Grassroots “flexible specialisation” in Brisbane’s West End: towards a politics of economic possibility

GeoJournal ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 74 (6) ◽  
pp. 525-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Gall
Author(s):  
Florian Butollo ◽  
Lea Schneidemesser

The “Industry 4.0” paradigm is present in the strategy of governments, employers' associations and trade union federations. Revisiting Piore and Sabel's classic study on flexible specialisation, we criticise the one-sidedness and narrowness inherent in the discourse of Industry 4.0, to which we counter empirical analyses on decentralised factory networks. Contrary to the prevailing stylised account, flexibility is facilitated by “B2B” platforms that link manufacturers and customers – a model that relies more on the versatility of decentralised manufacturing networks than on sophisticated production technology. The effects on labour are ambivalent, as they involve both potential for a small-scale, skilled-labour-intensive manufacturing paradigm, and dangers arising from competitive pressure for cost reduction. In sum, our aim is to offer theoretical and empirical evidence for understanding changes in digitised manufacturing and to highlight the approach of “B2B” networks and platforms in the debate on the transformation of manufacturing and industrial work.


1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Procter ◽  
Michael Rowlinson ◽  
Louise McArdle, ◽  
John Hassard ◽  
Paul Forrester

This paper offers a defence of Atkinson's model of the flexible firm. It takes issue with two arguments against it: that the model needs to be understood at a political level, as part of a wider `post-industrial' vision; and that the observed increase in flexibility offers the model no support because of its `non-strategic' nature. On the first of these it is argued that flexibility operates on a different level from flexible specialisation and other varieties of `post-industrialism' and that to consider them together confuses rather than illuminates the debate. On the second, it is argued that the criticism relies on an unnecessarily restrictive view of strategy. Rather than being regarded as `plans', strategies should be regarded as `patterns' in decision-making. On the basis of this alternative conception the paper suggests ways in which the flexible firm model might be recast.


1989 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 19-20
Author(s):  
Al Rainnie

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document