From Ambition to Innovation

152 Pages·2017·11.9 MB·English

by  Tuur .

From Ambition to Innovation

A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts

Tuur Pluijmen
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts

- This page is intentionally left blank -
II
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts

Research Institution
Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology
Master Management in the Built Environment
Chair of Urban Development Management

Mentors
1st mentor Dr. W.J. Verheul – Research fellow and lecturer at Delft University of Technology
2nd mentor Dr. F.T.J. Curvelo Magdaniel – Postdoctoral researcher at Delft University of Technology
External examiner Dr. Ir. W.J. Quist – Lecturer at Delft University of Technology

Internship
Municipality of The Hague
Mentor: Dr. P. Pol

Contact information
A. Pluijmen
[email protected]

III
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Preface

The research in front of you is the result of a strong interest in the development of cities, especially in
the context of the contemporary dynamics of global economics. Early on in my time as a student, I felt
the need to put things in the perspective of a comprehensible context. Therefore, after completing my
bachelor’s degree in urbanism at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, I decided to explore
this context more thoroughly by pursuing a master’s degree in Management in the Built Environment
at the Delft University of Technology. The knowledge gained during this period has given me a
significantly deeper understanding of the actors and resources in play in the dynamic world that is the
built environment. What is more, it has confirmed my suspicion that urban planning is a complex
process with a large variety of actor types and policy strategies.
Conducting research for this master thesis turned out to be, as expected, challenging. Particularly the
quest of finding a focal point proved troublesome in the early stages of the research. I would like to
express my gratitude to my mentors, Wouter Jan Verheul and Flavia Curvelo Magdaniel, who have
been there to guide me along the way. Even though my research process had its ups and downs and
both had their own busy schedules, they would always find the time and words to get me back on track
and uncover the right way to move forward.
My time at the municipality of The Hague has been a valuable experience and has greatly improved
my knowledge of the practice of innovation districts. I would like to thank my co-workers and in
particular Peter Pol, who involved me in the entire process of the development of the district.
I would also like to thank all the interviewees that have participated in this research. The knowledge
gained from these interviews have helped me construct a perception of the situation at hand that I
would otherwise have not been able to attain.
Another word of gratitude goes out to the respondents of the questionnaire. In this day and age, where
online surveys are widely apparent, it is simple to discard them. Therefore, I would like to thank the
respondents for not ignoring my contact attempts and taking the time to contribute to this research.
Finally, a special thanks goes out to my friends and family. Without their unconditional support and
advice I would not have been able to complete this thesis.
I hope you will enjoy reading my thesis as much as I have enjoyed my time developing it. The complex
world of the development of cities is a realm that has yet to seize to intrigue me and I hope this report
will pass some of this curiosity onto its reader.

Tuur Pluijmen

Amsterdam, 2017
IV
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts

Management
Summary

V
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Abstract

Context: The city of The Hague is located in The Netherlands, in the province of Zuid-Holland and with
nearly 500,000 inhabitants it is the third largest city of the country. The increasing dynamics of
globalization have also made its way to The Hague, where urban competitiveness is increasingly
considered to be an important aspect for the city’s future. In an attempt to reach high levels of urban
competitiveness, the municipality of The Hague has recently announced its plans for the development
of an innovation district.

Objective: The objective of this research is to intensively analyse a specific case (the innovation district
in The Hague) and, in doing so, add to the scientific literature concerning innovation districts. By
performing an empirical analysis about the demands of different groups in an innovation district and
the ambitions and policies on the steering side, this research attempts to clarify what the physical
needs are of specific groups of actors within the context of the innovation district in The Hague. What
is more, it attempts to draw conclusions regarding the relationship between physical interventions and
the development of innovation districts.

Methods: This thesis is divided into five main components: an introduction, a theoretical framework,
a case analysis, the conclusions and recommendations and a reflection. The methods that have been
used in this research are a literature review, interviews and a questionnaire. The quantitative data of
the questionnaire has been statistically analysed by calculating the median and the inter-quartile range
of each variable. What is more, frequency tables have been developed to create a more detailed image
of the results of each variable. Pearson’s r and Pearson’s chi-square method have finally been used to
discover significant differences and correlations.

Results: The results of the case study indicate several aspects that have high levels of importance to
specific groups within the district, while others show lower levels of importance. The results of the
levels of satisfaction of the different aspects within the district also show varying results for different
sub-areas. The analysis of the 22@ district in Barcelona has also revealed a number of physical
interventions related to the development of the district.

Conclusion: This research has resulted in a number of conclusions relating to the development of
innovation districts. First, municipal leadership appears to be key in the early stages of a top-down
initiated innovation district. Then, it has become apparent that the needs of the users of innovation
districts go beyond sheer accessibility. Walkability, bike-ability and the presence of hospitality services
are nearly equally important. However, user groups also have specific needs that other groups do not
have. Therefore, when the vision is to create a mixed environment, it is important to consider these
needs, otherwise innovation districts run the risk of having dispersed user groups. Another conclusion
is that physical proximity does not guarantee learning (there is a need for common ground) and that
physical conditions alone are not sufficient for innovation to take place. Finally, the cases studied in
this research have shown that the brand ‘innovation district’ is being used by cities as a model to strive
for, rather than a label that corresponds with the physical and economic situation at hand.

Keywords: Innovation, Innovation Districts, Urban Planning, Case Study, The Hague

VI
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Introduction

The increasing dynamics of globalization have caused for a growing importance of urban
competitiveness. In an attempt to reach high levels of competitive advantage, cities are increasingly
focusing on innovation as a means of achieving distinctiveness. In doing so, municipalities set up
‘innovation districts’ where innovation is claimed to be highly stimulated by different factors. One of
these factors is the built environment. This research specifically focuses on the role of the built
environment in these districts and therefore analyses the physical interventions by municipalities that
are made in order to stimulate the process of innovation by firms, universities and institutions.

Problem Statement
A recent trend among Dutch municipalities (along with other parts of the world) has been to create
districts where innovation is stimulated and knowledge is being shared in an urban context (Financieel
Dagblad, 2016b). These so-called ‘Innovation Districts’ attempt to mimic the success of Silicon Valley,
California, which is home to many highly innovative high-tech firms. However, although these new
districts look at Silicon Valley as an example, they differ in setting. Katz and Wagner (2014) have
described this ‘rise of innovation districts’ as the process of moving innovation from the secluded
science park outside of the city to highly urban settings where innovation is openly shared. The idea is
that people are no longer secretly working on new solutions, but instead are discussing their newest
ideas in trendy coffee bars that are located in a buzzing urban context. Large firms, universities and
start-ups come together in such a district to share knowledge and work on solutions for the future. At
least, that seems to be the idea. It appears that not everyone agrees with the benefits of creating an
innovation district. Recently, Boschma expressed his discontent with the growing number of such
‘clubs’ of innovation. Innovation districts, as Boschma argues, are good for creating a positive image,
but the actual results are minimal (Financieel Dagblad, 2016a). Furthermore, Boschma (2005) has
argued that ‘simple’ co-location is neither a prerequisite nor a sufficient condition for collaboration.
Van Oort and Bosma (2013) further acknowledge the role of entrepreneurship as an important source
of innovation. However, it seems that providing (affordable) space for entrepreneurship (e.g. start-ups
or spin-offs) in an area with soaring rental prices requires a challenging balancing process.

These issues raise questions as to what creating an innovation district actually means. Are districts just
given a new name to increase the image of the area? Or are there physical interventions being done
that stimulate the process of innovation? And moreover, what is it that companies need from their
built environment in order to be able to innovate? This research attempts to address this issue by
looking deeper into the physical interventions in innovation districts as well as the needs of the actors
responsible for innovation in relation to their built environment.

VII
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Research questions
The main research question of this research is:

“What kind of physical interventions are needed in innovation districts to stimulate the process of
innovation of its users?”

In order to be able to answer this question, the following sub-questions have been formulated:

1. Why is urban competitiveness increasingly important for cities?
2. How does innovation take place in firms and institutions and why is this important for cities?
3. What is the concept of an innovation district?
4. How can innovation be stimulated through municipal policy?
5. What is already known about the general physical characteristics of innovation districts?
- Literature review

6. To what extent are the concepts in sub-questions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 aligned with the ambitions of the
municipality where the case is located in?
– Review of policy documents, semi-structured interviews
7. What types of innovative entities is the innovation district targeted at?
– Review of policy documents, semi-structured interviews
8. What are the goals and policies of actors operating on the steering side regarding the district?
– Review of policy documents, semi-structured interviews
9. How do innovative entities, located in the innovation district, rate their current built environment
and the current image in relation to their goals and needs?
– Structured interviews
10. To what extent are the goals and policies of the actors operating on the steering side in line with
the demand of innovative entities operating in the innovation district?
– Comparison of empirical results

The different sub-questions have been answered in different chapters. A literature review has been
performed to answer questions 1 to 5, while questions 6 to 10 have been answered by performing an
empirical analysis. The empirical analysis includes interviews with different actors, a survey amongst
users of the district and a review of policy documents.

VIII
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Theoretical Framework

Research Design and Methodology
Figure I displays the research design of this thesis, which is divided into five parts. The first part serves
as an introduction. Here, the research will be introduced by discussing the motivation, the relevance
and the problem statement of this research. The introduction part concludes with an overview of the
main research question and its accompanying sub-questions. In the second part, the theoretical
framework will be defined which serves as the main structure of this research. Here, the results of the
literature review are discussed and the research design and methodology are elaborated on. The third
part comprises the empirical analysis of the research. Here, the 22@ case in Barcelona and the Central
Innovation District in The Hague are analysed. In part four, the conclusions of this research will be
presented as well as implications for policy and practice. Finally, in part five, the reflection and
discussion of this research are disclosed.

Figure I. Research design

IX
From ambition to innovation – A closer look at the physical characteristics of innovation districts
Figure II provides the conceptual model for this research. This research specifically focuses on the built
environment as a means to stimulate innovation in innovation districts. By stimulating innovation, this
could ultimately lead to a competitive advantage for municipalities. On the ‘steer’ side, steering actors
have their own policies that have an effect on the built environment. Such actors include municipalities,
but could also include developers or universities. These actors are the ones that have the power to
steer and change the built environment. On the ‘demand’ side, innovative entities are the ones that
use the built environment. Such entities include large firms or research institutions, but could also
include start-ups or spin-offs. Depending on the case, the types of entities that are involved in creating
innovation can vary. The ‘demand’ side makes use of the ‘supply’ (the built environment) as the
location where they operate their business. This research will specifically focus on how the ‘demand’
side rates the built environment in relation to their needs and goals, and how the ‘steer side’ is shaping
the built environment in a way that they feel will stimulate innovation. Ultimately this will lead to a
comparison as to whether the goals and corresponding actions of the steering actors are in line with
the needs and goals of the ‘demand’ side.

Figure II. Conceptual Model

For this research, a single case study has been chosen, as described by Bryman (2012). The case has
been analysed by performing interviews with the steering side of the built environment and
simultaneously spreading a questionnaire amongst the demand side in the district. Moreover, a
complementary case has been chosen (22@ Barcelona) to be able to draw lessons from which can
potentially be used for the development of the innovation district in The Hague.

X