ALL BRAINS ON DECK spatial strategy to stimulate and facilitate the development of the Brainport Eindhoven towards a competitive knowledge cluster
COLOPHON
Dion van Dijk 4023382 MSc thesis plan (preliminary) March 29, 2012 1st mentor
Drs. H.J. Rosenboom Spatial Planning and Strategy
Delft University of Technology Faculty of Architecture Department of Urbanism Urban Regeneration
3
CONTENT
1 INTRODUCTION
7
3 COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES
37
1.1 Introduction 1.2 Relevance 1.2.1 Sociatal relevance 1.2.2 Scientific relevance 1.3 Problem field 1.3.1 Problem statement 1.3.2 (Inter)national context 1.3.3 Regional context 1.3.4 Local context 1.4 Research questions 1.4.1 Main research questions 1.4.2 Sub-research questions 1.5 Aim 1.6 Methodology 1.7 Planning 1.7.1 Expected products 1.7.2 Overall planning
9 10 10 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 15 15 16 17 18 18 20
3.1 Introduction 3.2 Competitive regions 3.3 Nearby located metropolitan areas
38 39 40
4 EXISTING PLANS
41
4.1 Introduction 4.2 Planned readings
42 43
5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
45
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
21
2.1 Introduction 2.2 Composition of competitive cluster 2.3 Human capital 2.4 Attraction of human capital 2.5 Focus area 2.6 Literature review
22 23 26 30 32 34
5
1 INTRODUCTION
figure 1.2 (inter)national context of the Brainport
18%
25%
population
foreign researchers investments
Netherlands
oreign estments
lation
35%
45%
54%
export
private R&D
patents
Southeast of the Netherlands
26% figure
25%
8%
26%
45% 54% of the southeast 1.135%national contribution of the Netherlands source:export Brainport Development, researchers private R&D patents 2011
25%
26%
foreign researchers investments
35%
45%
54%
export
private R&D
patents
Amsterdam
Utrecht
The Hague
Rotterdam Den Bosch Breda
Tilburg Helmond
Duisburg
Eindhoven Antwerp Mechelen
Gent
8
Dusseldorf
Brussels
Leuven
Cologne
Dortmund
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The city of Eindhoven in the south of the Netherlands used to be a city deeply affected by economic and social decline due to processes of deindustrialisation. But since the mid-2000s, Eindhoven and its surrounding region have successfully transformed into the technology node of the Netherlands. Nowadays it is even the second engine of the Dutch economy, after the airport in Amsterdam and before the seaport in Rotterdam (Eindhoven, 2010). To remain of national and international value, the Dutch cabinet wants to strengthen and even expand the Brainport as top technology cluster. Therefore, the Dutch government has appointed in the 4th Memorandum on Spatial Planning the Eindhoven region as ‘Brainport’. This term consists of the non-geographical defined network of research and development related industries, universities, institutes and campuses in the south-east of the Netherlands, concentrated around the city of Eindhoven (S+RO, 2011). With this appointment the Eindhoven region was marked as economic centre of national importance (SRE, 2007a). One of the reasons for the appointment of the Brainport as economic centre is the ambition of the Netherlands to make the shift from a manufacturing economy towards a knowledge economy in order to keep developing itself as a strong economic country. This means more investments in the ‘new economies’, which is the Dutch cabinet has marked the following nine sectors as topsectors: water, agro food, horticulture, high-tech, life sciences, chemistry, energy, logistic and the creative industry. These topsectors will be the subject of renewed attention in the coming years (SRE, 2007b). Especially in the Eindhoven region many institutions, compagnies and campuses are related to these topsectors, which makes it into a very important centre in the knowledge economy of the Netherlands. The ambition for the Brainport is to position itself among the top
three technology centres of Europe and top ten top technology centres worldwide (S+RO, 2011). To achieve this ambition, the Brainport has decided to double the required portion of 8% of research & development according to the European R&D standards. Therefore, the existing industries in the Brainport need to grow and new business will be attracted to the region. The Brainport has understood this process very well by focussing their ambition on doubling its current amount of twelve thousand knowledge workers, the ‘human capital’ of the Brainport (Brainport, 2008), whereby the knowledge worker is ‘a person concerning research and development activities’. But in order to attract these knowledge workers, the Brainport and its surrounding region needs to become more complete, diverse and bigger. Therefore the Brainport and its surrounding region are facing the challenge how it can stimulate and facilitate its expected growth in order to strengthen and expand its status as top technology centre.
9th 1-3th top technology centre in 2020
13th 1-10th top technology centre in 2020
figure 1.3 ambition of Brainport source: Brainport Development, 2011 9
1.2 RELEVANCE 1.2.1 Societal relevance
1.2.2 Scientific relevance
Eindhoven and its region have a very strong knowledge and economic base. This is the result of the presence of many knowledge driven institution clusters. With the aim to be among the top three top technology centres in Europa and top ten top technology centres worldwide, the Brainport wants to attract more knowledge workers (Brainport Development, 2011). Nowadays compagnies also determine the choice of location of their future office on the supply of the city itself (Marlet, 2009). Therefore, besides the business climate, the people climate becomes more important to attract knowledge driven compagnies and their knowledge workers. Confronted with the challenges that cities have in the knowledge economy, Eindhoven has many advantages but also some clear disadvantages. Among the European cities in the knowledge economy, Eindhoven is marked as a Star Nicheplayer player (van Winden, 2007). This qualification means a clear advantage in terms of knowledge base and economic base, but a certain disadvantage in terms of urban scale. This project will focus on the people climate of the Brainport region and the integration of it with the business climate in order to achieve its ambition as top technology centre.
Research has been done about the economic growth and spatial growth of cities and regions. The integration of both aspects is of high importance, since the knowledge city and region becomes more dependent on its geographic position and local qualities (Marlet, 2009). However, the importance of the relation between these two aspects is relatively new and has not been made very clear yet in current policy and design. In the case of the Brainport, the integration of these two aspects is exactly what is lacking in the Brainport region (van Winden, 2007). This research and design project positions itself in the gap in existing literature between the business and spatial growth of the knowledge city and region.
business climate
+
figure 1.4 integrated of business climate with people climate 10
people climate
=
knowledge city?
1.3 PROBLEM FIELD 1.3.1 Problem statement
Stars Amsterdam, Munich, Helsinki, Stockholm, Dublin Pearls Leuven, Leiden
strong progress
However, the process of attracting knowledge workers takes more than only offering employment. Nowadays the ‘quality of life’ or ‘people climate’ of a city or region has become more important than the business-economic climate in attracting knowledge workers (Marlet, 2009). In order to attract these knowledge workers, the Eindhoven region has many advantages but also some clear disadvantages. Among the European cities in the knowledge economy, Eindhoven is marked as a ‘Star Nicheplayer’ (van Winden et al., 2007). This qualification means an advantage in terms of knowledge and economic base, but a clear disadvantage in terms of urban scale. Eindhoven has evident problems related to its modest urban scale and its location outside of metropolitan areas. It has the image of a provincial city, due to its modest size and development from several villages, which is still visible in the current image of the city.
Especially in the knowledge economy proximity matters for access to and exchange of ideas. But Eindhoven does not possess the advantage of proximity that agglomerations do have for attracting creative sectors (Maldonado, 2010). With this qualification, the problems of the Eindhoven region related to its urban scale and ‘people climate’ has priority to attract knowledge workers to strengthen its position as top technology centre.
Metropoles in transition Rotterdam, Manchester, Dortmund
Star Nicheplayer Eindhoven
non-metropolitan
metropolitan weak progress
The Netherlands wants to make the shift towards a knowledge economy to strenghten its international competitiveness. Therefore the Dutch cabinet has marked the region of Amsterdam (airport), Rotterdam (seaport) and Eindhoven (brainport) as economic growth centres. It wants these centres to become more complete, diverse and bigger in order to keep up with the international competition. They are the engines of the Dutch economy and therefore of national importance (SRE, 2007b). However, according to the 4th Memorandum on Spatial Planning and the ‘Pieken in de Delta’ report in 2004, the Netherlands has lost its position in the international benchmarks. The brainport in the Eindhoven region has also lost its competitive position as top technology centre, which makes their ambition of being among the ‘innovation leaders’ of Europe and worldwide more a dream than reality (Waterstaat, 2008). In order to be back among the top technology centres, the Brainport wants to double its effort in research and design activities by doubling its current amount of knowledge workers (Waterstaat, 2008).
Intellectuals Munster, Groningen Nicheplayers in transition Aachen, Enschede
figure 1.5 typology of cities source: van Winden et al., 2007 11
1.3.2 (INTER)NATIONAL CONTEXT To strenghten its position as a top technology centre, the Brainport wants to double the current amount of knowledge workers (Waterstaat, 2008). In this ‘battle for talent’ of attracting knowledge workers, the Brainport is dealing in the international competition with top technology regions like Helsinki, Dublin and Milan. As will be explained more in the chapter of comparative case studies, these regions are bigger in size and have the advantages of an agglomeration like a high concentration of employment and the proximity of many amenties. This is a crucial problem for the Brainport since people, and especially the knowledge workers, prefer living in the city with a high variety and amount of aminities (Marlet, 2009). This is clearly lacking in the Brainport region, which explains the qualification of Eindhoven as a ‘Star Nicheplayer’.
Rotterdam have an clear advantage compared to Eindhoven in attracting knowledge workers. Beside the presence of many amenties, another advantage of an agglomeration like the Randstad is the internal and external connections that have been made and improved over time, like train and air connections. Compared to these metropolitan areas, the Eindhoven region with its Brainport is a relatively new economic centre, which is why these connections have not been made yet and explain its isolated position. This isolated position gives the Brainport region clear disadvantages in terms of mobility. Because even though the surrounding metropolitan areas are well connected with each other, none of them are including the Brainport (SRE, 2007b).
At national level, the Brainport region is dealing with its location ouside of the economic core of the Netherlands, the Randstad. This is an evident problem since people, especially highly educated people, prefer living in urban areas with a high variety and amount of amenties (Marlet, 2009). This makes the cities of Utrecht, The Hague and because of their size especially Amsterdam and
AMSTERDAM AMSTERDAM AMSTERDAM
figure 1.6 Eindhoven in national competition 12
?
EINDHOVEN EINDHOVEN EINDHOVEN
ROTTERDAM ROTTERDAM ROTTERDAM
1.3.3 REGIONAL CONTEXT However the Brainport has a very strong business and economic base to attract knowledge workers, it is facing evident problems related to its spatial appearance. Especially now that the ‘people climate’ of the region instead of the ‘business climate’ of the region has become more important in attracting knowledge workers. Therefore the Brainport region needs to become an attractive environment where the knowledge workers want to work, live and recreate in. Knowledge workers seem to prefer living in areas with a high variety and amount of aminities (Marlet, 2009). Therefore many knowledge workers are attracted to cities and especially cities in or close to an urban agglomeration. But the city of Eindhoven and surrounding region lacks this urban scale prefered by knowledge workers. It does not have the same variety and amount of amenities that metropolitan agglomerations as the Randstad, Ruhr area and the Flemish Diamond have. This makes the Eindhoven region less complementary and explains the difficulties the region has in attracting knowledge workers and why people prefer to work in Eindhoven, but live in Amsterdam or Rotterdam (Marlet, 2009).
Unfortunately, due to the growing demand for expansion areas for living and working, this landscape is about to lose more of its size and quality. If all proposed buildings sites will be complete, the region is growing towards a structure which will affect the current character of the landscape deeply. Instead of having with a green landscape with a big variety of urban typologies, it will become a continuous urban chain (SRE, 2007b). This will take away one of the few elements for the Eindhoven region to be distinct from its competitors.
Due to its scale, density and population, the Eindhoven region is a very different type of region than its competitors. While the lack of a metropolitan centre with its many amenities is seen as an evident problem, it can also be seen as a chance for the Eindhoven region to be distinct from its competitors. Very often the structure of medium sized cities in a green landscape is seen as a major quality for the Eindhoven region in the (inter)national competition (SRE, 2007).
figure 1.7 urban area and planned expansion areas source: SRE, 2007b 13
1.3.4 LOCAL CONTEXT At the scale of the city of Eindhoven, the position of the knowledge centres (university campus, science park) of the Brainport on the edge of the city are a disadvantage, since in the knowledge economy proximity matters for access to and exchange of ideas (Maldonando, 2010b). Besides this isolated location, the inwarded character of the knowledge centres is a clear problem as well. The campuses have their accommodations, such as sports accommodations, Grand Café and cinema on their own terrain. Besides that, infrastructural elements as train tracks and the city’s ring road are dividing the campuses from the city centre. This makes the city centre not be part of their daily urban system and makes the exchange of knowledge stay within these isolated campuses. Instead of that there should be an open exchange of knowledge with the city as platform. But even though there are policies to integrate the campuses and technology clusters more with the city centre, no actions have been yet undertaken. Besides their isolated location and inwarded character, the Brainport knowledge centres are typical business parks in a non inspiring environment. Even though these parks ‘work’ quite well, the demand for more inspiring work environments with an urban character and a mix of functions is growing (SRE, 2007b).
city city
figure 1.8 network of knowledge not corresponding with network of cities 14
Within the city of Eindhoven, the housing market is also dealing with several problems. Even though many investments have been done in attractive housing and work environments and cultural facilities, Eindhoven and its surrounding region still lacks the metropolitan atmosphere that it needs to attract knowledge workers. The current supply of cultural aminities has cityno international allure and is not enough to make the inner city of Eindhoven into a lively area. This is needed to attract (international) knowledge workers and students (Maldonado, 2010b). Besides cultural amenities, new living and working environments prefered by knowledge workers, high-skilled foreign workers and students are needed as well. But the current housing stock and production is not corresponding with that type and amount of demand (Waterstaat, 2008).
3% X%
city total housing stock in city centre
annual housing production
housing prefered by knowledge workers
housing demand
figure 1.9 housing production not corresponding with actual demand source: Maldonado, 2010b)
Rot
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1.4.1 MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION What spatial strategy can stimulate and facilitate the development of the Brainport Eindhoven towards a competitive knowledge cluster? 1.4.2 SUB-RESEARCH QUESTIONS What cluster strategy can strengthen the Brainport as a competitive knowledge centre? What socio-spatial elements are on what scale level crucial to attract human capital for the Brainport? What are the existing plans for addressing the current problems and future challenges for the Brainport and its surrounding region?
15
1.5 AIM
The overall aim of the project is to develop a strategical programmatic and spatial interpretation for the Brainport region for attracting knowledge workers to become a competitive knowledge region. But besides the knowledge related challenges, the ‘general’ challenges for the Brainport region will be touched as well. These will be facilitated in line with the requirements in the knowledge economy. And it has to be fully integrated with the coming challenges for housing production, landscape development and mobility of the city and its region. The first phase of the project will consist of the theoretical framework, which will form the knowledge for many choices further on in the project. A comparative case study will bring up the advantages and disadvantages of the Brainport region compared to its competitors. Policy documents at national, provicial , municipal and institutional will be analyzed to know more about what the existing plans of different actors for the Brainport region are. During the research on the theoretical framework, comparative case studies and policy documents, the Brainport region will be analyzed on the aspects which are relevant within that specific section. This will form the analysis of the Brainport region. In the next phase, the project will get a more spatial translation. This will happen by using the study and design guidelines given by the research on the theoretical framework, comparative case studies and policy documents. A regional strategy will be made, with an expected focus on the BrabantStad network. Variants will be made before working on a final model. Finally, a detailed urban design proposal on one or more project locations will give spatial interpretation. Expected is an knowledge based urban development (KBUD) design of a location within the city of Eindhoven. 16
1.6 METHODOLOGY
?
!
PROJECT DEFINITION
problem statement research questions
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK critic review by comparison competitive cluster crucial scale level human capital elements of attraction
reflection on Brainport
literature review (abstract)
COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES design by research
benchmarking - competitors in high tech sector - nearby located metropolitan areas
reflection on Brainport
EXISTING PLANS
reflection
critic review by analysis national government province of Noord-Brabant municipalities of BrabantStad institutions (Brainport, SRE et al.)
reflection on Brainport
REGIONAL STRATEGY research by design
spatial strategy for Brainport region with internal and external connections
LOCAL DESIGN
research by design urban design for redevelopment area in Eindhoven 17
1.7 PLANNING 1.7.1 EXPECTED PRODUCTS
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
+
CLUSTER
€
€
?
FOCUS AREA
€
HUMAN CAPITAL AMENITIES OF ATTRACTION
GUIDELINES TOWARDS COMPETITIVE KNOWLEDGE REGION ...
... MAKING USE OF THE DISTINCTIVE QUALITIES OF THE BRAINPORT REGION ...
... IN LINE WITH CURRENT AND FUTURE PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES
! COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES
18
Brainport
-
+
EXISTING PLANS
!
!
! different actors with different vision
!
! !
existing and future problems upcoming challenges
... FORMED INTO A REGIONAL STRATEGY ...
P2
... WITH INDICATION OF INTERVENTION AREAS ...
... TRANSLATED IN A SPATIAL DESIGN AT NEIGHBOURHOOD SCALE
P5
19
1.7.2 OVERALL PLANNING
Start
P1
February 6, 2012
P2
April 2, 2012
June, 2012
P3
October, 2012
P4
December, 2012
PROJECT DEFINITION
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES EXISTING PLANS ANALYSIS REGIONAL STRATEGY
LOCAL DESIGN EVALUATION
20
P5
January, 2013
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The introduction chapter of this thesis plan has resulted in four themes, which will be used in the theoretical framework. In the scheme below is the total expected theoretical framework shown. This means that at this moment not all of the mentioned works are already read. Glaeser, E. - Rise of the creative class Marlet, G. - De aantrekkelijke stad van Oort, F. - Innovation and agglomeration economies in the Netherlands
FOCUS AREA
HUMAN CAPITAL
Marlet, G. - Dutch creative class and how it fosters urban employment growth Kotkin, J. - How the Digital Revolution is Reshaping the American Landscape Marlet, G. - De aantrekkelijke stad
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Marlet, G. - De aantrekkelijke stad Marlet, G. - Muziek in de stad
Porter, M. - The competitive advantage of nations van Winden, W. - European cities in the knowledge economy towards a typology Lundvall, B.A. - Innovation system theory Schumpeter, J. - Innovation theory
22
Clark, T. - Urban amenities: lakes, opera and juice bars: do they drive development?
COMPETITIVE CLUSTER COMPOSITION
AMENITIES OF ATTRACTION
van Oort, F. - Residential amenities of knowledge workers and the location of ICT-firms in the Netherlands Glaeser, E. - Consumer city Mathur, V. - Do amenities matter in attracting knowledge workers for regional economic development
2.2 COMPOSITION OF COMPETITIVE CLUSTER
In this paragraph different cluster theories will be explained and compared. The theories of Porter, Schumpeter and Lundval are relevant because their theories are related to clusters, knowledge and innovation. By comparing and criticizing the theories, and meanwhile reflection it on the cluster of the Brainport, a strategy can be developed which will lead towards a more competitive cluster for the Brainport. This can be done for example by making new relations, networks or partnerships with existing or new industries. CLUSTER THEORY OF PORTER To be in front of its competitors, a competitive cluster needs to be: 1 hardly copyable 2 unique 3 superieur to its competitors 4 applicable on multiple situation 5 sustainable Porter distinguishes several types of business clusters based on different kinds of knowledge: High-tech clusters These clusters are high technology-oriented, well adapted to the knowledge economy, and typically have as a core renowned universities and research centers. For example: Silicon Valley in United States
the centuries. They are often industry specific. For example: London as financial center Factor endowment clusters Created because of the comparative advantage they might have linked to their geographical position. For example: wine production clusters in France Low-cost manufacturing clusters These clusters have typically emerged in developing countries within particular industries. Drivers of cluster emergence include availability of low-cost labor, geographical proximity to clients. For example: Eastern Europe for Western European clients Knowledge services clusters Like low-cost manufacturing clusters, these clusters have emerged typically in developing countries. They have been characterized by the availability of lower-cost skills and expertise serving a growing global demand for increasingly commoditized (i.e. standardized, less firm-specific) knowledge services, e.g. software development, engineering support, analytical services. For example: Bangalore, India According to these categories, the Brainport cluster can be marked as a high-tech cluster.
Historic know-how-based clusters These are based on more traditional activities that maintain their advantage in know-how over the years, and for some of them, over 23
Hospers dinstinguishes three factors which determine the innovative capacity of regions 1 Hardware consists of techno-economic factors, the visible elements of the regional economic such as the presence of production factors, labor force, resources, infrastructure. 2 Software social-cultural factors such as network and learning regions. relation between people and the mutual trust. 3 Mindware cognitive-psychological factors, which consists aspect like the regions imago, experiences and prejudices. Innovation system theory of Lundvall yet to come...
Four pillars of the knowledge economy (1) an economic and institutional regime that provides incentives for the efficient use of existing knowledge, the creation of knowledge and entrepreneurship; (2) an educated and skilled population that can create and use knowledge; (3) a dynamic information infrastructure that can facilitate the effective communication, dissemination and processing of information; (4) a system of research centres, universities, think-tanks, consultants, firms and other organisations that can tap into the growing stock of global knowledge, assimilate and adapt it to local needs and create new local knowledge. Stars Amsterdam, Munich, Helsinki, Stockholm, Dublin Pearls Leuven, Leiden
Metropoles in transition Rotterdam, Manchester, Dortmund
Star Nicheplayer Eindhoven
non-metropolitan
metropolitan
figure 2.1 typology of cities source: van Winden et al., 2007 24
strong progress
According to Schumpeter, the only way to retain economic regional growth is to keep focussing on innovation. By stimulating innovation in a region, people can compete with othe regions, which stimulate economic growth.
Towards a typology Van Winden, 2007
weak progress
Innovation theory of Schumpeter
Intellectuals Munster, Groningen Nicheplayers in transition Aachen, Enschede
not present
present
figure 2.2 framework of analysis source: van Winden et al., 2007
25
2.3 HUMAN CAPITAL
HIGH EDUCATED PEOPLE The global shift from a manufacturing towards a knowledge economy makes high educated people a greater value (Glaeser, 2001). In this new economy Glaeser states that the amount of highly educated people is positive related with the growth of employment in the business and financial services. Highly educated people appear to be more productive, spend more capital on local services and are more likely to start up their own business. They can also adjust themself better to new economic circumstances, ideas and technologies than lower educated people. This explains why many companies prefer to be located in these skilled cities (Glaeser, 2001) and grow faster, which makes the cities itself grow faster as well.
This theory has been accepted by many professionals and is used in many research studies worldwide as an important indicator to measure the human capital in a city.
Figure 2.3 relation between MSA growth (1980-2000) and human capital (1980) source: Glaeser - The skilled city
“A slightly better handle on actual skills, rather than using only an educationbased mesaure - to measure what people do, rather than just what their training may say about them on paper” (Florida, 2004)
26
CREATIVE CLASS Even though the American theorist Richard Florida agrees with Glaeser’s Skilled City theory, Florida states that his creative capital theory is a much better indication of human capital in a city. The main difference between the theories is that Glaeser indicated human capital based on the level of education, while Florida bases his theory on the actual profession people execute (Florida, 2002). According to Florida, people who belong to his creative class prefer to live in urban areas with lots of density and a big variety in supply of culture, restaurants and cafes. This will stimulate the exchange of knowledge and creation of new ideas. Unique about the theory of Florida is that he noticed a new kind of work ethic, which he finds characteristic for the creative class. He states that this new work ethic is a combination of the calvinistic work ethic, hard working as the purpose of life, and a hedonistic lifestyle, with pleasure as porpose. Working is a way of life, working is fun (Florida, 2002). However, many professionals accept Florida’s creative class as a better indication to measure the city’s human capital, there is lots of critique about the standard Florida uses to determine which professions belong to the creative class. In his method, even
professions like a teacher at the primary school belongs to the creative class. This obviously explain why according to Florida, 35 percent of the American population is belongs to the creative class (Florida, 2002). Another critique on the creative capital theory is that Florida claims people of the creative class prefer living in densed urban areas with the proximity of many amenities. Glaeser, however, does not agree and claims that creative people also prefer living in “big suburban lots with easy commutes by automobile and safe streets and good schools and low taxes� (Glaeser, 2005). This indicates a Silicon Valley-like environment. DUTCH CREATIVE CLASS However, many of these human capital studies are based on the American context. More relevant for this project is whether the outcomes of those research are also applicable in Dutch context. In research to the Dutch creative class by Marlet and van Woerkens the employment growth is used as indication for the economic growth of a city instead of the population growth. This suggests that population growth and employment growth are highly correlated (Glaeser and Saiz, 2003). According to this research, the majority of the Dutch creative class is concentrated in the west part of the Netherlands (Marlet and van Woerkens, 2007). This can be explained by the preference of the creative class for a metropolitan atmosphere (Florida, 2002). In the Netherlands there is an equally growth of the creative class in the Randstad as in the rest of the country. Only in the south of the Netherlands the growth of the creative class is higher than in the rest of the country. According to the standard used by Marlet, more than 30% of the labor force belong to the creative class, which is a
figure 2.4 creative class stimulate the employment growth corrected by population growth source: Marlet - De aantrekkelijke stad
Creative core
IT specialists, mathematicians, engineers, architects, researchers, educators
Creative professionals
Leaders, lawyers, physicians, and employees in trade and finance
Bohemians
Artists, designers, journalists, and employees in the entertainment and media industries
Three groups in the creative class source: Florida, R. - The rise of the creative class 27
bit less than in the United States (Marlet, 2009). Calculations shows are positive correlation between the creative class and the employment growth corrected by the population growth (Marlet, 2009). Creative class appears to be a phenomenon especially in the urban areas. The presence of people of the creative class in the city’s surrounding (spatial lag) does not correlate with the employment growth. Explanation for this can be that it is not about the individual knowledge and skills of a singular person, but about the exchange of it with others, which happens mostly in urban areas (Marlet, 2009).
figure 2.5 Creative class stimulates employment growth more than highly educated people source: Marlet - De aantrekkelijke stad
In calculation models with a high explanatory power, the presence of the creative class seems to stimulate the city’s employment growth more than highly educated people (Marlet, 2009). This concludes that in the Dutch context a person of the creative class stimulates the economic effect for the city more than a highly educated person. Both can be the same person, but is not necessary (Marlet, 2009) ICT AND HIGHTECH SECTOR Since the ICT revolution in the 90s, people working in the ICT and high-tech sector were also seen as important contributers for the city’s economy. They were also made part of the creative class because these people stimulated the technologic innovation and and thus the hereby associated growth of employment (Kotkin, 2000). Florida agrees with Kotkin and adds the people working in the ICT and hightech sector to his creative class, because he claims that the economic effects of the creative class are mainly because of the ICT and hightech sector (Florida, 2002). According to Kotkin, people working in the ICT and hightech sector prefer, in contrast with the rest of the creative class, living in modern 28
figure 2.6 ‘Nerds’ do not stimulate employment growth source: Marlet - De aantrekkelijke stad
apartments, easily accessible amenities and lots of parking lots. This seems to be in line with what Glaeser earlier mentioned about the preference of the creative class not only to live in urban areas with lots of density and proximity to many amenties (Glaeser, 2005). Research, however, has shown that not every population group within the creative class causes economic growth. According to emperical research, people working in the ICT sector do not stimulate the local economy (Marlet, 2009). An explanation can be that persons working in the ICT and hightech sector are part of the category mentioned by Kotkin and Glaeser who prefer living in less densed urban areas than the rest of the creative class (Marlet, 2009).
29
2.4 ATTRACTION OF HUMAN CAPITAL
This paragraph consists of a research to what spatial elements can attract knowledge workers or human capital. This section will be largely supported by the literature review (paragraph X.X)
30
figure 2.7 typologies of cities in the knowledge economy source: van Winden, 2007 31
2.5 FOCUS AREA
Glaeser introduces the amenity index as a way to measure the attractiveness of a city: increasement housing prices increasement average income
house 19,3%
When the housing prices grow faster than the average income, it means that people are willing to pay more for an attractive living environment (“half of the pay for a view of the bay�) Research (Marlet, 2009) has shown that regional factors are for the largest part responsible for the housing price differences in the Netherlands. The accessibility to jobs (advantage of agglomeration), proximity to nature and the regional supply of performing arts explain 43 percent of the housing price differences in the Netherlands. Especially the first one is very important. City related factors like the supply of performing arts, culinary and the presence of a historical inner city add more than 13 percent to the total of the attraction between cities. Important for many households is the amount and degree of diverse job offer (Marlet, 2009)
32
region 43,0% neighbourhood 24,3%
city 13,4% figure 2.8 Which scale level explains the housing price differences in the Netherlands? source: Marlet, G. (2009) De aantrekkelijke stad
If the regional scale is indeed determinative in for the ability to attract knowledge workers, then the focus for the Brainport region needs to shift from the city of Eindhoven to a much wider region. Looking to the current city networks and collaborations, the BrabantStad network is a potential focus area for the regional strategy.
Den Bosch Tilburg Breda Eindhoven
Helmond Eindhoven
figure 2.9 Brainport region
33
2.6 LITERATURE REVIEW
Attraction of the knowledge workers research to spatial elements of a city to attract knowledge workers in order to stimulate the local economy
P.D. van Dijk 4023382 P.D.vanDijk@student.tudelft.nl Delft University of Technology, Department of Urbanism March 29, 2012 Abstract - In the global shift from a manufacturing economy towards a knowledge economy, different factors have become more important to stimulate the economic growth. Nowadays people, especially those concerning knowledge-driven activities, are seen as the most important capital (Marlet, 2009). Therefore it is important for the city’s economy to offer an environment which stimulates people to innovate, re-invent and develop themselves so they can stimulate the city’s economy (Van Winden, 2007). And cities are putting lots of effort in becoming an attractive city where these (potential) knowledge workers want to work and live. Multiple theories have been written about what people are seen as the knowledge workers. Therefore different standards have been used to make a qualification, such as based on their level of education (Glaeser, 2001) or the actual profession they execute (Florida, 2002). However, the majority of this research is based on the American context. Important to know is whether these theories are also applicable in the Dutch context (Romein, 2007). Empirical research is a method often used often in literature related to this subject, which will therefore also be used for this paper, to indicate the influence of what knowledge workers on the local economy in the Dutch context.
34
The next questions that will be addressed in this paper is why certain cities are better in attracting knowledge workers than other cities? What makes these people decide to work and/or live in a certain city instead of the other one? To answer this question, empirical research will be used to indicate what spatial elements are correlating with the presence of the knowledge workers. The outcome of the research will determine what knowledge workers need to be attracted in order to stimulate the city’s economy and what spatial elements are crucial in this process. Hereby an analysis will show the relation between the written theories about economic stimulation and whether this is applicable in the Dutch context. Furthermore, the outcome of this paper will be used in the graduation project, which focuses on the clustering of knowledgedriven technology industries concentrated around the city of Eindhoven, in the southeast of the Netherlands. The results of this paper will be used to facilitate the required elements in order to achieve an environment which attracts (potential) knowledge workers to the Eindhoven region. Key words – spatial elements , knowledge workers, city economy, The Netherlands
References FLORIDA, R. 2002. The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. GLAESER, E., KOLKO, J., SAIZ, A. 2001. Consumer City. Journal of Economic Geography, 27-50. MARLET, G. 2009. De aantrekkelijke stad. ROMEIN, A. A. K., D. 2007. The limited potential of the creative cities. VAN WINDEN, W., VAN DEN BERG, L. AND POL, P. 2007. European cities in the knowledge economy: towards a typology. Urban Studies, 44, 525–549.
35
3 COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, the Brainport region will be compared with regions with competitive industries and regions with a high amount and variety of amenities. Elements of attraction as outcome of the theoretical framework
will be used in this chapter as elements where the regions will be measured on and compared with. The results will be shown by representing the benchmarking method in a final framework, where a preview of is shown below.
competitors in high tech industry
policy
economy
amenities
spatial
demography
South/Eastern Ireland, Ireland
38
population size density
spatial organisation accessibility to jobs culture recreation main industries networks ambition of policy documents
Paris, France
Milan, Italy
Rhone Alpes, France
nearby located metropolitan areas Border Midlands, Ireland
Randstad, The Netherlands
Ruhr area, Germany
Flemish Diamond, Belgium
3.2 COMPETITIVE REGIONS
In the Brainport region many industries are related to the middle and high tech industry. The ambition is to focus more on the high tech industry. Therefore comparative case studies will be done on the competitors of the Brainport in the high tech industry.
total
low tech industry
middle tech industry
high tech industry
1
Milan, Italy
Antwerp, Belgium
Paris, France
South/Eastern Ireland, Ireland
2
Paris, France
Parijs, France
Milan, Italy
Paris, France
3
Antwerp, Belgium
Milan, Italy
Dusseldorf, Germany
Milan, Italy
4
Düsseldorf, Germany
Düsseldorf, Germany
Stuttgart, Germany
Rhone Alpes, France
5
Stuttgart, Germany
Arnsberg, Germany
Antwerp, Belgium
Border Midlands, Ireland
6
South/Eastern Ireland, Ireland
Cologne, Germany
Arnsberg, Germany
Helsinki, Finland
7
Arnsberg, Germany
East Flanders, Belgium
Cologne, Belgium
Düsseldorf, Germany
8
Cologne, Germany
Stuttgart, Germany
Rhone Alpes, France
Stuttgart, Germany
9
Rhone Alpes, France
West Flanders, Belgium
Oberbayern, Germany
Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
10
Oberbayern, Germany
Rhone Alpes, France
Catalonia, Spain
Inner London, United Kingdom
figure 3.1 competitors of the Brainport in the technology sector source: PBL - De concurrentiepositie van Nederlandse regio’s, 2011
One of the preliminary findings is that the competitors in the high tech industry are more far located than the low and middle tech industry competitors. This can mean a opportunity for the Brainport in the high tech industry and room for networks with other sectors supporting their high tech ambition.
BORDER MIDLANDS, IRELAND
SOUTH/EASTERN IRELAND
PARIS, FRANCE
RHONE ALPES, FRANCE
MILAN, ITALY
figure 3.2 competitors of the Brainport in the high tech industry source: PBL - De concurrentiepositie van Nederlandse regio’s, 2011 39
3.3 NEARBY LOCATED METROPOLITAN AREAS
figure 3.3 nearby located metropolitan areas
In this part of the comparative case study, the Brainport region will be compared with nearby located metropolitan areas of the Randstad, Ruhr area and the Flemish Diamond. This is needed because in the current situation, people who work in Eindhoven, very often live in one of the surrounding metropolitan areas. Especially the Randstad is preffered due to acceptable travelling time (Marlet, 2009). Expected results will be the unique spatial qualities which the Brainport region has compared to the nearby located metropolitan areas, or which spatial qualities the region is lacking. Unique qualities need to be maintained or even expanded and for missing qualities need to be investigated wheter it is feasible and desirable for the Brainport region. Amsterdam
RANDSTAD Utrecht
The Hague
Rotterdam
Duisburg Antwerpen
40
Eindhoven Dusseldorf
Mechelen
Gent
FLEMISH DIAMOND Brussels
Leuven
Dortmund
Cologne
RUHR AREA
4 EXISTING PLANS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The existing plans of different administrative layers will be analyzed and criticized. This is needed to know what the purposes and consequenses for the Brainport region are of every involved actor. This chapter ensures that this project is corresponding with the existing and future context of the Brainport region. In the next page the planned readings are shown. One of the preliminary finding is that the SRE (Samenwerkingsverband Regio Eindhoven) seems to want the city of Eindhoven to fully benefit from the expected growth of the Brainport. This means that the only the city have the capacity to facilitate this growth, which means new working and living environments. However, this is quite surprising, due its modest size and the ambition to protect the outer areas from expansion areas. A better solution can be to facilitatie the growth of the Brainport more in the BrabantStad network instead of only concentrated in Eindhoven.
42
4.2 PLANNED READINGS
Eindhoven Studentenstad Regionaal Structuurplan regio Eindhoven Provinciaal uitwerkingsplan Zuidoost-Brabant Brainport 2020
Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Milieu
TU/e
SRE
ORGANISATIONS
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
Pieken in de Delta 4th Memorandum on Spatial Planning
Brainport
5th Memorandum on Spatial Planning
EXISTING PLANS
Staat van de stad 2020
MUNICIPALITY OF EINDHOVEN
PROVINCE OF NORTH BRABANT
Vision on center area
vision Southeast Brabant Contouren van de Strategische Agenda BrabantStad 2012-2020
BRABANTSTAD
Verkenning MIRT Zuidoostvleugel BrabantStad Bestuursakkoord ‘Tien voor Brabant’ Meerjarenprogramma Brabantstad 2008-2012
43
5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
REFERENCES AFFAIRS, U. 2005. Eindhoven SUPERvillage. BAUM, S., YIGITCANLAR, T., O’CONNOR, K. 2008. Knowledge-based urban development: planning and applications in the information era. BONTJE, M. A. M., S. 2009. Creative industries, creative class and competitiveness: Expert opinions critically appraised. Geoforum, 40, 843–852. BRAINPORT, S. 2008. Brainport en Route. CAMPBELL, T. 2009. Learning cities: Knowledge, capacity and competitiveness. Habitat International, 33, 195-201. DEVELOPMENT, B. 2011. Brainport 2020. EINDHOVEN, G. 2010. Staat van de stad 2020. EINDHOVEN, S. R. 2009. Ruimtelijk Programma Brainport. FERNÁNDEZ-MALDONADO, A. M. 2010a. Combining design and high-tech in knowledge cities: the case of Eindhoven. 20. FERNÁNDEZ-MALDONADO, A. M. A. R., A. 2010b. The role of organisational capacity and knowledge-based development: the reinvention of Eindhoven. Int. J. Knowledge-Based Development, 1, 79-96. FLORIDA, R. 2002. The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. GLAESER, E. 2011. Triumph of the city. GLAESER, E., KOLKO, J., SAIZ, A. 2001. Consumer City. Journal of Economic Geography, 2750. GLAESER, E. A. S., A. 2003. The Rise of the Skilled City. HOEGER, K. C., K. 2007. Campus and the City. LANDRY, C. 2000. The Creative City. LEEFOMGEVING, P. V. D. 2011. De concurrentiepositie van Nederlandse regio’s. MARLET, G. 2007a. Dutch creative class and how it fosters urban employment growth. MARLET, G. 2009. De aantrekkelijke stad. MARLET, G. 2010. Atlas voor gemeenten 2010. MARLET, G. A. V. W., C. 2007b. Dutch creative class and how it fosters urban employment growth. ROMEIN, A. A. K., D. 2007. The limited potential of the creative cities. 46
S+RO 2011. Brainport Eindhoven. 6. SRE 2007a. De geniale brainportlocatie. SRE 2007b. Het geniale landschap. SRE 2010. Het geniale wonen. STOUTEN, P. 2010. Changing contexts in urban regeneration. TU/E 2009. Eindhoven Studentenstad. VAN OORT, F. G. 2002. Agglomeration, economic growth and innovation. Spatial analysis of growth R&D externalities in the Netherlands. VAN WINDEN, W., VAN DEN BERG, L. AND POL, P. 2007. European cities in the knowledge economy: towards a typology. Urban Studies, 44, 525–549. WALL, R. 2011. Urban geopolitics. Atlantis, 3, 4-6. WATERSTAAT, M. V. V. E. 2008. MIRT Verkenning Zuidoostvleugel BrabantStad. ZAKEN, M. V. E. 2004. Pieken in de Delta. INTERVIEWS ROCCO, R. 2012. personal communication with professor of Spatial Planning and Strategy of Urbanism at University of Technology Delft. February 27 ROMEIN, A. 2012. personal communication with professor of Urban and Regional Development of OTB Research Institute at University of Technology Delft. February 27 FERNà NDEZ MALDONADO, A.M. 2011. personal communication with professor of Spatial Planning and Strategy of Urbanism at University of Technology Delft. December 21 WESEMAEL, P.J.V. 2012. personal communication with professor of Urbanism and Urban Architecture at University of Technology Eindhoven. April 24. MEULDER, B.E.J.D. 2012. personal communication with professor of Urbanism and Urban Architecture at University of Technology Eindhoven. to be planned VIDEO VPRO. 2011. Tegenlicht - Nederland buiten kennis. November 7
47