The progress through clusterisation in European Union.

Popa, Horia Liviu ; Izvercianu, Monica ; Mocan, Marian 等

1. INTRODUCTION

The enlarged European Union is taking new steps in enforcing the 2000-2010 Lisbon Strategy, updating it three times a year but without succeeding in eliminating the negative competitiveness discrepancies as compared to North America (3 countries) and the Asia-Pacific Area (13 countries). The various competiveness classifications realized in the last 10 years confirm this reality (GCR, -2007; WCY, -2008) and require integrative systemic innovation, adjusted to the various categories of EU 27 member countries. One of the means to increase sustainable competitiveness in the European Union is to improve clusterisation and cluster performances in all domains of activity.

In the present work, the concepts of cluster and clusterisation are defined in a systemic way. The evolution of clusterisation and the enforcement of competitiveness strategies are analysed from an objective perspective, new integrative patterns for achieving progress through clusterisation are submitted, based on total competitiveness cycle (Popa, 2007/1).

Future research will develop new models and methods for clusterisation optimisation.

2. SYSTEMIC DEFINITION OF CLUSTERS AND CLUSTERISATION

In our Universe, clusters are the systems of systems {SS} which generate becoming (progress / stagnation / regress) in all natural and / or artificial environments, from macro-cosmos to micro-cosmos.

In economy, clusters C are geographical agglomerations / concentrations of organizations which consist of four categories of sub-systems:

[1] Enterprise networks (EN), product / service providers, which offer competitive assortments {[K.sub.i]} to the consumers in the target markets and consist of: [1.1] Enterprises / organization groups "leader" within EN; [1.2] Innovation, production companies / service providers, selling, human resources training etc; [1.3] Research-development-innovation companies (Universities, institutes and R&D companies,....); [1.4] Financing companies (banks, refundable financing funds etc.),

[2] Facilitators (Fa) such as institutions / organizations / networks for cooperation and competitiveness which include: [2.1] Competitiveness Councils and Centres, [2.2] Development Agencies (regional, county, local), [2.3] Chambers of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture, [2.4] Other facilitators: employers, professional organizations, unions etc.

[3] Territorial public authorities (TPA): [3.1] local; [3.2] regional; [3.3] euro-regional; [3.4] governmental

[4] Target markets / segments / niches with specific consumers and clients under continuous behavioural changes (Consumers--Co).

Based on strong public-private partnerships, competitive clusters are: a) potentially lasting competitive on the national and global market; b) in competition and internal / external cooperation relations (coopetition); c) determinant at a large extent in the 21st century of the evolution of sustainable competitiveness at regional, national and global level; d) decisively contributors to increasing life standards in the countries and regions where they operate, according to a particular stage of their life cycle.

Clusterisation is a continuous process of creating, functioning with regular restructuration and liquidation of successive-parallel cluster generations g = 1, 2, ..., n, n+1, ... / clusters of clusters in a [D.sub.str] space-time-resources domain which create the conditions for the existence of {[S.sub.S]} systems of systems. Natural clusterisation is spontaneous and it can take decades when operating in the business community; clusterisation based on strong public-private partnerships is planned and, at present, it lasts for 1-2 years. The competitive integrative clusterisation and innovation within the clusters generate in successive-parallel manner the lasting integrative competitiveness [K.sub.id] (long period of time) / sustainable integrative competitiveness [K.sub.is] (unlimited period of time) in external environments [M.sub.ext].

The optimal clusterisation level [N.sub.Copt] depends on a great number of factors [natural, demographical, psychological, social, cultural, political, juridical, administrative, socio-economical (business), technological-managerial, military], on the nature of the factor innovation and it is defined by the maximal integrative competitiveness [K.sub.imax]. (Table 1).

3. SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVENESS AND OPTIMAL CLUSTERISATION IN EU 27

After the acceleration of globalisation, started in 1960, the concept of cluster and the priority of competitive clusterisation in all domains of activity have been understood in the European countries with great delay. The clusterisation process has evolved differently in EU 27 (Table 2), thus contributing to the increase of regional, national and global competitiveness of member countries. The 15 European countries (+) / 12 EU countries (+) in the world 27 top, according to "Global Competitiveness Index GCI", have superior performance (economic performance, government efficiency, business efficiency and infrastructure) which explain the competitiveness--clusterisation correlations as shown in Table 2. In all these countries, clusterisation has been playing a very important role in increasing sustainable competitiveness; the pioneer in generating the natural / spontaneous economic clusters is (EC, 2006): England (1780), France (1800), Germany (1804), Switzerland (1820), Italy (1823).

In Europe, the sustainable competitiveness growth and the clusterisation are still approached in a traditional way (EC, 2006; Gallup, 2006; CLUNET, 2008; HLAGC, 2008): non-systemic (concepts, patterns, quantification, methods) and non-integrative (innovation in policies, management, culture of competitiveness, resources, technologies, critical masses / thresholds for competitive clusters, optimal clusterisation levels).

Sustainable clusterisation is the key of the progress in any [D.sub.str] space-time-resources domain and it relies upon two categories of systemic integrative processes : (1) clusterisation of entities in the domain, while generating efficient critical masses [M.sub.crp] / thresholds able to produce lasting progress; (2) cluster-based integrative innovation (in resources, processes and executive structures / programmes, self-control structures and processes, radical and continuous improving programmes), capable for generating sustainable competitiveness in external environments [M.sub.ext]. This pattern was fully confirmed after 1960 by the USA, Canada, Asia-Pacific Area (the 13 developed countries), by the European developed countries, respectively (+).

At present and in the years to come, EU 27 shall reconsider Lisbon 2000 strategy in a systemic / integrative manner and urgently orient its efficient and effective enforcement, in order to attain as soon as possible the target envisaged: "the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion, and respect for the environment by 2010". Three categories of new DAK interrelated actions are necessary for increasing sustainable competitiveness, as follows:

--DAK for the entire EU 27, focused on clusterisation optimisation,

--DAK for the 12 EU countries (+) identified in Table 1, focused on cluster-based integrative innovation (in resources, processes and executive structures / programmes, self-control structures and processes, radical and continuous improving programmes),

--DAK for the other 15 EU countries in Table 1, focused on centres, clusters and competitiveness programmes in the enlarged Europe (Popa, Mocan & Pater, 2007/2).

4. CONCLUSIONS

The persistent negative competitiveness discrepancies in the European Union as compared to those in North America and in the Asia-Pacific Area claim the elaboration of new actions, structured on categories of member countries. The necessary DAK actions for increasing sustainable competitiveness are: (1) DAK for the entire EU 27, focused on clusterisation optimisation in all domains; (2) DAK for the 12 EU countries (+) identified in Table 1, focused on cluster-based integrative innovation; (3) DAK for the other 15 EU countries in Table 1, focused on centres, clusters and competitiveness programmes in the enlarged Europe.

5. REFERENCES

CLUNET, (2008). Cluster Policy Guidelines Report, PRO INNO Europe, Available from: www.proinno-europe.eu/admin/uploaded_documents/CLUNET_policy_G uidelines_080108.pdf Accessed: 2008-05-02

EC, (2006). Innovation clusters in Europe--A statistical analysis and overview of current policy support, European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, ISBN 978-92-79-07289-5, Luxembourg

Gallup, (2006). The Gallup Organization Flash EB No 187-2006 Innobarometer on cluster's role in facilitating innovation in Europe. Analytical Report, Available from: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/innovation/docs/innobaromet er_2006.pdf Accessed: 2008-05-02

GCR, (-2007): Global Competitiveness Report, World Economic Forum, Geneva, 1997 / .... / 2007, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 1-4039-9636-9, New York, USA

HLAGC, (2008). The European Cluster Memorandum, The High Level Advisory Group on Clusters, Available from: http://www.vinnova.se/upload/dokument/VINNOVA_geme nsam/ Kalender/2008.pdf Accessed: 2008-05-02

Popa, H.L., (2007/1). The integrative competitiveness. A systemic approach, Scientific Bulletin of the "POLITEHNICA" University of Timisoara, Romania, Transactions on Management. Engineering Economy. Transportation Engineering, Tom 52 (66), 2007, Fasc. 1, pp. 5-18, ISSN 1224-6050

Popa, H.L.; Mocan, M.L. & Pater, L.R. (2007/2). Competitiveness Strategies for the International Scientific--Academic Associations and Clusters, Annals of DAAAM for 2007 & Proceedings of the 18th International DAAAM Symposium, Katalinic, B. (Ed.), pp. 579-580, ISBN 3-901509-58-5, ISSN 1726-9679, Zadar, October 2007, Published by DAAAM International, Vienna, Austria

WCY, (-2008). World Competitiveness Yearbook, International Institute for Management Development, 1997 / .. / 2008, ISBN: 185-743-451-X, Lausanne, Switzerland

Tab. 1 The optimal clusterisation level NCopt

N.sub.copt [left and right arrow] [K.sub.ismax]

 innovation

 partial integrative

clusterisation innovative [K.sub.idmax] [K.sub.idmax]
 trade [K.sub.idmin] [K.sub.id]

Tab. 2. The nowadays correlation competitiveness--
clusterisation level in Europe

Nr. Competitiveness [rank GCI The
 2007-2008] for EU 27 and clusterisation
 nonEU countries (from 131 level
 countries) (GCR, -2007) (Gallup, 2006)

1 England [9] +
2 Ireland [22] + 99-50%
3 Latvia [45]
4 Austria [15] +
5 Italy [46] 49-25%
 1 Turkey [53]
6 Bulgaria [79]
7 Sweden [4] +
8 Finland [6] +
 2 Norway [16] + 24-20%
9 Belgium [20] +
10 Portugal [40]
 3 Croatia [57]
11 Germany [5] +
12 Netherlands [10] +
13 France [18] +
 4 Iceland [23] +
14 Estonia [27] +
15 Lithuania [38] 19-10%
16 Slovenia [39]
17 Slovak Republik [41]
18 Hungary [47]
19 Malta [56]
20 Romania [74]
 5 Serbia [91]
 6 Switzerland [2] +
21 Denmark [3] +
22 Luxembourg [25] +
23 Spain [29] 9-1%
24 Czech Republic [33]
25 Poland [51]
26 Cyprus [55]
27 Greece [65]