Competitiveness in a globalised world: Michael Porter on the microeconomic foundations of the competitiveness of nations, regions, and firms.

In this paper, we provide the text of an interview with Professor Michael Porter discussing his research and ideas relating to the microeconomic foundations of global competitiveness. The discussion provides a microeconomic perspective on some of the key issues relating to recent research on competitiveness, productivity, clusters, US economic leadership, economic growth and development.

Competitive advantage revisited: Michael Porter on strategy and competitiveness.

Strategic management is constantly evolving as both an academic discipline and as a reflection of management practice. This article, based on a recent interview with Michael Porter, assesses his contribution to the development of the discipline in the context of the advances that have taken place since the publication of his seminal work Competitive Strategy in 1980. The authors conclude that Porter has made major lasting contributions to strategy, increasing both its academic rigor and its accessibility to managers. The article and interview place Porter's work at the center of the development of strategic management in terms of the provision of practical analytical frameworks, transforming it into a recognized and recognizable field of academic study and management practice. This feat of transformation has not been equaled before or since, so that 25 years after his first seminal contribution, Porter's work continues to provide remarkable insights into the nature of competition and strategy.

Legislative policy, law and competitiveness: a mysterious and difficult relationship in the EU

The Lisbon Agenda places Europe in a uniquely difficult position globally, most particularly as an example of a social and regulatory experiment which many consider to be doomed to failure. The drive towards economic competitiveness has led to a focus on regulation and its effect on entrepreneurship, productivity and business growth but assessing this relationship is complex for a number of reasons. First, not all regulatory effects can be predicted precisely in relation to behavioural outcomes. Path-dependency scholars have also demonstrated that the regulation will have varying effects depending on context. Second, theoretically it is clear that many non-regulatory factors may contribute to economic and competitive success. Third, there is evidence of internal conflict within the Commission as to the relative importance of the Lisbon goals. Finally, the experience of distinct Member States presents challenges both for assessment and prescriptive remedies. The Commission has estimated that the cost of regulatory compliance obligations on businesses in the EU is between 4% and 6% of gross domestic product and that 15% of this figure is avoidable 'red tape' (the term used specifically to signify unnecessary compliance burdens). This article proposes to assess the likely outcomes of de-regulation as we rapidly approach 2010, the year for attainment of the Lisbon goals.

Social Inclusion or Market Competitiveness? A Comparison of Rural Development Policies in the European Union and the United States

The language of EU rural development policy appears more interested in social inclusion and that of US policy more interested in market competitiveness. We seek to determine why policies directed at rural development in the EU and the USA differ. In both contexts new rural development policies emphasize partnership and participation but we find local participation is used to promote social inclusion in the EU and market competitiveness in the USA. An examination of these dimensions illustrates important transcontinental differences and similarities in rural development policies. We explore the socio-historical reasons for differences in the commitment to social inclusion, while also noting similarities in the priority of market competitiveness.

The relationship between spatial planning and economic competitiveness: the ‘path to economic nirvana’ or a ‘dangerous obsession’?

This paper offers a contribution to contemporary studies of spatial planning. In particular, it problematises the relationship between neoliberal competitiveness and spatial planning. Neoliberal competitiveness is a hegemonic discourse in public policy as it (allegedly) provides the ‘path to economic nirvana’. However, commentators have critiqued its theoretical underpinnings and labelled it a ‘dangerous obsession’ for policy makers. Another set of literatures argues that spatial planning can be understood as a form of ‘neoliberal spatial governance’ and read in a ‘postpolitical’ framework that ‘privileges competitiveness’. Synthesising these debates this paper critically analyses the application and operationalisation of neoliberal competitiveness in Northern Ireland and Belfast. In focusing on this unique case study—a deeply divided society with a turbulent history—the paper takes the debate forward in arguing that rather than offering the ‘path to economic nirvana’ neoliberal competitiveness is a ‘postpolitical strategy’ and represents a ‘dangerous obsession’ for spatial planning.