1994). Dynamics of competitive technology diffusion through local network structures: The case of EDI document standards. In L. Leydesdorff & P. van den Besselaar (Eds.), Evolutionary economics and Chaos theory (pp. 63–78). London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  18. Dekler, Z. (1912). Przemysl Lotniczy w roku 1911. Lotnik I Automobilista, 1912(4), 8–9.Google Scholar
  19. Deszczynski, M. P. (2012). Import sprzętu wojskowego przez Polskę w latach 1921–1939. Kwartalnik Historyczny CXIX, 3, 507–540.Google Scholar
  20. Ehlert, A. (1954). Die Industrialisierung Polens zwischen den Weltkriegen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der neuen Standorte. Kiel.Google Scholar
  21. Fiszer, M., & Bluj, M. (2007). Od Pegasusa do F-100-PW229. Wypisy z siedmiu dekad historii WSK “PZL-Rzeszów” S.A (1937–2007). Magnum-X, Warszawa.Google Scholar
  22. Frenken, K., & Boschma, R. A. (2007). A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: Industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(5), 635–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frenken, K., Van Oort, F. G., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garud, R., & Karnøe, P. (2001). Path dependence and creation. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  25. Glass, A. (1992). Realizacja koncepcji rozwoju przemysłu lotniczego. In A. Glass (Ed.), Polska Technika Lotnicza do Roku 1939 (pp. 44–79). Warszawa: IHNOit.Google Scholar
  26. Glass, A. (2004). Polskie Konstrukcje Lotnicze (Vol. I). Sandomierz: Stratus.Google Scholar
  27. Glass, A., & Kubalanca, J. (2013). Polskie Konstrukcje Lotnicze (Vol. V). Sandomierz: Stratus.Google Scholar
  28. Hall, P. G., & Preston, P. (1988). The carrier wave: New information technology and the geography of innovation, 1846–2003. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  29. Herrmann, D. (2012). Führungsverhalten und Handeln reichsdeutscher Unternehmer/Manager und deren Verstrickung in den NS-Terror im Generalgouvernement der besetzten polnischen Gebiete (GG) 1939 bis 1945. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg.Google Scholar
  30. Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in Competition Economic Journal, 39, 41–57.Google Scholar
  31. Jane, F. (Ed.). (1913). Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 1913. London: Sampson Low Marston.Google Scholar
  32. Kinder, S., & Suwala, L. (2012). Rzeszów und das “Aviation Valley” – Perspektiven für eine dynamische Wirtschaftsentwicklung in Südostpolen. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Dossier Polen. 6.12.2012. Polen-Analysen, 7(118), 1–13.Google Scholar
  33. Klepper, S. (1997). Industry life-cycles. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6, 145–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kondratiev, N. D. (1935). The long waves in economic life. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 17(6), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kulke, E. (1992). Empirische Ergebnisse zur regionalen Produktlebenszyklushypothese – Untersuchung in Niedersachsen. Die Erde, 123(1), 49–61.Google Scholar
  36. Majewski, M. W. (2008). Samoloty i zakłady lotnicze II Rzeczypospolitej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo ZP.Google Scholar
  37. Malecki, E. (1991). Technology and economic development: The dynamics of local, regional and national change. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  38. Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(4), 395–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. North, D. N. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Norton, R. D., & Rees, J. (1979). The product cycle and the spatial decentralization of American manufacturing. Regional Studies, 13, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Page, S. E. (2006). Path dependence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Radocki H (1939) Centralny Okręg Przemysłowy w Polsce, Nakładem Myśli Polskiej, Warszawa.Google Scholar
  45. Rymut, K. (1980). Nazwy miast Polski, Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
  46. Samecki, W. (1998). Centralny Okrȩg Przemysłowy 1936–1939. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.Google Scholar
  47. Scott, A. J., & Storper, M. (1987). High technology industry and regional development: A theoretical critique and reconstruction. International Social Science Journal, 112, 215–232.Google Scholar
  48. Sewell, W. H. (1996). Historical events as transformations of structures: Inventing revolution at the bastille. Theory and Society, 25, 841–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simmie, J. (2013). Path dependence and new technological path creation in the economic landscape. In P. Cooke (Ed.), Re-framing regional development—Evolution, innovation and transition (pp. 164–185). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Smith, D. M. (1971). Industrial location. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  51. Storper, M., & Walker, R. (1989). The capitalist imperative: Territory, technology and industrial growth. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  52. Strambach, S. (2010). Path dependency and path plasticity. The co-evolution of institutions and innovation—The German customized business software industry. In: R. A. Boschma & R. Martin (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary economic geography (pp. 406–431). Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.Google Scholar
  53. Suwala, L. (2014). Kreativität, Kultur und Raum. – Ein wirtschaftsgeographischer Beitrag am Beispiel des kulturellen Kreativitätsprozesses. Springer. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  54. Suwala, L., & Micek, G. (2018). Beyond clusters? Field configuration and regional platforming: The Aviation Valley initiative in the Polish Podkarpackie region. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsy010.
  55. Sydow, J., Lerch, F., & Staber, U. (2010). Planning for path dependence? The case of a network in the Berlin-Brandenburg optics cluster. Economic Geography, 86(2), 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tygodnik Illustrowany. (1909, December 18). Modele Aeroplanów. Tygodnik Illustrowany, 51, 1081.Google Scholar
  58. Vernon, R. (1966). International investment and international trade in the product cycle. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(2), 190–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Weber, A. (1909). Über den Standort der Industrien. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  60. Wolf, N. (2008). Ökonomische Zugänge zur Geschichte der deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen. In D. Bingen, P. O. Loew, & N. Wolf (Eds.), Interesse und Konflikt: zur politischen Ökonomie der deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen, 1900–2007 (pp. 9–24). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeographyHumboldt-University of BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Urban and Regional PlanningTechnical University BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations