How Innovation Districts (Do Not) Work: the Case Study of Cracow

Jacek Gądecki; Łukasz Afeltowicz; Karolina Anielska; Ilona Morawska

doi:10.18778/1231-1952.27.1.07

Authors

Jacek Gądecki Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Cieszyńska 2, 30-015 Kraków, Poland; AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Humanities Gramatyka 8a, 30-071 Kraków, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1954-9605
Łukasz Afeltowicz AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Humanities, Gramatyka 8a, 30-071 Kraków, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2316-6332
Karolina Anielska Jagiellonian University, Faculty of Geography and Geology, Institute of Geography and Spatial Management, Gronostajowa 7, 30-387 Kraków, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4697-7135
Ilona Morawska Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Cieszyńska 2, 30-015 Kraków, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2383-9568

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1231-1952.27.1.07

Keywords:

innovation district, ICT, cluster

Abstract

This article is an attempt to answer the question: how one selects a neighbourhood to develop an innovation district, using the case of Cracow. This article mainly refers to the issue of the shape of innovation districts, showing how much the morphology of such spaces and their functions can promote or limit the development of innovative enterprises from the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) industry. It also refers to our research carried out with quantitative and qualitative methods in Poland, using two locations in Cracow as a case study. In this paper, we focus on the significant restrictions which hinder the emergence and development of such districts. We also indicate the potential solutions to these difficulties such as the temporary spaces of events we mapped and which we called ‘totemic spaces’.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ASHEIM, B., BUGGE, M.M., COENEN, L. and HERSTAD, S. (2013), ‘What does evolutionary economic geography bring to the policy table? Reconceptualising regional innovation systems’, Papers in Innovation Studies, 5.
Google Scholar

AUDRETSCH, D.B. and FELDMAN, M.P. (2004), ‘Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation’, Handbook of regional and urban economics, Elsevier, 4, pp. 2713–2739. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0080(04)80018-X
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0080(04)80018-X

BAPTISTA, R. (2000), ‘Do innovations diffuse faster within geographical clusters?’ International Journal of Industrial Organization, 18, pp. 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7187(99)00045-4
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7187(99)00045-4

BECATTINI, G. (1990), ‘The Marshallian Industrial District as a Socio-Economic Concept’, [in:] PYKE, F., BECATTINI, G. and SENGENBERGER, W. (eds.), Industrial Districts and Inter-firm Cooperation in Italy, Geneva, IILS.
Google Scholar

BOSCHMA, R. (2005), ‘Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment’, Regional Studies, 39 (1), pp. 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320887
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320887

BRESCHI, S. and LISSONI, F. (2001), ‘Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: a critical survey’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (4), pp. 975–1005. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.975
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.975

BUZARD, K., CARLINO, G.A., HUNT, R.M., CARR, J. and SMITH, T.E. (2015), Localized Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from the Agglomeration of American R&D Labs and Patent Data, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Research Department. https://doi.org/10.21799/frbp.wp.2015.03
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.21799/frbp.wp.2015.03

CARLINO, G. and KERR, W.R. (2015), ‘Agglomeration and Innovation’, Chapter 6, [in:] DURANTON G., HENDERSON J.V. and STRANGE, W.C. (eds.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, 5, Elsevier, pp. 349–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59517-1.00006-4
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59517-1.00006-4

CRESCENZI, R., NATHAN, M. and RODRÍGUEZ-POSE, A. (2016), ‘Do inventors talk to strangers? On proximity and collaborative knowledge creation’, Research Policy, 45 (1), pp. 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.003
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.003

CUSMANO, L., MORRISON, A. and PANDOLFO, E. (2014), ‘Spin-off and clustering: a return to the Marshallian district’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39 (1), pp. 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beu032
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beu032

DELGADO, M., PORTER, M.E. and STERN, S. (2014), ‘Clusters, convergence, and economic performance’, Research Policy, 43 (10), pp. 1785–1799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.007
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.007

DEPRET, M.H. and HAMDOUCH, A. (2013), ‘Clusters, Networks, and Entrepreneurship’, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, pp. 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_199
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_199

ERIKSSON, R.H. (2011), ‘Localized spillovers and knowledge flows: How does proximity influence the performance of plants?’, Economic Geography, 87 (2), pp. 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2011.01112.x
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2011.01112.x

FLORIDA, R. (2010), Narodziny klasy kreatywnej: oraz jej wpływ na przeobrażenia w charakterze pracy, wypoczynku, społeczeństwa i życia codziennego, Warsaw, Narodowe Centrum Kultury.
Google Scholar

GLAESER, E.L. (2014), https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/07/renewing-urban-renewal/ (accessed on 27.10.2019).
Google Scholar

GLAESER, E.L., KALLAL, H.D., SCHEINKMAN, J.A. and SHLEIFER, A. (1992), ‘Growth in cities’, Journal of Political Economy, 100 (6), pp. 1126–1152. https://doi.org/10.1086/261856
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261856

GLAESER, E.L., RESSEGER, M. and TOBIO, K. (2009), ‘Inequality in Cities’, Journal of Regional Science, 49 (4), pp. 617–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00627.x
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00627.x

GRAHAM, S. and GUY, S. (2002), ‘Digital space meets urban space. Sociotechnologies of urban restructuring in downtown San Francisco’, City, 6 (3), pp. 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360481022000037788
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360481022000037788

HEALY, A. and MORGAN, K. (2012), ‘Spaces of innovation: Learning, proximity and the ecological turn’, Regional Studies, 46 (8), pp. 1041–1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2012.672725
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2012.672725

HOWELLS, J.R. (2002), ‘Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic geography’, Urban Studies, 39 (5–6), pp. 871–884.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980220128354

JACOBS, J. (2016), The economy of cities, Vintage.
Google Scholar

JAFFE, A.B., TRAJTENBERG, M. and HENDERSON, R. (1993), ‘Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108 (3), pp. 577–598. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118401
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2118401

KATZ, B. and WAGNER, J. (2014), The rise of innovation districts: A new geography of innovation in America, Washington: Brookings Institution.
Google Scholar

KLEPPER, S. (2010), ‘The origin and growth of industry clusters: The making of Silicon Valley and Detroit’, Journal of Urban Economics, 67 (1), pp. 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2009.09.004
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2009.09.004

KO, A.J. (2017), ‘A Three-Year Participant Observation of Software Startup Software Evolution’, IEEE, pp. 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2017.29
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2017.29

LÖW, M. (2016), The Sociology of Space – Materiality, Social Structures, and Action, New York, Cultural Sociology, Palgrave, Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-69568-3
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-69568-3

MAFFESOLI, M. (1995), The time of the tribes: The decline of individualism in mass society, Sage.
Google Scholar

MAILLAT, D. (1995), ‘Territorial dynamic, innovative milieus and regional policy’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 7 (2), pp. 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985629500000010
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08985629500000010

MARKUSEN, A. (1996), ‘Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts’, Economic Geography, 72 (3), pp. 293–313. https://doi.org/10.2307/144402
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/144402

MARSHALL, A. (1920), Principles of Economics, 8th Edition, London, Macmillan.
Google Scholar

MARTIN, R. and SUNLEY, P. (2003), ‘Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?’, Journal of Economic Geography, 3, pp. 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.5
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.5

MAUSS, M. (2002), The gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies, Routledge.
Google Scholar

MICEK, G. (2017), Bliskość geograficzna przedsiębiorstw zaawansowanego przemysłu i usług a przepływy wiedzy, Krakow, Instytut Geografii i Gospodarki Przestrzennej, Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie.
Google Scholar

MIRABAL, N.R. (2009), ‘Geographies of Displacement: Latina/os, oral history, and the politics of gentrification in San Francisco’s Mission District’, The Public Historian, 31 (2), pp. 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2009.31.2.7
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2009.31.2.7

MORETTI, E. (2012), The new geography of jobs, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Google Scholar

MORGAN, K. (2004), ‘The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems’, Journal of Economic Geography, 4 (1), pp. 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/4.1.3
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/4.1.3

MORRISON, A. and BEVILACQUA, C. (2019), ‘Balancing gentrification in the knowledge economy: the case of Chattanooga’s innovation district’, Urban Research & Practice, 12 (4), pp. 472–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2018.1472799
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2018.1472799

OLIVEIRA, V. (2018), Teaching Urban Morphology, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76126-8
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76126-8

PORTER, M.E. (2000), ‘Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy’, Economic Development Quarterly, 14 (1), pp. 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240001400105
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240001400105

RODRÍGUEZ-POSE, A. and CRESCENZI, R. (2008), ‘Mountains in a flat world: why proximity still matters for the location of economic activity’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1 (3), pp. 371–388. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsn011
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsn011

SAXENIAN, A. (1996), Regional advantage, Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjnrsqh
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjnrsqh

SPENCER, G.M. (2015), ‘Knowledge Neighborhoods: Urban Form and Evolutionary Economic Geography’, Regional Studies, 49 (5), pp. 883–898.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2015.1019846

STORPER, M. and VENABLES A.J. (2004), ‘Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy’, Journal of Economic Geography, 4, pp. 351–370.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlecg/lbh027

WIŚNIEWSKI, M. (2011), ‘Zabłocie – a model revitalization?’, Herito , 4, pp. 58–77.
Google Scholar