Regional economies are shaped by their economic histories and existing endowments. This paper explores the question: how do a region’s economic history and institutional endowments affect its success and trajectory in an emerging industry? Our case, electric vehicle development and production, is an industry which combines more traditional skilled manufacturing with knowledge-driven innovation activities. We present deep qualitative case studies of two regions, focusing on one firm in each. The case of Tesla in the San Francisco Bay Area examines an electric vehicle firm in a region with a strong tech innovation system, while the case of Maserati in Emilia-Romagna, Italy, examines a firm that builds on a regional history of automotive manufacturing. Across cases, we compare regional skill endowments, institutional coordination, and place-based policymaking. We conclude that, as an emerging industry under a new economic paradigm, electric vehicle manufacturing by Tesla and Maserati represents two different conceptions of the industry and consequently two different location strategies. Yet these two strategies remain rooted in regional contexts, owing both their success to successful exploitations of these, and their struggles to their failure to compensate for regional gaps. This presents a clear opportunity for place-based industrial strategy to evolve and intervene.

区域经济受其经济历史和现有existing赋的影响。本文探讨了一个问题：一个地区的经济历史和制度end赋如何影响其在新兴产业中的成功和发展轨迹？我们的案例是电动汽车的开发和生产，该行业将更多传统的熟练制造与知识驱动的创新活动结合在一起。我们提供了两个区域的深入定性案例研究，每个区域都专注于一家公司。旧金山湾区的特斯拉案审查了具有强大技术创新系统的地区的一家电动汽车公司，而意大利艾米利亚-罗马涅的玛莎拉蒂案则审查了建立在汽车制造业区域历史上的一家公司。在不同情况下，我们比较了区域技能end赋，机构协调，和基于位置的决策。我们得出的结论是，作为一种新的经济范式下的新兴产业，特斯拉和玛莎拉蒂制造的电动汽车代表着两种不同的产业概念，因此代表着两种不同的选址策略。然而，这两种战略仍然植根于区域背景，这是由于它们成功地成功利用了这两种战略，并且由于未能弥补区域差距而在奋斗。这为基于场所的产业战略发展和干预提供了明显的机会。由于他们成功地利用了这些武器，又因为他们未能弥补区域差距而斗争。这为基于位置的产业战略发展和干预提供了明显的机会。由于他们成功地利用了这些武器，又因为他们未能弥补区域差距而斗争。这为基于场所的产业战略发展和干预提供了明显的机会。