At the beginning of Section 3.2, as well as at the end of the description of each cluster, we mitigated the dichotomist nature in the typology of cluster development by some qualification. For example, we changed the formulation from “characterized as public-driven clusters” to “characterized as more public-driven than private-driven clusters”.
Although ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ have been replaced by public-driven and ‘private-driven’, the dichotomist nature remains as the focus of my critique. I would still like to see a qualification stating that private and public initiative often interacts in cluster development, and that the degree of private and public sector involvement usually differs from case to case.