Giersch’s competition theory took the world market, not the nation, as its key unit.

Evidence

Unlike Porter, Giersch did not perceive competitive advantages in terms of a local or national combination and allocation of resources. The world market was the key referent, attracting mobile factors of production to the most competitive region: capital and knowledge. Flexible regions are upwardly mobile, and regions marked by rigidity are prone to decline. Local endowments can be more or less favorable to local development, but they do not explain the trajectory. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 304

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes Giersch’s non-local competition-state theory from Porter’s more territorial competitive-advantage framework.