1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness...
-
Upload
galih-lasahido -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness...
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
1/155
Graduate School ETD Form 9
(Revised 12/07)
PURDUE UNIVERSITYGRADUATE SCHOOL
Thesis/Dissertation Acceptance
This is to certify that the thesis/dissertation prepared
By
Entitled
For the degree of
Is approved by the final examining committee:
Chair
To the best of my knowledge and as understood by the student in theResearch Integrity and
Copyright Disclaimer (Graduate School Form 20), this thesis/dissertation adheres to the provisions of
Purdue Universitys Policy on Integrity in Research and the use of copyrighted material.
Approved by Major Professor(s): ____________________________________
____________________________________
Approved by:Head of the Graduate Program Date
Silas Tora
Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana:A Framework for Improving Productivity and Competitiveness
Doctor of Philosophy
Eva Haviarova, Ph.D.
Carl Eckelman, Ph.D.
Brigitte S. Waldorf, Ph.D.
Eva Haviarova, Ph.D.
Robert K. Swihart, Ph.D. 4/27/10
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
2/155
Graduate School Form 20
(Revised 1/10)
PURDUE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Research Integrity and Copyright Disclaimer
Title of Thesis/Dissertation:
For the degree of ________________________________________________________________
I certify that in the preparation of this thesis, I have observed the provisions ofPurdue University
Teaching, Research, and Outreach Policy on Research Misconduct (VIII.3.1), October 1, 2008.*
Further, I certify that this work is free of plagiarism and all materials appearing in this
thesis/dissertation have been properly quoted and attributed.
I certify that all copyrighted material incorporated into this thesis/dissertation is in compliance with
the United States copyright law and that I have received written permission from the copyright
owners for my use of their work, which is beyond the scope of the law. I agree to indemnify and save
harmless Purdue University from any and all claims that may be asserted or that may arise from any
copyright violation.
______________________________________Printed Name and Signature of Candidate
______________________________________Date (month/day/year)
*Located at http://www.purdue.edu/policies/pages/teach_res_outreach/viii_3_1.html
Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana:A Framework for Improving Productivity and Competitiveness
Doctor of Philosophy
Silas Tora
4/27/10
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
3/155
ANALYSIS OF THE FOREST PRODUCTS CLUSTER IN INDIANA: AFRAMEWORK FOR IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY AND COMPETITIVENESS
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Faculty
of
Purdue University
by
Silas G. Tora
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
of
Doctor of Philosophy
May 2010
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
4/155
"#$ %&'()*+ 3418185
,-- *./012 *)2)*3)4
$%567#,8$6% 86 ,99 ":;7:80) ?@ 10.2 *)A*?4&B1.?C .2 4)A)C4)C1 &A?C 10) ?@ 10) B?A> 2&('.11)4D
$C 10) &C-.E)-> )3)C1 10=1 10) =&10?* 4.4 C?1 2)C4 = B?'A-)1) '=C&2B*.A1=C4 10)*) =*) '.22.C/ A=/)2F 10)2) G.-- () C?1)4D ,-2?F .@ '=1)*.=- 0=4 1? () *)'?3)4F
= C?1) G.-- .C4.B=1) 10) 4)-)1.?CD
"#$ 3418185H?A>*./01 I!"!(> J*?K&)21 99HD
,-- *./012 *)2)*3)4D 80.2 )4.1.?C ?@ 10) G?*E .2 A*?1)B1)4 =/=.C21&C=&10?*.L)4 B?A>.C/ &C4)* 8.1-) MNF "C.1)4 :1=1)2 H?4)D
J*?K&)21 99HNOP ;=21 ;.2)C0?G)* J=*EG=>
JD6D Q?R MSTU,CC ,*(?*F #$ TOMVUWMSTU
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
5/155
ii
To my daughter Subira, you give me the joy and
strength to keep on trying.
Thank you.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
6/155
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to begin by thanking my major professor Dr. Eva Haviarova, who,
through her insightfulness, saw my ability and gave me the opportunity to pursue
this degree. Her continued support, both academically and morally, has not only
made me a better person, but also contributed to making me a successful
researcher. I also would like to express my heartfelt appreciation to Professors
Carl Eckleman, Daniel Cassen, and Brigitte Waldorf for agreeing to serve on mycommittee, and for the thoughtful advice that often served to give me a better
understanding of issues in my PhD study. And I am deeply grateful to the
Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, which
financially supported me through the program.
My warm thanks are due to Christine Nolan and Professor Rado Gazo for
giving me valuable educational and friendly advice. This study would not have
been possible without the help of Tracy Simmerman, Isaac Slaven, Hongtao
Zhou, Stephanie Houin, and others who tirelessly worked in the preparing and
sending of survey materials. I would also like to thank the representatives of the
forest products firms in Indiana who spent their time answering the survey.
Finally, I would like to sincerely thank friends and fellow graduate students
with whom I have had the pleasure of meeting and sharing the enjoyable
academic experiences at Purdue. In addition, I am greatly indebted to my family
for their moral support and loving environment. In particular, the unconditional
love and support of my parents, John and Keremensia Tora, have seen me
through many challenges in life.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
7/155
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageLIST OF TABLES viLIST OF FIGURES viii
ABSTRACT.. ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION..11.1. Where do firms locate? ............................................................................ 2
1.2. Research justification ............................................................................... 4
1.3. Objectives ................................................................................................ 4
1.4. Methodology ............................................................................................ 5
1.4.1. Data description .................................................................................... 7
1.5. Summary .................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER 2. HISTORY OF FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY CLUSTER..92.1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 9
2.2. Forest products industry in the industrial revolution era (1870 -1915).... 10
2.2.1. Technology advancement in lumber processing ................................. 112.2.2. Secondary industry ............................................................................. 12
2.3. Effect of the World Wars on the forest products industry (1915 1979) 14
2.3.1. Effect of substitute material on the industry ........................................ 16
2.4. Current role of the forest products industry (1980-present) .................... 18
2.4.1. Industry composition ........................................................................... 18
2.4.2. Forest industry value chain creation ................................................... 18
2.4.3. Challenges facing the forest industry .................................................. 20CHAPTER 3. INDUSTRIAL CLUSTER BENCHMARKS.22
3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 22
3.1. Forest products industry clusters in Europe ........................................... 243.1.1. Wood and furniture cluster in France (Lorraine) ................................. 24
3.1.2. Wood and Furniture cluster in Denmark (Salling) ............................... 26
3.1.3. Northern Italys furniture cluster .......................................................... 283.2. U.S. forest products industry clusters ..................................................... 30
3.2.1. Oregon wood products cluster ............................................................ 30
3.2.2. Northeastern Mississippi furniture cluster ........................................... 33
3.2.3. Kentucky wood products cluster ......................................................... 34
3.2.4. North Carolina furniture cluster ........................................................... 36
3.2.5. Maine forest industry cluster ............................................................... 37
CHAPTER 4. THE FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY IN INDIANA. 414.1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 41
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
8/155
v
Page4.2. Solid economic performance .................................................................. 45
4.3. Demographic challenges ........................................................................ 474.4. Locational challenges ............................................................................. 49
4.5. Conclusions ........................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER 5. THE PRODUCTIVITY AND COMPETITIVENESS OF INDIANAWOOD PRODUCTS CLUSTERS53
5.1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 53
5.2. Concepts of competitiveness ................................................................. 55
5.2.1. Sources of competitive advantages .................................................... 565.3. Productivity measure .............................................................................. 57
5.4. U.S. forest products industry .................................................................. 58
5.4.1. Challenges and issues facing the forest products industry in Indiana 585.5. Objectives .............................................................................................. 60
5.6. Methodology .......................................................................................... 61
5.6.1. Data collection .................................................................................... 61
5.6.2. Data analysis ...................................................................................... 62
5.7. Results and discussions ......................................................................... 64
5.7.1. Descriptive results .............................................................................. 65
5.7.2. Multivariate analysis of variance results ............................................. 915.8. Conclusion ........................................................................................... 100
CHAPTER 6. GAP ANALYSIS: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES.. 103
6.1. Introduction .......................................................................................... 1036.2. Method ................................................................................................. 104
6.3. Environmentally-sustainable processes and products ......................... 106
6.3.1. Opportunities .................................................................................... 1086.4. Recycled pallets ................................................................................... 109
6.4.1. Price comparison between recycled and manufactured pallets ........ 109
6.4.2. Opportunity ....................................................................................... 111
CHAPTER 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1137.1. Study significance ................................................................................ 117
7.2. Limitations ............................................................................................ 119
7.3. Future studies ...................................................................................... 119LIST OF REFERENCES. 121
APPENDIX129
VITA136
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
9/155
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table PageTable 3.1 Summary ofDanish furniture cluster. .................................................. 27Table 3.2 Summary of the Italian furniture cluster (in Livenza). .......................... 29
Table 3.3 Summary of the Oregon forest products cluster. ................................ 32
Table 3.4 Summary of Kentucky wood products cluster. .................................... 36Table 3.5 Summary of Mainesforest products cluster. ...................................... 40
Table 4.1 Top ten least and most vulnerable counties in Indiana. ...................... 44
Table 4.2 Economic indicators. ........................................................................... 47
Table 4.3 Demographic characteristics of FWPI counties as compared to othercounties. ....................................................................................................... 49
Table 4.4 Locational differences among Northern and Southern FWPICounties. ...................................................................................................... 51
Table 5.1 Percent sales revenue changes for different wood products firmtypes. ............................................................................................................ 65
Table 5.2 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether easy labor availability has a significant effect on firm typea. ........... 67
Table 5.3 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether labor availability has a significant effect on firm sizea. .................... 67
Table 5.4 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether labor availability has a significant effect on salesa. ......................... 67
Table 5.5 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether educational background of entry-level employees has a significanteffect on firm typea. ....................................................................................... 69
Table 5.6 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether educational background of entry-level employees has a significanteffect of firm sizea. ........................................................................................ 70
Table 5.7 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether easy labor availability has a significant effect on firm revenuea. ..... 70
Table 5.8 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether skill level of entry-level employees has a significant effect on firm
typea. ............................................................................................................ 73
Table 5.9 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to determinewhether skill level of entry-level employees has a significant effect on firmsizea. ............................................................................................................. 73
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
10/155
vii
Table PageTable 5.10 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to
determine whether skill level of entry-level employees has a significanteffect on salesa. ............................................................................................ 74
Table 5.11 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) to
determine whether training resources for advancement of employeeperformance and profitability has a significant effect on firm typea. .............. 78
Table 5.12 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) todetermine whether training resources has a significant effect on firm sizea.. 78
Table 5.13 Responses (counts with row percentagesin parentheses) todetermine whether skill level of entry-level employees has a significanteffect on salesa. ............................................................................................ 79
Table 5.14 Results of labor-related factors in a multivariate analysis withbusiness type as the dependent variable. .................................................... 92
Table 5.15 Results of labor-related factors related factors in a multivariateanalysis with firm size as the dependent variable. ........................................ 92
Table 5.16 Results of labor-related factors in a multivariate analysis with salesas the dependent variable. ........................................................................... 93
Table 5.17 Results of labor-related factors in a multivariate analysis withproduction volume as the dependent variable. ............................................. 93
Table 5.18 Results of training resources-related factors in a multivariateanalysis with firm type as the dependent variable. ....................................... 94
Table 5.19 Results of training resources-related factors in a multivariateanalysis with firm size as the dependent variable. ........................................ 95
Table 5.20 Results of training resources-related factors in a multivariateanalysis with sales as the dependent variable. ............................................. 95
Table 5.21 Results of training resources-related factors in a multivariateanalysis with production volume as the dependent variable. ....................... 96
Table 5.22 Results of competitiveness- and productivity-related factors in amultivariate analysis with firm type as the dependent variable. .................... 97
Table 5.23 Results of competitiveness- and productivity-related factors in amultivariate analysis with firm size as the dependent variable. .................... 98
Table 5.24 Results of training competitiveness- and productivity-related factorsin a multivariate analysis with sales as the dependent variable. ................... 98
Table 5.25 Results of competitiveness- and productivity-related factors in amultivariate analysis with production volume as the dependent variable. ..... 99
Table 6.1 Measure of the scaled challenges for survival, future growth, andcompetitiveness factors levels. ................................................................... 105
Table 6.2 Comparison of per trip cost of pallets of different materials. ............. 112
Appendix TableTable A.1 Correlation Matrix for Labor-related questions ................................. 134
Table A.2 Correlation Matrix for Training, Communications andCompetitiveness ......................................................................................... 135
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
11/155
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure PageFigure 2.1 Forest product industry value chain. .................................................. 19Figure 4.1 Indiana counties specializing in FWPI. .............................................. 43
Figure 4.2 Distribution of FWPI counties and remaining counties acrossvulnerability score. ........................................................................................ 45
Figure 4.3 Educational attainment levels of adult residents in FWPI counties .... 48
Figure 5.1 Percent availability of labor force, benefits, and investment in youngworkers in the wood products industry. ........................................................ 68
Figure 5.2 Educational background of entry-level employees in the woodindustry. ........................................................................................................ 71
Figure 5.3 Level of entry-level employees. ......................................................... 74
Figure 5.4 Training to enhance employees job performance and/or skills foradvancement. ............................................................................................... 76
Figure 5.5 Training resources needs to advance employee job performanceand companys profitability. .......................................................................... 77
Figure 5.6 Type of communication with suppliers and consumers. .................... 81
Figure 5.7 Communication improvement requirement with suppliers andconsumers. ................................................................................................... 82
Figure 5.8 Business relationship with competitor................................................ 83
Figure 5.9 Sources of information on new technologies, new productionmethods and new market opportunities. ....................................................... 84
Figure 5.10 Sources of major raw material. ........................................................ 86Figure 5.11 Sources of advice and technical assistance. ................................... 87
Figure 5.12 Challenges for survival and future growth. ...................................... 89
Figure 5.13 Most important things to ensure competitiveness. ........................... 90Figure 6.1 Determination of an existing gap in the wood products industry
cluster in Indiana. ....................................................................................... 106
Figure 7.1 Comparison of labor education and skill level by forest productsindustry type. .............................................................................................. 115
Figure 7.2 Comparison of labor education and skill level by forest products
industry firm size. ........................................................................................ 115
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
12/155
ix
ABSTRACT
Tora, Silas G. Ph.D., Purdue University, May 2010. Analysis of the ForestProducts Cluster in Indiana: A Framework for Improving Productivity andCompetitiveness. Major Professor: Eva Haviarova.
The forest products industry is faced with several challenges that range from
the acquisition of materials to marketing of the finished products. These
challenges require that firms consider the past, current, and future trends, and
determine what factors have made them successful and which ones need
improvement. An industrial analysis provides the tools necessary to determine
the challenges and strength of the industry. In addition the analysis provides a
necessary baseline to be used in the regular monitoring of the industry.
Through the use of secondary data and a survey developed by the author,
this study examined the composition, opportunities, and challenges facing the
forest products industry in Indiana. The study used factors related to human
resources, communication, and competitiveness in analyzing the industrys
productivity and competitiveness. Previous studies have shown that there are
strong industrial competitive clusters mainly in rural Indiana. However, this study
found that these clusters are faced with major challenges in terms of human
resource- and competitiveness-related factors. In addition to suggesting methods
to tackle the challenges, the study provides a gap analysis showing the
opportunities available within the clusters, and their impact on the overallperformance of the industry.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
13/155
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Various studies ( e.g. Florence (1948), Hoover (1948), Fuchs (1962), Enright
(1990), Krugman (1991), Ellison and Glaeser (1997) have shown that industries
are usually concentrated in particular states, regions, or urban areas, forming so-
called industry clusters. Formally, industrial clusters are defined as
geographically proximate concentration of similar, related, or complementary
industries, with active channels for business transactions, communications, and
dialogue that share specialized infrastructure, labor markets, and services, and
that are faced with common opportunities and threats (Rosenfeld 1995).
The interest in agglomerations and industry clusters has grown considerably
over the last two decades. This is due in part to the awareness created by
Porters (1990) study on the competitiveness of nations, and the much-talked-
about success of some of high-tech clusters, namely Silicon Valley in California
and Route 128 in Boston, Massachusetts (Dorfman, 1983; Saxenian, 1994). As a
result, local, regional, national, and international governmental agencies
implemented policies to boost competitiveness and to help regional economies
develop by encouraging firms to form and build up industrial clusters (Barkley
and Mark 2001).
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
14/155
2
The forest products industry is historically known to be located within rural
areas in the United States. Typically, the rural areas contain more abundant
forests (Webster and Chappelle 1989). The forestry industry represents primary,
reconstituted, and value-added firms. The primary firms process round wood into
dimensional material, for instance plywood mills and sawmills. Reconstituted
firms use wood residues, chips, and wood pulp to produce goods that have
intermediate or final demand. Examples include particle board, paper, and
oriented strand board manufacturers. Value-added wood products firms
represent firms that utilize primary and reconstituted firms products to produce
finished products. Examples include printing paper, cabinet manufacturers and
furniture.
1.1. Where do firms locate?
Classical location theory has its foundation in two problems (Norman 1979).
The first problem is, given the locations of all other economic agents, how should
a particular agent, such as a firm, be located to minimize either cost or a known
fixed demand? By using the location theory of least cost approach, a firm is able
to solve this problem (Zhang 2002). The second problem is, given that similar
firms are in direct competition with one another, how will they locate and what
market areas will they control, given their knowledge of demand conditions?
Theories of central place and interdependence are used to analyze this problem.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
15/155
3
Weber (1909) was the first to use the least cost approach. He investigated the
general factors influencing the location of an industry and what role each factor
played in affecting its industrial location. The theory is based on the following
assumptions: (1) the firms technology exhibits constant returns to scale; (2)
production factors are available in unlimited supply at fixed prices independent of
location; (3) these factors are either available everywhere in the market or
located in a few fixed locations; (4) demand is known and fixed in terms of space
and amount; and (5) transportation costs for each commodity vary directly with
weight and distance transported. The most favorable location for a firm is one
that reduces production and transportation costs with the above named
assumptions. In the case of two inputs located at different points and one product
market located at a third point, Weber showed that the optimal location was one
which was situated within a triangle formed by linking the product market point
with the two input points. He also argued that the optimal location is found by
taking into consideration the relative strength of two material pull forces and the
product market pull force. Weber set up the paradigm for location of facilities
(such as plants, warehouses, military bases, schools, waste material dumps, fire
engine depots, hospitals, administrative buildings, and department stores) based
on minimization of transportation costs.
Lsch (1940) introduced the theory of central place and interdependence in
1938. According to this theory, a firm is assumed to maximize its profit by
selecting a location, in addition the theory notes that there are no unusual profits
in economic activities that are open to everybody. The Lsch theory examined
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
16/155
4
the diverse and unlimited areas where consumers were evenly distributed.
Instead of supply, the theory assumed a downward-sloping demand curve for
any product.
1.2. Research justification
A report by Bio-crossroads (2006) on agricultural economy identified the
forest products industry as one of the five major industrial clusters in Indiana.
According to the report, the industry contributes approximately 31.4 percent of
agricultural sector jobs. This finding necessitated a study in order to determine
the industrys source of strengths. In addition to the strengths, it was also
important to discern the underlying challenges that might be facing the industry
and effective ways to tackle them.
Through empirical research, we will be able to assess the strengths and
challenges contributing to industrial clustering of the forest products industry in
Indiana.
1.3. Objectives
The main objective of the study was to determine the factors that contribute to
the strengths and challenges of forest products industry clusters, and to
determine how these factors influence the industrys competitiveness and
productivity.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
17/155
5
The minor objectives were:
i. Determine how counties with a concentration of forest and
wood products clustersin Indiana compare with other counties in
the state in terms of demography and location;
ii. Determine the effect of labor-related factors on the
productivity and competitiveness of the industry;
iii. Determine if factors related to resources and training have
an effect on the strength of the industry;
iv. Determine how communication, information sharing and
other competitiveness-related factors influence productivity.
1.4. Methodology
In performing an industrial cluster analysis, several methodologies have been
suggested in the literature (Hofe V. R., and Chen K., 2006). The three most
commonly used methodologies include industrial cluster analysis following the
theoretical principles of localization economies (e.g. Rosenfeld, 1995; Schmitz
and Nadvi, 1999); industrial cluster analysis based on inter-industry relationship
and done by the use of input-output tables (Czamanski and Ablas 1979; Feser
and Bergman, 2000); and lastly, industrial cluster analysis utilizing value chain
linkages and technology innovation (Porter, 1980 and 1990). This study uses the
last method with a modification on the value chain to include only the primary
value chain, and not the supporting counterparts. The study reviewed some
forest products clusters in Europe and the U.S. in an effort to determine their
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
18/155
6
reasons for success, and to see whether those successes can be reproduced in
Indiana. The selection of the reviewed clusters was based on their level of
establishment, contribution to local economy, and similarity to Indianas possible
industrial cluster.
The first part of the study used publicly available data to determine how the
counties with forest and wood products clusters in Indiana performed. The
analysis determined that human resources and transportation were the two most
common factors that affected the industry and offered suggestions for further
analysis. The analysis in this studyutilized the rurality measure developed by
Waldorf (2006) to determine whether the clusters were located in urban or rural
areas.
To examine the factors suggested from the results of the publicly available
data analysis, the study was narrowed to specifically observe the forest products
industry. In addition to the suggested factors, other additional factors were added
to the study. A survey was utilized in the collection of information. The survey
was sent to a comprehensive list of firms generated from several government
and private sources, with a focus on firms that used a wood resource as a major
input. The survey was divided into four sections, each covering a different factor
of interest, namely: labor resources; training resources; communication; and
competitiveness. The firms in the industry were grouped as logging, primary,
secondary, and reconstituted. These firms represented the primary levels of the
forest products industry value chain. The analysis was based on a methodology
developed in a similar study by Bumgardner et al.(2004) that used chi square
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
19/155
7
tests for independence with firm category and multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) to determine if overall differences existed between the levels.
1.4.1. Data description
The data used in this study included both primary and secondary sources.
The primary data was obtained from a questionnaire sent to the forest products-
based industries in Indiana. The secondary data used in this study was collected
from various sources, and spanned the time period from 2001 to 2004. The data
was classified using the standard NAICS code definition of industries. The data
was a compilation of various data sets listed below:
Public company records
Specialized information from local organizations, including Indiana
Hardwood Lumbermens Association, Indiana Department of Natural
Resources, and Indiana Business Research Center data (through the
Purdue Center for Regional Development)
1.5. Summary
The chapters are arranged so that each new chapter builds on information
presented on the previous chapter. In Chapter 1, the introduction defines and
describes the concept of industrial clusters, and gives a summary of background
theory on the concept. Chapter 2 explores the historical background of the forest
products industry in Indiana. The chapter outlines the changes that have
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
20/155
8
occurred through various periods of development, and concludes with the current
challenges that are facing the industry. Chapter 3 presents examples of forest
industry concentrations in the U.S. and Europe. This chapter also offers insight
into the challenges facing clusters, and explains why these clusters are
successful. In Chapter 4, publicly available data is used to determine whether the
impact of location and social economic factors affect the forest and wood
products industry. The chapter looks at labor, transportation networks, and level
of income to determine whether the industry is affected. Chapter 5 explores the
productivity and competitiveness of the forest products industry in Indiana.
Chapter 6 provides an insight into possible forest products industry-related
businesses that can be introduced to increase the industrys contribution to the
states economy. The chapter specifically studies the pallet recycling business
and the sustainable products industry as two possible areas of interest. In
addition, the chapter illustrates the opportunities that are possible with the use of
a sustainable production process.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
21/155
9
CHAPTER 2. HISTORY OF FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY CLUSTER
2.1. Introduction
Indiana was primarily an agricultural state until after 1880 (Clark 1987).
Manufacturing developed primarily to utilize native coal, timber, and agricultural
products to serve the needs of the agricultural population. Hardwood forests,
which covered a large part of the state, provided an easily exploited natural
resource. A large amount of capital was invested in the lumber industry, and in
the manufacturing of wooden products such as furniture and wagons (Blyth et al.
1982). During 1880s, more workers were employed in the cutting of the timber
and the fabrication of the wooden products than in any other manufacturing field
(Whitten and Whitten, 1990). Since the amount of capital required to start a
sawmill business was small, many mills employing only a few people sprang up.
In the late 1800s, Indiana had more than 2,000 sawmills that processed lumber
and prepared it for shipment (Clark 1987). Shipping was done through the Ohio
River in the southern counties. Building of the railways enabled a steady
expansion of the lumber industry by providing easier transportation for forest
products.
Improved production technologies during the industrial age led to an increase
in production volumes. Increased production resulted in an increased competition
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
22/155
10
for raw materials, which gave the large- and medium-sized establishments an
advantage, and in turn, caused the smaller-sized mills to close (Clark 1987). By
1966, the number of mills had declined to 518 (Blyth et al. 1982); today, only 334
mills remain. Despite the decline in the number of mills, there has been an
increase in the number of secondary firms established in the same period. The
industry has generally managed to retain its characteristic elements of a small
business structure in which family members are recruited as additional resource
for capital and management skills, but reliance on an informal network of
business relationships in dealings is also significant. In addition, the unique
demand for lumber, like walnut, continues to place a premium on Indiana wood
products (IHLA, 2007). The remaining sections of this chapter will cover the
contributions of various historical periods to the improvement of the industry
based on published information, beginning with the industrial revolution age to
the current period.
2.2. Forest products industry in the industrial revolution era (1870 -1915)
There was a tremendous growth in the economy of the United States after the
Civil War (Niall 2005). With increased wealth, consumers preferences for the
aesthetic and functional qualities of products increased. For the forest products
industry, there was an increase in demand for fine furniture, comfortable
carriages, and attractive interior surfaces (Clark 1987). There was also increased
demand by other industries such as railroads, vehicles, and agricultural
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
23/155
11
equipment that required strong, durable, and easily shaped wood (Whitten and
Whitten 1990).
During this period, demand for hardwood lumber production increased from
about two billion board feet annually to 11 billion in the U.S., which resulted in
substantial production increases for mills in the Midwest and Southern hardwood
areas (Whitten and Whitten 1990). The Central region (which consisted of
Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri) produced 50
percent of the nations hardwood lumber. Indiana was the leading producer
among these states (Clark 1987). It had more than 40 hardwood lumber species,
with the dominant species being oak, walnut, maple, poplar, hickory, cherry, elm,
and ash, as well as the lesser-used species such as butternut, sycamore, beech,
locust, and dogwood. Due to rich soils and a slow growing process that is
engendered by the Midwestern climate, hardwood timber from Indiana developed
grain patterns with relatively few imperfections that achieved world-quality
standards, especially for oak and walnut (Clark 1987). Indiana led the country in
the annual production of both oak and walnut, with nearly 700 million and 25
million board feet, respectively.
2.2.1. Technology advancement in lumber processing
Technology advancements during the industrial revolution focused on
improvements in the speed of cutting large size logs into standard sizes with
smooth surfaces while minimizing waste. Unlike the earlier period when mills
were animal and water powered, mills in the industrial revolution period were
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
24/155
12
steam powered. Steam power, coupled with the circular saw, which had been
patented in England in the 1770s, provided a continuous cutting motion that
doubled production speed (Evelyn M., 1965). However, since the saw blades
resulted in massive lumber waste caused by thick large kerf, these saws
remained best suited for the production of rough lumber such as construction
boards and railroad ties. Developed in the 1880s, the band saw provided an
efficient sawing method for hardwoods (Dopp 1913). Most mills added band mills
as supplements to the circular saws because they increased the amount of
uniform lumber and reduced waste due to the thin blades. More advances in
machining resulted in the specialized sawing processes that included re-saws,
edgers and trimmers as essential equipment in the milling operation.
Other subsidiary technologies reduced the amount of time required to dry
wood. John Stephenson Co. of New York City was the first to devise a steam kiln
that extracted almost four hundred pounds of water in less than four days (Evelyn
M., 1965). By the beginning of the twentieth century, dry kilns controlled both
temperature and humidity. Drying schedules were based on research results
following input from university and government scientists.
2.2.2. Secondary industry
The improved sawing and drying technologies resulted in the establishment of
hundreds of shops and factories in Indiana and surrounding states whose
primary resource was oak, walnut, hickory, maple, ash, and other hardwoods.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
25/155
13
The shops and factories were the core of the regional development that resulted
in the establishment of industrial towns and cities (Clark 1987).
One of the lumber industrys limitations was a lack of regional and national
transportation networks linking the primary producers in rural areas to the
secondary industries, which were located primarily in urban areas. The creation
of more integrated railroad networks near the turn of the century resulted in the
development of more substantial secondary industries, such as the wagon and
carriage, furniture, and agricultural implement industries (Nicholls 1970). Overall,
the expansion of the railroads to small towns opened new markets for Indiana
lumber companies (Whitten and Whitten 1990).
The increased demand created by railroad expansion necessitated expansion
by most lumber manufacturers. Since Indiana hardwood species were known for
their high quality properties, most secondary manufacturers established their
production plants in Indiana. This resulted in the industry being a leading
employer in Indiana for over thirty years, until the beginning of the twentieth
century (Clark D. L., 1987). In addition, the industry created a large demand for
iron, steel, and glass products, resulting in considerable growth of the
manufacturing sector as a whole.
There was an increased demand for labor and raw material due to the rising
number of small manufacturing firms with a low entry capital requirement. As a
result, a number of the firms organized themselves into larger corporately owned
factories in order to realize the economies of scale (Foner 1997). By 1900, the
average number of employees per agricultural implement factory in Indiana was
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
26/155
14
75, while the average in carriage and wagon factories was 25. In addition, nearly
70 percent of the furniture companies were incorporated (Clark 1987).
2.3. Effect of the World Wars on the forest products industry (1915 1979)
The outbreak of World War I in 1914 led to an increase in demand for
hardwoods. These hardwoods were needed for U.S. military purposes,
particularly gunstocks and airplane propellers (Bryant, 1919). Because of the
large number of wholesalers, small sawmill owners, and secondary
manufacturers, the National Hardwood Lumber Council of the National Defense
sought the assistance of the National Hardwood Lumber Association (an
organization established in 1898 to harmonize hardwood lumber grading rules in
the U.S.). The NHLA was designed to act as an intermediary in expediting and
streamlining transactions (Whitten O. D. and Whitten B.E., 1990). By specifying
that NHLA rules were to govern hardwood purchases, the U.S. government, in a
sense, established the NHLA as the national marketing agent for hardwoods.
Throughout WWI, military and defense contractors filled their demands by
applying the NHLA rules (Silver J. W. 1957). In order to reduce any confusion or
conflict for the various suppliers within the hardwood industry, the NHLA, using
input from various industry associations, established a national system for
grading and inspection of hardwood lumber. This system was adopted in 1918
(Clark, D.L., 1987).
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
27/155
15
After the War, the U.S. had to readjust to a less-productive economy. Inflation
rose due to the decreased domestic demand (Cooley, T. and Ohanian, L., 1991).
Record price levels affected many commodities in 1919 and 1921. Hardwood
lumber prices increased from 33 to 296 percent within that period. Additionally,
the open competition plan idea suggested by the American Hardwood
Manufacturers Association contributed to record high prices (Milton N., 1923).
According to the plan, members of the association held price meetings in which
they exchanged price and production information, and then formulated
predictions on future supply and demand (Arthur E., 1912). In 1920, the Federal
Trade Commission determined that the open competition plan was in violation
of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Through the Justice Department, the commission
filed a temporary restraining order that stopped the 365 association members
from using the plan (James W., 1957). Though the AHLA disputed the decision in
the Supreme Court, a permanent injunction was reached against the open
competition plan, stating that information was only available to sellers, and they
could tactfully use it to influence market forces towards lower production and
higher prices. Herbert Hoover, the Secretary of Commerce in 1921, sought to
reorganize the market effort of the hardwood business by placing the production
and price information gathering activities under the Commerce Department
(Smith J. R. 1920). The Commerce Department also acted as an intermediary for
collection and dissemination of hardwood information. For the Indiana wood
industry, this regulation of the market meant increased prosperity, but changing
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
28/155
16
from the traditional concepts of grading and marketing meant the industry had to
be modified.
The primary goal of the wood industry during this time period was to simplify
the variety of manufacturing techniques and the large number of products that
were characteristic of an era that was primarily small manufacturers who were
producing almost solely for local market (Clark 1987). The hardwood and
secondary firms, largely made up of individual or family owned small-scale
enterprises, were representative of such firms. As a result, it was difficult for
government agencies to regulate the industry by imposing standardized
procedures at a speed or to a degree similar to those imposed on the mass
production industries (Whitten and Whitten 1990). Instead, the industry managed
to control the tension among various groups of manufacturers, wholesalers, and
consumers through its own internal mechanisms.
2.3.1. Effect of substitute materials on the industry
Beginning in the 1950s, the forest products industry faced increased
competition from metals and plastics. In addition, the quality hardwood lumber
supply was rapidly diminishing (International Labor Organization 1991). The
market for high quality hardwood needed for furniture, cabinets, and musical
instruments diminished. At the same time, the market for low quality lumber used
for pallets, pulp and railroad crossties continued to sustain the mills. Buyers and
sellers maintained the tradition of transacting through personal relationships with
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
29/155
17
shared mutual confidence and understanding, where each party would treat the
other with honesty and fairness.
The Indiana hardwood lumber industry maintained some of its traditional
traits. Ninety percent of commercial forests were still owned by individuals while
less than one-fourth of the states mills owned their own timberland (Hutchison
O., 1956). A survey of one thousand Indiana sawmills conducted in the mid-
1950s showed that only 30 mills produced more than one million board feet
annually. Ten years later, 43 percent of the mills manufactured less than 100,000
board feet per year, while the rest sawed less than 350,000 board feet. This
figure corresponds to capacities of many mills at the turn of the century (Clark
1987). The majority of the mills in this period produced lumber that was intended
for only few products; numerous mills operated part-time to produce pallet lumber
and red and white oak timber railroad ties.
Despite the substitution challenges, many wood industries in the post-WWII
period survived by duplicating business strategies employed by other
manufacturing industries. Searching for new sources of supply, new markets,
and limiting the overhead expenses through effective management also
contributed to continued success in the industry. Several additional factors such
as scientific advancements in manufacturing and utilization efficiencies,
improvement in woodlot management, and reforestation programs have
increased the wood supply (Bramble 1965).
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
30/155
18
2.4. Current role of the forest products industry (1980-present)
Since the early 1980s, the forest products industry has steadily improved the
quality of products and production processes (Bael and Sedjo 2006). These
advancements came as a result of enhanced transportation and communication
networks. In addition, the effect of market globalization has led to increased
competition from other regions, thus forcing the local firms to adapt to changing
times.
2.4.1. Industry composition
The wood industry is composed of small, family-owned businesses. Non-
industrial, private landowners own approximately 71 percent of the forest growing
within the U.S. (FIA, 2006). Between 1996 and 2005, forest growth exceeded
removal by 42 percent (U.S. Census, 2006). Within Indiana, 83 percent of the
forests are small and privately owned (Bratkovich S., et al. 2003)
Estimated U.S. consumption of hardwood lumber in 2005 was over 11 billion
board feet; thus, the wood industry makes a major contribution to U.S. economy
(U.S. Census 2006). This hardwood lumber is processed into other high-value
products such as cabinets, furniture, pallets, flooring, and architectural millwork.
2.4.2. Forest industry value chain creation
The concept of value chain creation includes all of the value-adding activities
within a firm. The activities include inbound logistics, production, outbound
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
31/155
19
logistics, marketing and sales, and services (Kaplinsky R. 2004). Inbounds are
the goods and services that go into the manufacturing of a product; outbounds
are finished goods coming from a manufacturing firm which are ready for
consumption. For the wood industry, the value chain is composed of loggers,
sawmillers, secondary manufacturing firms, lumberyards, exporters, construction,
marketing and sales, and services (Figure 2.1). In order for firms to perform well,
there should be a balance between the inbounds and outbounds. This means
that a manufacturer must have a good control on both inbound and outbound.
Figure 2.1 Forest product industry value chain.
When examining the wood industry inbounds chain as a whole, the logs are
the highest input item and can either be obtained from government-managed
forests, or from individuals and families. Individuals and families usually have an
Machinery Seeds Water fertilizers
Forestry Sawmills
andPanels
Furniture
Industries
Buyers Consumers
Chemicals Machinery Logistics,
Quality
Design Chemical Machinery Logistics
& Quality
Domesticwholesalersandretailers
Foreignwholesalers& retailers
RecycleReuseDispose
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
32/155
20
incentive to manage with long-term sustainable benefits in mind. Well-managed
forests typically show an increase in timber quality and quantity.
Outbounds, including furniture, pallets and boxes, building materials, and
exports, vary in terms of price, species, grade, and moisture content. Competitive
market advantage can be gained through efficient planning of the supply chain,
improved demand forecasts, and control of manufacturing processes.
2.4.3. Challenges facing the forest industry
Currently, there are several challenges that are facing the Indiana forest
industry. These challenges include: availability of labor; environmental
regulations; international trade practices; quality of raw material inputs; and
advancements in research and development.
The labor force within the industry has been declining in the last two decades.
This decline is attributed to the factors of increased of cheap imports and the
increased availability of wood substitutes with better-engineered properties. Due
to job insecurities resulting from increased competition, some experienced and
qualified workers are moving to other industries offering better job security
(Schuler and Ince 2005). These two factors have affected many firms abilities to
remain competitive.
Despite the increasing competition, some of Indianas forest products
industries are still very competitive. Unlike previous time periods when resources
were evenly distributed throughout the state, forest resources are now primarily
concentrated in the southern part of the state. Through support from the Indiana
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
33/155
21
Hardwood Lumbermens Association (IHLA), the primary wood industry has
managed to remain competitive in both local and international markets.
Availability of quality input is another major concern, especially to the
sawmillers. Because most of the hardwood forests in the state are privately
owned, it is difficult for firms to determine with certainty the quality of logs they
will receive. The industry can profit from more efficient production processes that
optimize the log sawing. The development of engineered wood with properties
similar to solid wood could increase industry competitiveness.
In this environment of constant competition, declining timber resources, and
substitute materials, only firms that simultaneously sustain their source of supply,
retain their customers, and cultivate new markets will survive (Panwar, et al.
2006). To overcome supply, production, labor, marketing, and management
challenges, a personal knowledge of and attention to the problems of timber
quality, sawing and drying processes, employee relationships, sales, research,
and management is required.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
34/155
22
CHAPTER 3. INDUSTRIAL CLUSTER BENCHMARKS
3.1. Introduction
The modern analysis of economic interactions in space stresses the
significance of agglomeration, which includes regional concentration, spatial
clustering, and path dependence. Agglomeration has been described and
analyzed in some detail by numerous researchers, including Marshall (1890),
Weber (1909), Hoover (1948), Lloyd and Dickens (1977), Krugman (1991),
Porter (1990), and Enright (1994).
Using the small- and medium-sized businesses located in Italy and Germany,
Marshall (1890) provided the benchmark literature used for industrial districts and
clusters studies. From this study, Marshall identified three main sources of
agglomeration externalities that are related to inputs, labor market, and
knowledge externalities. The input externalities were based on the fact that firms
in the same industry that are located in close proximity will attract suppliers to
locate near them. This results in transportation cost savings and efficient service.
Labor market externalities ensured that firms in a cluster attracted specialized
workers, thus making the firms more efficient. Knowledge externalities enabled
the exchange of knowledge and information, which resulted primarily in
technology and information spillover.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
35/155
23
Literature on industrial clustering in the forest products sector is limited. In
1987, Abt looked at the local impact of raw materials and labor for three lumber-
producing regions in the U.S. He discovered that significant regional differences
exist, and that a stable input trend was more important than price and technology
trends. Smith and Munn (1998) added to Abts study by examining labor and
capital impacts to two regions containing logging industries using the maximum
likelihood estimation technique. They concluded that capital and labor were
substitutes with changes in input prices and output demands. Both studies
obtained remarkable results, but failed to identify the locational advantages for
the firms. Leigh (2000) examined changes in the woodworking industry caused
by global competition. Leigh noted that the woodworking industry location was
influenced by the input raw material sources as well as the location of growing
economies with construction activities. She concluded that success of the
woodworking industry depended on the use of advanced machines in production.
However, the study did not provide a detailed analysis of global competition and
competitiveness in the woodworking industry. Bowe S., et al. (2004) developed
models to study the location of forest products industries. Although the models
developed included important input and output variables, they did not utilize any
locational analysis; they simply applied ordinary least square methodology to
location quotients. They also failed to take into account the contribution of
variables, such as labor, shown to influence the spatial clustering of firms
(Diamond and Simon 1990).
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
36/155
24
This chapter profiles some important regional concentrations of the forest
products industry. The properties and strengths of these concentrations are
considered benchmarks for analyzing the forest products industry in Indiana.
3.1. Forest products industry clusters in Europe
Industrial clusters, especially in the forest products industry, are more
established in Europe than in the rest of the world. These clusters have led to the
industrial reorganization of firms, ranging from large operations engaged in high-
volume production to small-scale firms, therefore strengthening the local
economies and encouraging networking among firms. In this chapter, furniture-
manufacturing clusters in France, Denmark, and Italy are chosen to present a
good representation of clusters that have relevant assets and competitive
advantages. These advantages can be used to improve Indianas forest products
industry.
3.1.1. Wood and furniture cluster in France (Lorraine)1
The wood and furniture cluster in France is located in Lorraine, a region in
eastern France. The cluster is located in a region with 850,000 hectares of
forestland, and has an annual production of 148 million board feetof lumber.
1Information on Wood and Furniture Cluster in Lorraine, France was obtained from the clusters
websiteHTTP://WWW.PLAB.FR/ENGLISH/INDEX.HTM and a report by Forest and Wildlife
Research Center, Mississippi State University and Regional Technologies, Inc. (2002) on the
Micro Economic Environment Assessment Report for Mississippis forest products and furniture
cluster.
http://www.plab.fr/english/index.htmhttp://www.plab.fr/english/index.htmhttp://www.plab.fr/english/index.htmhttp://www.plab.fr/english/index.htm -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
37/155
25
There are 483 firms distributed over the twenty-mile radius of the cluster
employing 6,700 people. Liffol-Le-Grand Basin contains the greatest
concentration, with 110 furniture firms that employ approximately 2,000 people,
accounting for two-thirds of the working population in the basin. Liffol-Le-Grand is
also considered the capital of the furniture industry, with twenty-five percent of
national production.
The main products manufactured within the cluster are specialized chairs and
chair frames. Due to the regular vocational training established by Furniture
Industries' Professional Training Association, the cluster ensures the availability
of a sustained labor force. The vocational training focuses on high school and
undergraduate students who are interested in joining the wood and furniture
industry. In addition, there are professional training associations. For instance the
association in Liffol- le-Grand ensures continued provision of training for workers.
Due to the extensive investment in training, the clusters competitive advantages
include a large pool of well-trained artisan designers and craftsmen, and the
employees knowledge of the industry.
An agency composed of representatives from the furniture firms and local
economic representatives is the main group responsible for coordinating
activities within the cluster. Known as the Lorraine Agency for Wood-Made
Furniture Industry, it provides advice and services to the manufacturing firms.
Agency services include the creation of a common web portal, technical and
commercial workshops, and export groups.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
38/155
26
3.1.2. Wood and Furniture cluster in Denmark (Salling)2
The wood and furniture cluster in Denmark is centered in Salling, a region in
the western part of Jutland. The cluster developed in the early 1960s as a result
of rapid export market demand. Currently, the cluster spreads over an 80-mile
radius and contains a total of approximately 400 firms (Table. 3.4). The cluster
has an annual revenue of about 3.7 billion US dollars, and employs nearly
14,000 people. Due to inferior production techniques, the firms in the cluster tend
to be small, specialized, and labor intensive. The clusters growth is attributed to
strong entrepreneurial skills, friendly labor and wage regulations, collaborative
philosophy among firms, and well-developed local service support system.
Firms in the cluster belong to the Association of Danish Furniture Industries,
which assists them with sales and market information. The firms also collaborate
with each other in developing new products, sharing machine and equipment,
and sharing personnel. The clusters success is based primarily on the informal
way of doing business. This informality results in the establishment of long-term
relationships among producers, suppliers, and customers, developed over time.
Skills are passed on informally, with some of the skilled workers from a firm
starting their own business.
Danish furniture cluster competitive advantages are in the forms of sustained
supply of knowledgeable workforce, continued innovation, and market
2Information on the Furniture Cluster in Central Jutland, Denmark was obtained from a Danish
furniture website:http://www.danishfurniture.dkand Regional Technology Strategies Inc. 2003
report on wood products clusters:HTTP://RTSINC.ORG/PUBLICATIONS/PDF/MT_WOOD.PDF
http://www.danishfurniture.dk/http://www.danishfurniture.dk/http://www.danishfurniture.dk/http://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://www.danishfurniture.dk/ -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
39/155
27
information availability. The cluster is located strategically close to the worlds
largest furniture showroom where trade shows are presented annually, thus
providing the much-needed market awareness. In addition to the showroom,
there is an engineering school specializing in wood and furniture located at the
center of the cluster, thus ensuring a constant supply of trained labor. The
schools curriculum is designed so that students gain industrial experience while
taking classes. In addition to training, the school also conducts research and
provides technical assistance to the firms.
Table 3.1 Summary ofDanish furniture cluster.
Approximate size Radius 80 miles
Specialization Modern household
Approximate number of firms 400
Key assets
Technology Institutes
Furn. Industry Associations
Apprenticeship
Competitive advantageDesign capabilities
Tacit Knowledge
Government role Indirect only
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
40/155
28
3.1.3. Northern Italys furniture cluster3
The Italian furniture cluster is located in Livenza, a region consisting of 800
core firms producing lumber and furniture. Known popularly in Italy as industrial
districts, the clusters were formed as a result of the socially inclined business
model. Due to the models success, the Italian government offered its support to
the cluster concept by passing the Industrial Districts Act of 1999. Currently, the
cluster has approximately 1,400 firms employing about 12,000 people, including
suppliers and supporting industries (Table 3.5). Despite its varied products, this
cluster is more focused on the production of office and kitchen furniture.
The center of this cluster is Pordenone, a city that hosts an annual trade show
and the Office of the Furniture Consortium Association (producers association).
The firms also utilize the local Chamber of Commerce in order to market their
products. The cluster is characterized by small- and medium-sized firms that
specialize in producing components to be assembled by larger firms to form a
finished product. The large firms are also tasked with the distribution and sales of
the finished products.
3Information on the Northern Italys Furniture Cluster was obtained from
HTTP://WWW.FURNISHINGFROMITALY.COM/LIVENZA/MENUDATI.ASP and Regional
Technology Strategies Inc. 2003 report on wood products clusters:
HTTP://RTSINC.ORG/PUBLICATIONS/PDF/MT_WOOD.PDF
http://www.furnishingfromitaly.com/livenza/menudati.asphttp://www.furnishingfromitaly.com/livenza/menudati.asphttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://www.furnishingfromitaly.com/livenza/menudati.asp -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
41/155
29
In most cases, small firms are started by former employees of larger firms
who have strong entrepreneurial skills. Due to the closely-knit community, it
follows that cluster strengths are highly integrated supply chain networks which
allow firms to specialize and excel in various aspects of production.
Table 3.2 Summary of the Italian furniture cluster (in Livenza).
Approximate size Radius 20 miles
Specialization Kitchen, Office furniture
Approximate number of firms 800
Key assets Trade associations
School furniture
Competitive advantage Flexible specialization
Design
Government role Ind. District Act of 1999
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
42/155
30
3.2. U.S. forest products industry clusters
3.2.1. Oregon wood products cluster4
The spotted owl, typically found in the U.S. and Canadian west coast old
growth forests, was designated as an endangered species in the late 1980s by a
court ruling (Marcot and Thomas 1997). With more than one-third of its
manufacturing jobs in the primary wood industry firms at the time, the ruling
economically devastated Oregon. To tackle the problem, the state formed an
Interim Legislative Committee on Forest Products Policy (ILCFPP). The
committees task was to change the emphasis from the primary wood products
manufacturing to secondary wood products manufacturing.
To achieve the change from primary wood industry to the secondary industry,
the state of Oregon sent members of ILCFPP to Europe to study how the forest
products industries in Italys industrial districts and Denmark forest products
industries remained competitive. When the committee members returned with
their findings, the state commissioned a study of the forest products industry. The
study was reviewed by a series of focus groups, with more emphasis given to
small businesses. The study recommended several courses of action, including:
flexible manufacturing networks; technical assistance; financial incentives; and a
4Information on Oregon wood products clusters are from
HTTP://WWW.OREGONCLUSTERS.ORG/FOREST.HTML and a 2003 USDA report by Jason
P. Brandt, Todd A. Morgan, Thale Dillon, Gary J. Lettman, Charles E. Keegan, and David L.
Azuma on Oregons Forest Products Industry and Timber harvest.
http://www.oregonclusters.org/forest.htmlhttp://www.oregonclusters.org/forest.htmlhttp://www.oregonclusters.org/forest.html -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
43/155
31
cluster coordinating body. As a result of the study, Oregons Senate Bill 364 was
passed in July 1991, establishing the Oregon Wood Products Competitiveness
Corporation (WPCC). Using lessons learned from Europe, the state established
extension service vouchers with incentives for multi-firm projects, networks, and
capital access programs, but left operations to WPCC directors. The WPCC's
board, comprised of private industry representatives, eventually traveled to
Europe to fully understand the concept. However, unlike the European programs
that included financial incentives, the board suggested a strategy that resulted in
the improvement of social and capital infrastructure, and in the capacity for
growth. The board also believed that, with time, networks and opportunities
would be formed as firms collaborated with one another.
3.2.1.1. Current situation
The Oregon wood products industry is experiencing market growth despite
the current increase of imports to local markets, which has led to a general
decline in employment. The growth is mostly in rural areas where forest products
industry-allied jobs contribute significantly to local economies. The secondary
wood products industry employs about 40 percent of total forest products
industry workers, and is composed of approximately 800 firms out of the 1862
firms. In general secondary industry accounts for approximately 37 to 42 percent
of all manufacturing employment in Oregon (Table 3.3).
The key strength of the secondary indstry is the Northwestern Wood Products
Association (NWPA), which replaced the Wood Products Competitiveness
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
44/155
32
Corporation (WPCC). Its goals are to promote and improve the competitiveness
of the Oregon forest products industry through access to market, capital, and
workforce. Collaboration between the NWPA and Oregons community colleges
ensures the development and implementation of curricula that suits the industry.
The Oregon State University Extension Forestry program also serves as a
source of technical information through research and development, and market
guidance.
Table 3.3 Summary of the Oregon forest products cluster.
Approximate size Radius 100 miles
Specialization Kitchen, Office furniture
Approximate number of firms 1,862
Key assets Trade associations
Port access
Competitive advantage Access to Pacific
Skilled workforceGovernment role Oregon Wood Products Act
1991 (State enacted legislation:
WPCC now NWPA)
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
45/155
33
3.2.2. Northeastern Mississippi furniture cluster5
Morris Futorian opened the first furniture manufacturing plant in New Albany,
Mississippi in 1948. Futorian applied the concept of mass production introduced
by the automotive industry to the furniture industry. Futorian was attracted to
Mississippi by the abundant supply of cheap labor, raw material, and business
friendliness. Over time, employees trained in mass production methods began
their own businesses. As the number of furniture companies in the area
increased, the number of other companies providing supplies and services also
increased. Improved support from local government and community leaders
helped attract more suppliers and other non-upholstery furniture companies. With
the increased momentum, firms started the Tupelo Furniture Market and trade
show in early the 1980s to help market low-priced furniture.
3.2.2.1. Current situation
The U.S.s largest upholstered furniture producer is the ten-county region of
Appalachia in Northeastern Mississippi, located around Tupelo. Although
furniture produced in the region is not considered as fashionable as North
Carolinas traditional pieces or Oregons stylish pieces, they are functional
5Information on the Northern Mississippi Furniture cluster was obtained from Tupelo Furniture
Market (HTTP://WWW.TUPELOFURNITUREMARKET.COM)and a report by the Forest and
Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University and Regional Technologies, Inc. 2002 on
the Micro Economic Environment Assessment Report for Mississippis forest products and
furniture cluster.
http://www.tupelofurnituremarket.com/http://www.tupelofurnituremarket.com/http://www.tupelofurnituremarket.com/http://www.tupelofurnituremarket.com/ -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
46/155
34
products distributed primarily through mass marketing to chain stores. The
regions furniture industry contains about 200 manufacturers employing
approximately 25,000 people (33 percent of the areas population)
The clusters key strengths are the massive Tupelo showrooms, skilled labor
force, superior technology, and large numbers of suppliers. Proximity to suppliers
is considered the main competitive advantage. Supporting institutions such as
the Community Development Foundation, Itawamba Community College, and
Mississippi State University offer assistance in terms of business management
services, product promotion, research product testing, and employee training.
3.2.3. Kentucky wood products cluster6
The Kentucky wood products cluster, like the Oregon cluster, used the
European clusters as its model to develop a suitable collaborative strategy for
small- and mid-sized businesses. The strategy was to encourage networking
among firms.
The Kentucky Wood Products Competitiveness Corporation (KWPCC) and
the Kentucky Forest Products Council were created in 1994 by a bill the
Kentucky legislature passed. The KWPCC acted as a community corporation
with the duty of providing information, developing workforce training services,
and raising financial support for new technologies. Other duties included the
6Information on Kentucky Wood Products Clusters was obtained from the government archives
atWWW.E-ARCHIVES.KY.GOV/ and the Regional Technology Strategies Inc. 2003 report on
wood products clusters:HTTP://RTSINC.ORG/PUBLICATIONS/PDF/MT_WOOD.PDF
http://www.e-archives.ky.gov/Minutes/legislate/eco_dev/981015.htmhttp://www.e-archives.ky.gov/Minutes/legislate/eco_dev/981015.htmhttp://www.e-archives.ky.gov/Minutes/legislate/eco_dev/981015.htmhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://www.e-archives.ky.gov/Minutes/legislate/eco_dev/981015.htm -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
47/155
35
maintenance of the Quicksand Wood Utilization Center to monitor the industry;
management seminars; workforce training programs; and technical advice and
assistance. To encourage collaboration, the corporation offered incentives to
three or more firms who formed manufacturing networks.
3.2.3.1. Current situation
To enhance its performance, KWPCC has opened several technology centers
in conjunction with the Kentucky Community and Technical College System
(KCTCS). The technology centers, including one located at Jefferson Community
College, are responsible for training, technical assistance, and community
outreach. The Kentucky Advanced Technology Institute in Bowling Green is
another center that is charged with improving production processes through the
use of advanced technology such as CNC panel processing. Finally, there is the
Wood Utilization Center, based at both the University of Kentucky and Hazard
Community College, which provides training. The corporation has also formed
partnership with technology centers in three counties, thus allowing its members
accessibility to information regarding technological advancements. To encourage
continued training, KWPCC facilitates practical work experience that translates to
academic credit for students. A summary of the cluster composition is given in
Table 3.4 below.
-
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
48/155
36
Table 3.4 Summary of Kentucky wood products cluster.
Approximate size Radius 100 miles
Specialization None
Approximate number of firms 956
Key assets Technology center
Competitive advantage Timber supply
Low wages
Government role Kentucky Wood Products
Competitiveness Act of 1996
3.2.4. North Carolina furniture cluster7
The furniture cluster in North Carolina is within a two-hundred-mile radius of
Newton, Hickory, and Lenoir regions. The cluster has established its name as the
U.S.s center for the furniture industry, despite the recent production and market
shifts. Some of the clusters core competitive advantages are high-quality yet
low-cost home furnishings. The cluster also has a variety of firms, ranging from
the custom furniture makers to the mass producers. For customers, the regions
primary attraction is the manufacturing firms concentration ensuring the ability to
find desired products in one location.
Of the three regions, Hickory is the largest, containing 250 firms that provide
employment for about 33,500 people. This concentration of firms has led to the
7Information on North Carolina Furniture Clusters was obtained from Duke University 2004 report
on furniture industry and the global economy, and Regional Technology Strategies Inc. 2003
report on wood products clustersHTTP://RTSINC.ORG/PUBLICATIONS/PDF/MT_WOOD.PDF
http://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdfhttp://rtsinc.org/publications/pdf/mt_wood.pdf -
8/10/2019 1b. Analysis of the Forest Products Cluster in Indiana- A Framework for Improving Competitiveness (SURVEY)
49/155
37
development of trade shows and exhibitions in the area. The result has been an
increase in revenue for the firms. The shows and exhibitions are facilitated and
supported by both public and private support institutions. In addition to attracting
consumers, firms also benefit through the formation of business networks and
collaborating partners.
3.2.4.1. Current situation
Consumers of the custom furniture industry require quick delivery times,
quality, low price, and customized designs. Thus, the driving force for the
furniture industry today is to please the changing demand patterns of home
furnishing customers. There are several ways that local firms can address the
growing demands; for example, by serving as a channel for cheap, imported
furniture. The firms can also be part of the import structure. One setback for
embracing imports is the possibility that a firm may lose its competitive edge, in
addition to the loss of experienced workers who help to ensure quality products.
3.2.5. Maine forest industry cluster8
Through formation of an industrial association, policy makers in Maine believe
that firms will be able to collaborate and to compete, especially the forest
8Information on Maine Forest Products Cluster was obtained from a 2005 report on Maine
technology sectors and clusters commissioned by Maine Technology Institute.
HTTP://WWW.MAINETECHNOLOGY.ORG/ASSETS/CLUSTER_FULL_REPORT_8._FOREST_
PRODUCTS_AND_AGRICULTURE.PDF
http://www.mainetechnology.org/assets/Cluster_Full_Report_8._Forest_Products_and_Agriculture.pdfhttp://www.mainetechnology.org/assets/Cluster_Full_Report_8._Forest_Products_and_Agriculture.pdfhttp://www.mainetechnology.org/assets/Cluster_Full_Report_8._Forest_Products_and_Agriculture.pdfhttp://www.mainetechnology.org/assets/Cluster_Full_Report_8._Forest_Products_and_Agriculture.pdfhttp://www.mainetechnology.org/assets/Cluster_Full_Report_8._Forest_Products_and_Agriculture.pdf