The Changing Firm Landscape and Firm Location Behaviour

  • Sierdjan KosterEmail author
  • Piet Pellenbarg


The landscape of firms in the Netherlands is changing in such a way that small firms increasingly dominate the Dutch economy. This development suggests a re-evaluation of how firm location decisions are made, which factors are important and consequently the dynamics in firm location and relocation. This chapter argues that the borders of the firm become permeable as the average firm size declines: Non-firm considerations, including residential preferences and other job locations in the family, play an increasingly important role in the firm location decision process. Also, the physical spaces of the residence and the firm premises overlap more often than ever. Rather than regarding the location of the firm as a reflection of the optimal firm location, it is arguably better viewed as a part of the larger locational puzzle people and households face.


  1. Arauzo-Carod, J. M., Liviano-Solis, D., & Manjón-Antolín, M. (2010). Empirical studies in industrial location: An assessment of their methods and results. Journal of Regional Science, 50(3), 685–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baines, S. (2002). New technologies and old ways of working in the home of the self-employed teleworker. New Technology, Work and Employment, 17(2), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brouwer, A. E., Mariotti, I., & Van Ommeren, J. N. (2004). The firm relocation decision: An empirical investigation. Annals of Regional Science, 38(2), 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooke, T. J. (2008). Migration in a family way. Population, Space and Place, 14(4), 255–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dahl, M. S., & Sorenson, O. (2009). The embedded entrepreneur. European Management Review, 6(3), 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Garwood, J. D. (1953). An analysis of postwar industrial relocation to Utah and Colorado. Economic Geography, 29(1), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Greenhalgh, P. (2008). An examination of business occupier relocation decision making: Distinguishing small and large firm behaviour. Journal of Property Research, 25(2), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hamilton, B. H. (2000). Does entrepreneurship pay? An empirical analysis of the returns to self-employment. Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 604–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hartog, C., & Wennekers, S. (2009). De twee gezichten van de ondernemerschapsrevolutie en hun betekenis voor Nederland. Zoetermeer: Panteia.Google Scholar
  10. Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2008). Ties that spatially bind? A relational account of the causes of spatial firm mobility. Regional Studies, 42(3), 385–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Koster, S., & Venhorst, V. A. (2014). Moving shop: Residential and business relocation by the highly educated self-employed. Spatial Economic Analysis, 9(4), 436–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lazear, E. P. (2003). Entrepreneurship. Bonn: IZA.Google Scholar
  13. LISA. (2015). Landelijk InformatieSysteem Arbeidsplaatsen (National Information System on Employment).Google Scholar
  14. McLaughlin, G. E., & Robock, S. (1949). Why industry moves South: A study of factors influencing the recent location of manufacturing plants in the South. Kingsport, Tennessee: Kingsport Press, National Planning Association.Google Scholar
  15. OECD. (2015a). Entrepreneurship at a glance 2015. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. OECD. (2015b). OECD employment outlook 2015. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pellenbarg, P. H., & Knoben, J. (2012). Spatial mobility of firms. In A. Frenkel, P. Nijkamp, & P. McCann (Eds.), Societies in motion: Innovation, migration and regional transformation (pp. 71–113). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  18. Pellenbarg, P. H., Van Wissen, L. J. G., & Van Dijk, J. (2002). Firm relocation. In P. McCann (Ed.), Industrial location economics (p. 148). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  19. Pred, A. R. (1967). Behaviour and location. Foundations for a geographic and dynamic location theory, Part 1. Lund Studies in Geography B, 27.Google Scholar
  20. Risselada, A. H., Schutjens, V., & Van Oort, F. (2013). Real estate determinants of firm relocation in urban residential neighbourhoods. Journal of Economic and Social Geography, 104(2), 136–158.Google Scholar
  21. Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man, social and rational. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Sleutjes, B., & Völker, B. (2012). The role of the neighbourhood for firm relocation. Journal of Economic and Social Geography, 103(2), 240–249.Google Scholar
  23. Smallbone, D., & Welter, F. (2001). The role of government in SME development in transition economies. International Small Business Journal, 19(4), 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith, D. M. (1966). A theoretical framework for geographical studies of industrial location. Economic Geography, 42(2), 95–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stam, E. (2003). Why butterflies don’t leave. Location evolution of evolving enterprises. Utrecht: University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  26. Statistics Netherlands. (2017). Regionale Kerncijfers (Primary regional data).
  27. Van Dijk, J., & Pellenbarg, P. H. (2000). Firm relocation decisions in the Netherlands: An ordered logit approach. Papers in Regional Science, 79(2), 191–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Dijk, J., & Pellenbarg, P. H. (2017). Firm migration. In: D. Richardson (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of geography: People, the earth, environment, and technology. Section industrial geography. AAAG/Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economic Geography, Faculty of Spatial SciencesUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations