01.03.2013 Views

The Performance of Seaport Clusters - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

The Performance of Seaport Clusters - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

The Performance of Seaport Clusters - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 10 – Structure and <strong>Performance</strong> in <strong>Seaport</strong> <strong>Clusters</strong>; Results <strong>of</strong> the Cases 131<br />

• <strong>The</strong> most relevant entry barrier is the inaccessibility <strong>of</strong> knowledge and networks. In all<br />

three port clusters, networks are relatively closed and knowledge is relatively<br />

inaccessible. In the conversations this was explained with reference to a specific local<br />

‘port community’. This port community is internationally oriented but inaccessible for<br />

entrants with no prior expertise in the port cluster. Especially in the LMPC, the vast<br />

majority <strong>of</strong> respondents regard the cluster community as closed for outsiders.<br />

• A significant majority agrees that exit barriers have a negative effect on the cluster (in<br />

the long run). According to the experts, exit barriers reduce dynamism. This argument is<br />

regarded as more important than the ‘static’ argument that ‘firms committed to the<br />

cluster (because <strong>of</strong> high exit barriers) are more likely to invest in the quality <strong>of</strong> the<br />

cluster’.<br />

• Specific investments are regarded as a relevant exit barrier. Experts indicate this can<br />

also be regarded as an entry barrier. This underlines the theory that exit barriers are by<br />

definition entry barriers as well and provides an argument for port authorities to make<br />

specific investments - provided that firms are willing to lease these investments - in<br />

order to reduce entry barriers. This is an important result, because it implies that<br />

arrangements that lower the need for firms to invest in specific assets contribute to the<br />

performance <strong>of</strong> a port cluster. Possibilities for such arrangements are discussed later.<br />

• With regard to local capital, the difference between Rotterdam on the one hand and<br />

Durban and the LMPC on the other is striking. Contrary to Rotterdam, in the latter two<br />

clusters, the absence <strong>of</strong> ‘local capital’ is regarded as a relevant start-up barrier. This<br />

might be explained by the fact that banks in Rotterdam (branches <strong>of</strong> multinational<br />

banks) as well as a venture capitalist partially owned by the port authority (together with<br />

partners from the banking industry) actively seek customers in the port cluster. Such<br />

organizations are lacking in the other two ports.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!