{"title":"网络安全优势产业集群:演进与维持","authors":"E. Carmel, E. Roche","doi":"10.1080/13662716.2022.2145938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Three mega-clusters dominate the cybersecurity industry: the San Francisco Bay Area, the Washington D.C. area and Israel. Together they are home to about half the influential cybersecurity firms; they have remained dominant since industry take-off in the 1990s. How have they remained dominant? We answer this question by synthesizing firm-level data, case studies, and interviews, compiling an extensive history of their evolution; then using a Geographic Information System to map these clusters. Applying the Menzel and Fornahl cluster lifecycle model, we find these clusters advanced into the Growth (2nd) stage but have not reached an equilibrium state. The model points to heterogeneity as key to avoiding cluster weakening through lock-in. Three vectors of heterogeneity explain how these clusters remain dominant: The absence of a de facto standard design, spatial expansion, and the ever-increasing cyber-threat landscape. Additionally, powerful anchor institutions are present in two of the three clusters.","PeriodicalId":13585,"journal":{"name":"Industry and Innovation","volume":"30 1","pages":"361 - 391"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The dominant cybersecurity industry clusters: evolution and sustainment\",\"authors\":\"E. Carmel, E. Roche\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13662716.2022.2145938\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Three mega-clusters dominate the cybersecurity industry: the San Francisco Bay Area, the Washington D.C. area and Israel. Together they are home to about half the influential cybersecurity firms; they have remained dominant since industry take-off in the 1990s. How have they remained dominant? We answer this question by synthesizing firm-level data, case studies, and interviews, compiling an extensive history of their evolution; then using a Geographic Information System to map these clusters. Applying the Menzel and Fornahl cluster lifecycle model, we find these clusters advanced into the Growth (2nd) stage but have not reached an equilibrium state. The model points to heterogeneity as key to avoiding cluster weakening through lock-in. Three vectors of heterogeneity explain how these clusters remain dominant: The absence of a de facto standard design, spatial expansion, and the ever-increasing cyber-threat landscape. Additionally, powerful anchor institutions are present in two of the three clusters.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industry and Innovation\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"361 - 391\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industry and Innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2022.2145938\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industry and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2022.2145938","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The dominant cybersecurity industry clusters: evolution and sustainment
ABSTRACT Three mega-clusters dominate the cybersecurity industry: the San Francisco Bay Area, the Washington D.C. area and Israel. Together they are home to about half the influential cybersecurity firms; they have remained dominant since industry take-off in the 1990s. How have they remained dominant? We answer this question by synthesizing firm-level data, case studies, and interviews, compiling an extensive history of their evolution; then using a Geographic Information System to map these clusters. Applying the Menzel and Fornahl cluster lifecycle model, we find these clusters advanced into the Growth (2nd) stage but have not reached an equilibrium state. The model points to heterogeneity as key to avoiding cluster weakening through lock-in. Three vectors of heterogeneity explain how these clusters remain dominant: The absence of a de facto standard design, spatial expansion, and the ever-increasing cyber-threat landscape. Additionally, powerful anchor institutions are present in two of the three clusters.
期刊介绍:
Industry and Innovation is an international refereed journal presenting high-quality original scholarship of the dynamics of industries and innovation. Interdisciplinary in nature, Industry and Innovation is informed by, and contributes in turn to, advancing the theoretical frontier within economics, organization theory, and economic geography. Theoretical issues encompass: •What are the institutional underpinnings for different organizational forms? •How are different industrial structures and institutions related to innovation patterns and economic performance?