微型群聚是由小規模的企業與公司在地表空間上的集中，在尺度上，明顯地與過去熟知的產業群聚差異甚遠，小尺度的微型群聚發生在一個街區大的商辦、三層樓的老舊洋房或是只有40坪大的空間裡面，令人驚奇的是在這個小尺度的地理空間，裡面成員靠者緊密的互動，激盪出創意的火花，讓這個小小的空間成為城市的創意基地。本研究以高雄市的共同工作空間為研究案例，探討共同工作空間所形成的微型群聚，運用新經濟地理學三位一體「技術¬ 組織-領域」的架構，分析共同工作空間之微型群聚帶來的經濟現象，最後，研究共同工作空跟地方行動者之間的關係。
本研究發現：第一，共同工作空間的出現，來自於人們對於新型態工作模式的追求，透過共享經濟與創意領域，吸引新創團隊與獨立工作者慕名前來，產生一種極為小尺度的群聚效應；第二，微型群聚因為地理的鄰近性將空間的限制格除了，強化成員間的非貿易性依賴，產生由信賴建立的商業模式；第三，微型群聚因互補性與暫時性帶來知識的交流而帶來創新，同時，透過地方傳言與全球渠道學習到知識與技術；第四，領域是來自於關係所建構，隨者空間內高度的流動性，建構出彈性化的領域。
結論指出，共同工作空間新型態的工作場域，結合起微型企業與新創團的力量，在這個小小的空間中去實踐他們的夢想，他們擁有最大的資源就是緊密的「關係」，關係產生的非貿易性依賴使他們樂於分享，產生知識的交流，而成為創新的動力，同時象徵地理學邁向分析關係為核心的「關係經濟地理學」。

Microcluster is the concentration of small-scale enterprises and companies in the space. On the scale, it is obviously different from the well-known industry cluster. The small-scale microcluster takes place in the block of commercial office, three-stored old bungalows and even only 1440 square feet of apartment. But ,surprisingly, in this small-scale geography concentration, the members of microcluster are stirring the creative sparks by the closely interaction, so that this small space can become the city's creative base! This study takes Kaohsiung's coworking space as a research case, exploring the microcluster formed by the coworking space , and using the new economic geography model of Storper’s holy trinity—" technology, organization, and territory " to analyze the coworking space of the microcluster which brought about by the economic phenomenon. Finally, the impact of the coworking space on the local area is discussed.
According to the study,there can conclude three result：First, the emergence of coworking space come from a new type of work model, through the sharing economy and creative field,which attract start up group and independent workers come here and give rise to small size of microcluster. Second, microcluster break through the limit of space by geography proximity, strengthening untraded interdependencies,and produce a commercial model established by trust. Third, microcluster result in the complementary and temporary proximity which cause the exchange of knowledge by closely interaction increase abilities of innovation. Simultaneously,they learn knowledge and technology from local buzz and global pipelines. Fourth, the territory derived from the construction of relationship with a high degree of mobility, and makt it flexibility.
The conclusion point out that the coworking space as new generation of workplace,combined with the power of start up group and independent workers. In this little space, catch their dreams. They have the most resource which is a closely "relationship".The untraded interdependencies of relationship makes them happy to share and produce knowledge exchanging ,which become the driving force of innovation.At the same time, symbolic geography towards the "Relational economic geography" which analysis of the relationship as the core.

一、英文文獻
Banks, M. (2007). The Politics of Culture Work: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2003). Toward a relational economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 3(2), 117-144.
Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31-56. doi:10.1191/0309132504ph469oa
Bergman, E. M., & Feser, E. J. (1999). Industrial and Regional Clusters: Concepts and Comparative Applications: Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
Capdevila, I. (2013). Knowledge dynamics in localized communities: Coworking spaces as microclusters. Browser Download This Paper.
Christopherson, S., & Clark, J. (2007). Power in Firm Networks: What it Means for Regional Innovation Systems. Regional Studies, 41(9), 1223-1236. doi:10.1080/00343400701543330
Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class.
Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M., & Bacevice, P. (2014). Co-constructing a Sense of Community at Work: The Emergence of Community in Coworking Spaces. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1). doi:10.5465/ambpp.2014.139
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American journal of sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
Granovetter, M. (1992). Economic Institutions as Social Constructions: A Framework for Analysis. Acta Sociologica, 35(1), 3-11. doi:doi:10.1177/000169939203500101
Marshall, A. (1920). The economics of industry: Macmillan and Company.
Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(4), 395-437. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbl012
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization science, 15(1), 5-21.
Polanyi, M. (1974). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy (Corr. Ed ed.): University of Chicago Press.
Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations.
Porter, M. (2000). Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly.
Reimer, S. (2007). Geographies of production I. Progress in Human Geography, 31(2), 245-255. doi:10.1177/0309132507075373
Ross, A. (2004). No-collar: The humane workplace and its hidden costs: Temple University Press.
Scott, A. J. (2000). The cultural economy of cities : essays on the geography of image-producing industries. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.
Scott, A. J. (2001). Capitalism, cities, and the production of symbolic forms. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 11-23.
Scott, A. J. (2014). Beyond the Creative City: Cognitive–Cultural Capitalism and the New Urbanism. Regional Studies, 48(4), 565-578. doi:10.1080/00343404.2014.891010
Spinuzzi, C. (2012). Working Alone Together: Coworking as Emergent Collaborative Activity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 399-441. doi:10.1177/1050651912444070
Storper, M. (1997). The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy: Guilford Press.
Torre, A. (2008). On the Role Played by Temporary Geographical Proximity in Knowledge Transmission. Regional Studies, 42(6), 869-889. doi:10.1080/00343400801922814
Uda, T. (2013). What is coworking?: A theoretical study on the concept of coworking. Discussion Paper, Series A, 265, 1-15.
Yamazumi, K., Sannino, A., Daniels, H., & Gutiérrez, K. (2009). Expansive agency in multi-activity collaboration. Learning and expanding with activity theory, 212-227.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods: Sage Publications.
二、中文文獻
王文誠 (2009)。 關係經濟地理:臺灣科學園區的發展、轉變與調適。 台北市: 國立臺灣師範大學地理系。
王緝慈 (2001)。 創新的空間︰企業集群與區域發展。 北京市: 北京大學出版社。
林政逸, & 辛晚教 (2007)。 創新、能力與文化產業群聚的演化：臺北市音樂產業個案研究。 [Innovation, Competence and the Evolution of Cultural Industry Clusters: The Case Study of Music Industries in Taipei City] 地理學報(50), 23-45. doi:10.6161/jgs.2007.50.02
楊友仁 (2004)。 經濟地理學的制度轉向：一個理論性回顧與研究取向的建議.。國立臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究學報, 12, 69~80。
謝安田 (1979)。 企業研究方法。 台北: 水牛出版社。