Paper presented at EURAM 2019: Exploring the Future of Management, Lisbon. Solution ecosystems can help to solve or minimize societal problems. A wide range of different actors are involved in co-creating a solution. Together, they form a ‘solution ecosystem’. They co-create different forms of value for different stakeholder groups. They create value at the ecosystem level, for different stakeholder groups. Moreover, they create system-resources. Value capture and distribution among ecosystem actors can therefore be challenging. Moreover, little is known on the role of ecosystem orchestration and goal-alignment of ecosystem actors. In this paper, we shed light on these aspects with a case study of an emerging solution ecosystem that develops a circular urban area in the Netherlands, with the aim of tackling a number of societal problems. We explore the challenges this solution ecosystem faces with regards to value creation, value capture and distribution, ecosystem orchestration and goal alignment. We conclude with avenues for future research on solution ecosystems that enable sustainability transitions. Submission to track ST13_08 - The inner life of business ecosystems, http://www.euramonline.org/annual-conference-2019.html
DOCUMENT
from the article: Abstract Based on a review of recent literature, this paper addresses the question of how urban planners can steer urban environmental quality, given the fact that it is multidimensional in character, is assessed largely in subjective terms and varies across time. The paper explores three questions that are at the core of planning and designing cities: ‘quality of what?’, ‘quality for whom?’ and ‘quality at what time?’ and illustrates the dilemmas that urban planners face in answering these questions. The three questions provide a novel framework that offers urban planners perspectives for action in finding their way out of the dilemmas identified. Rather than further detailing the exact nature of urban quality, these perspectives call for an approach to urban planning that is integrated, participative and adaptive. ; ; sustainable urban development; trade-offs; quality dimensions
DOCUMENT
This article will explore the Cradle to Cradle (C2C) framework for urban environments, focusing on the perception, utilization and maintenance of parks. The case study explores the perception of urban flora and the value of greenery in everyday life in The Netherlands. The reflection section addresses the difference between conventional and C2C approaches to greenery on the one hand and current green management policies and public opinion on the other hand. The author reflects on how urban planning policies can be better geared towards public awareness of C2C, and towards the implementation of ecologically benign management of urban flora. It is proposed that an implementation of urban green management consistent with C2C is feasible and desirable. It is feasible given the favorable shifts in public opinion in relation to urban sustainability, and it is desirable due to the basic cost-benefit analysis and increased need for urban sustainability. This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Urban Ecosystems. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0468-2 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
This short communication contains a reflection on local entrepreneurial ecosystems and how to boost them, in the context of smart specialisation strategies of cities and regions. It is based on a literature study and inputs from ten member cities of the InFocus project (sponsored by the EU's URBACT programme), that exchange and develop knowledge about the development of smart specialisation strategies on the urban level. In September 2017, the network held a meeting in Turin, dedicated to the topic of promoting entrepreneurship ecosystems. The paper discusses several specific aspects of policies regarding entrepreneurship: the relation with smart specialisation approach, start-up promotion policies, fostering a culture of entrepreneurship, and the different development stages in entrepreneurship: Starting, scaling, and growing, with examples from cities in the InFocus network. Among other things, it concludes that a stronger alignment between the urban and regional policy levels is required to link the urban-focused start-up ecosystems to the regional industrial tissue.
MULTIFILE
This article analyses four of the most prominent city discourses and introduces the lens of urban vitalism as an overarching interdisciplinary concept of cities as places of transformation and change. We demonstrate the value of using urban vitalism as a lens to conceptualize and critically discuss different notions on smart, inclusive, resilient and sustainable just cities. Urban vitalism offers a process-based lens which enables us to understand cities as places of transformation and change, with people and other living beings at its core. The aim of the article is to explore how the lens of vitalism can help us understand and connect ongoing interdisciplinary academic debates about urban development and vice versa, and how these ongoing debates inform our understanding of urban vitalism.
DOCUMENT
From the article : "Based on a review of recent literature, this paper addresses the question of how urban planners can steer urban environmental quality, given the fact that it ismultidimensional in character, is assessed largely in subjective terms and varies across time. A novel perspective of urban environmental quality is proposed, simultaneously exploring three questions that are at the core of planning and designing cities: ‘quality of what?’, ‘quality for whom?’ and ‘quality at what time?’. The dilemmas that urban planners face in answering these questions are illustrated using secondary material. This approach provides perspectives for action. Rather than further detailing the exact nature of urban quality, it calls for sustainable urban environmental quality planning that is integrated, participative and adaptive" ( wileyonlinelibrary.com ) DOI: 10.1002/eet.1759 - Preprint available for free download.
DOCUMENT
The world is rapidly transforming. Economic, ecological and technological developments transcend existing boundaries and challenge the way we innovate. The challenge we face is to reinvent innovation as well, changing the way organisations and industries innovate and cooperate. Only with a new approach we can design a better future: an approach where stakeholders from government, organisations, companies and users participate in new ways of collaboration; an approach where solutions are realised that makes our society future-proof. Participatory innovation means that the innovation team changes: expanding beyond the boundaries of the own organisation. For organisations and companies, this is a huge step. Every partner must be willing to think and act beyond their own borders and participate in a joint effort. Participative innovation is a new way of working, where new challenges are encountered. In the field of urban lighting, this transformation is strongly felt. This paper will further explore the challenge and describe a rich case study where participative innovation is used to rethink, redesign and realise the solutions to transform urban lighting from functional lighting to improving social quality.
DOCUMENT
Floating urbanization is a promising solution to reduce the vulnerability of cities against climate change, population growth or land scarcity. Although this type of construction introduces changes to aquatic systems, there is a lack of research studies addressing potential impacts. Water quality data collected under/near floating structures were compared with the corresponding parameters measured at the same depth at open water locations by (i) performing scans with underwater drones equipped with in situ sensors and video cameras and (ii) fixing two sets of continuous measuring in situ sensors for a period of several days/months at both positions. A total of 18 locations with different types of floating structures were considered in this study. Results show small differences in the measured parameters, such as lower dissolved oxygen concentrations or higher temperature measured underneath the floating structures. The magnitudes of these differences seem to be linked with the characteristics and type of water system. Given the wide variety and types of water bodies considered in this study, results suggest that water quality is not critically affected by the presence of the floating houses. Underwater images of biofouling and filter feeders illustrate the lively ecosystems that can emerge shortly after the construction of floating buildings.
DOCUMENT
The emergence of organic planning practices in the Netherlands introduces new, non-conventional, local actors initiating bottom-up urban developments. Dissatisfied with conventional practices and using opportunities during the 2008 financial crisis, these actors aim to create social value, thus challenging prevailing institutions. Intrigued by such actors becoming more present and influential in urban planning and development processes, we aim to identify who they are. We use social entrepreneurship and niche formation theories to analyse and identify three types of social entrepreneurs. The first are early pioneers, adopting roles of a developer and end-user, but lacking position and power to realize goals. Secondly, by acting as boundary spanners and niche entrepreneurs, they evolve towards consolidated third sector organizations in the position to realize developments. A third type are intermediate agents facilitating developments as boundary spanners and policy entrepreneurs, without pursuing urban development themselves but aiming at realizing broader policy goals. Our general typology provides a rich picture of actors involved in bottom-up urban developments by applying theories from domains of innovation management and business transition management to urban planning and development studies. It shows that the social entrepreneurs in bottom-up urban development can be considered the result of social innovation, but this social innovation is set within a neoliberal context, and in many cases passively or actively conditioned by states and markets.
MULTIFILE
In a matter of weeks last year, discussions regarding tourism in cities changed from how to deal with overtourism to how to deal with ‘no tourism’. Shortly thereafter, a great number of posts on LinkedIn, websites, and blogs highlighted how the tourism crisis that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic could help reinvent tourism, into something more equal, inclusive, and sustainable. And so, online – at leastin mypersonalonlinebubble – there seemedtobe a real momentum for proper, transformative changes in (urban) tourism. How can we rebuild urban tourism in a sustainable and resilient way?
DOCUMENT
