Zoekresultaten

Urban Innovation Systems

Introduction: There are good reasons to study urban innovation from a systemic perspective. A key finding in innovation research is that organizations rarely innovate in isolation, but in interaction with clients, competitors, suppliers, and other organizations. A system perspective is useful in understanding and analyzing these interactions. Cities and urban regions are increasingly recognized as key milieus in which these interactions occur. The urban innovation system approach conceptualizes the city or urban region as a context in which innovations emerge from complex interactions between urban actors—firms, citizens, governments, knowledge institutes— in a particular institutional setting. The systemic view of innovation departs from traditional linear models that depict innovation as a staged process that starts with (basic) scientific research and ends with commercialization by companies. Innovation processes are much more complex and diverse, influenced by multiple actors that interact in networks with feedback loops, and involving many types of knowledge beyond scientific knowledge. Urban innovation systems are nested in innovation systems on other spatial levels—regional, national, international. Studies on urban innovation systems seek to explain how innovations emerge in an urban context, why urban regions differ in their innovative performance, and also address questions on the governance and management of such systems. Studies in this field draw from a variety of disciplines including economic geography, urban and regional economics, political sciences, innovation studies, social sciences, and urban planning.

Systems Thinking, Mapping and Change in Food and Agriculture

Societal actors across scales and geographies increasingly demand visual applications of systems thinking – the process of understanding and changing the reality of a system by considering its whole set of interdependencies – to address complex problems affecting food and agriculture. Yet, despite the wide offer of systems mapping tools, there is still little guidance for managers, policy-makers, civil society and changemakers in food and agriculture on how to choose, combine and use these tools on the basis of a sufficiently deep understanding of socio-ecological systems. Unfortunately, actors seeking to address complex problems with inadequate understandings of systems often have limited influence on the socio-ecological systems they inhabit, and sometimes even generate unintended negative consequences. Hence, we first review, discuss and exemplify seven key features of systems that should be – but rarely have been – incorporated in strategic decisions in the agri-food sector: interdependency, level-multiplicity, dynamism, path dependency, self-organization, non-linearity and complex causality. Second, on the basis of these features, we propose a collective process to systems mapping that grounds on the notion that the configuration of problems (i.e., how multiple issues entangle with each other) and the configuration of actors (i.e., how multiple actors relate to each other and share resources) represent two sides of the same coin. Third, we provide implications for societal actors - including decision-makers, trainers and facilitators - using systems mapping to trigger or accelerate systems change in five purposive ways: targeting multiple goals; generating ripple effects; mitigating unintended consequences; tackling systemic constraints, and collaborating with unconventional partners.

From Spatial Data to Synchronised Actions: The Network-centric Organisation of Spatial Decision Support for Risk and Emergency Management. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 1–22

A considerable amount of the required information in risk and emergency management is geographical, but this information does not always reach the right actors at the right time, so how can geographical information be organised in such a way that it supports risk and emergency management more effectively? The answer requires a conceptualisation of risk and emergency management practices resulting in the network-centric concept, which implies that those involved in risk and emergency management are connected and that they have the capability to share and access information. The concept was made operational through the development of an information system and the exchange of geographical information within the system was facilitated by the use of peer-to-peer networking in combination with a client server network. On the application level, the information was presented in both map and text forms to support the exchange of information between actors. This way of organising geographical information and technology leads to improved information and communication, better situational awareness and faster decisionmaking.

A Roadmap for the Design of a Public-participation Geographic-Information System to Support Urban Ageing

Geospatial technologies have the potential to transform the lives of older adults by providing them with necessary tools to navigate their local communities, access services, connect with others, and access valuable information. However, the usability and accessibility of such technologies often fall short of the needs of older adults. Many existing geospatial tools are not designed with the needs and preferences of older adults in mind; this can lead to usability challenges and limit their usage. This paper explores a participatory approach in developing an inclusive geodata-collection tool that is specifically tailored to older users’ needs. The paper also highlights the importance of incorporating user-centered design principles, participatory design methods, and accessibility guidelines throughout the entire geodata-tool-development process. It also emphasizes the need for ongoing user engagement and feedback in order to ensure that the tool remains relevant and usable in the evolving digital landscape. This participatory approach has resulted in a tool that is easy to use and accessible for older adults; it is available in various languages, thus ensuring that the elderly can actively participate in the prototype’s creation and contribute to the collection of the geospatial information that reflects their lived experiences and needs.

Geographical dimensions of risk management

Land use or land-use changes can trigger or generate hazards and affect the potential consequences of these hazards. Deforestation can trigger land slides, for example, and land reclamation or levee construction can increase flood hazards downstream. New dwellings in or near forests can trigger wildfires, especially if home owners fail to prioritise fire safety measures. In addition, if land is used for industrial activities, new technological hazards, such as the risks resulting from the storage or production of hazardous materials, can be introduced into the environment. Moreover, land-use changes can increase damage potential. Residential developments in hazard-prone areas, such as areas prone to flooding or earthquakes, can negatively affect the number of properties and people exposed to hazards. Consequently, spatial planning activities that are concerned with influencing land use by locating physical structures and activities such as agriculture, recreation or industry within a territory (Couclelis, 2005; Tewdwr-Jones, 2001) can result in new or increased safety risks in a particular area.

Quantifying road network accessibility to tourist regions with geographical information systems