Metropolitan regions and cities are often coined as the ‘motors of the economy'. The performance of national economies – and even the EU in general – is increasingly dependent on the cumulative performance of metropolitan regions and/or cities. All around the world, cities are increasingly in competition with one another; interconnected in a network of criss-cross relations between firms and institutions. With respect to urban competitiveness, numerous activities of benchmarking and ‘best practises' between cities exist. Many policies are based upon these evaluations leading to cherry-picking and the hasty copying of experiences from one specific urban context to another. A deeper understanding of the problems and structural mechanisms behind urban competitiveness is often lacking. This paper aims to analyse the competitiveness of European metropolitan regions via a comparative case study research, defining the main threats and challenges concerning the economic vitality of urban areas. It will be driven by the input of regions and cities with the aim to identify ‘best' and ‘bad' practices across Europe. In other words, we will set out the contours of a research framework on economic competitiveness that aims to bridge the gap between academic research and urban practices by means of a policy-driven research agenda. The competitiveness of five European regions will be discussed in more detail: Munich, Warsaw, Madrid, Bucharest and Stockholm. Based on roundtable discussions with stakeholders in these cities, the missing blanks in urban research will be defined. This paper will go beyond the ranking lists based solely on economic productivity figures by discussing cities' competitiveness from an integral perspective. The underlying determinants of competitiveness (e.g. local economic sectoral structure, labour market) will be analysed to create a better understanding of the economic performance of cities. It is the aim of this study to make academic research on urban competitiveness applicable for urban practice by listing knowledge and research questions that are of interest for both researchers as well as urban practitioners.
This study examines the relationship between regions' spatial organization and subjective well-being in North-West Europe. Combining data on life satisfaction with data on the spatial structure of regions, we find that the degree of polycentricism is positively associated and dispersion is negatively associated with life satisfaction. At the same time, the results indicate that in more dispersed regions, people experience more positive effects of polycentric structures than in more centralized regions, while residents of more urbanized polycentric regions report lower levels of life satisfaction compared with residents of less urbanized polycentric regions. Likewise, the findings suggest that urban residents living in polycentric regions are less satisfied compared with their rural counterparts.
Abstract A quarter of the European population lives in ‘polycentric urban regions’ (PURs): clusters of historically and administratively distinct but proximate and well‐connected cities of relatively similar size. This paper explores whether tighter integration can increase agglomeration benefits at the PUR‐level. We provide the first comprehensive list of European PURs (117 in total), establish their level of functional, institutional and cultural integration and measure whether this affects their performance. ‘Performance’ is defined as the extent to which urbanisation economies have developed, proxied by the presence of metropolitan functions. In this first‐ever cross‐sectional analysis of PURs we find that while there is evidence for all dimensions of integration having a positive effect, particularly functional integration has great significance. Regarding institutional integration, it appears that having some form of metropolitan co‐operation is more important than its exact shape. Theoretically, our results substantiate the assumption that networks may substitute for proximity.
It has been argued that the concept of “borrowed size” is essential to understanding urban patterns and dynamics in North-West Europe. This paper conceptualizes this idea and provides an empirical exploration of it. A place borrows size when it hosts more urban functions than its own size could normally support. A borrowed size for one place means that other places face an “agglomeration shadow” because they host fewer urban functions than they would normally support. This paper explores the extent to which size and function are related for places in North-West Europe and tries to explain why one place borrows size while the other faces an agglomeration shadow by examining the position of places within the regional urban system. The presence of urban functions was approximated using high-end cultural amenities. We conclude that the largest places in their functional urban area (FUA) are better able to exploit their own mass. The largest place in a FUA is also better able to borrow size from nearby places and from (inter)national urban networks than the lower-ranked places.
In this study, we examine the relationship between neighborhood-based social capital and residents' life satisfaction by considering resident heterogeneity. Using a database of the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands, we find a small but significant positive association between neighborhood-based social capital and individual life satisfaction. However, we also find considerable differences among residents because neighborhood-based social capital is important mainly for people who are more likely to spend considerable time in the neighborhood or who are more neighborhood dependent (i.e. less-educated people, people who live on welfare, people with poor health, retired people, and those who are divorced or widowed). Our results confirm the importance of neighborhood-based social capital for residents' life satisfaction in terms of both actual social contacts with neighbors and the perceived social cohesion within a neighborhood. At the same time, the importance of neighborhood-based social capital varies among different groups of residents. These findings have important implications for policy-makers.
Metropolitan regions and cities are often coined as the ‘motors of the economy'. The performance of national economies – and even the EU in general – is increasingly dependent on the cumulative performance of metropolitan regions and/or cities. All around the world, cities are increasingly in competition with one another; interconnected in a network of criss-cross relations between firms and institutions. With respect to urban competitiveness, numerous activities of benchmarking and ‘best practises' between cities exist. Many policies are based upon these evaluations leading to cherry-picking and the hasty copying of experiences from one specific urban context to another. A deeper understanding of the problems and structural mechanisms behind urban competitiveness is often lacking. This paper aims to analyse the competitiveness of European metropolitan regions via a comparative case study research, defining the main threats and challenges concerning the economic vitality of urban areas. It will be driven by the input of regions and cities with the aim to identify ‘best' and ‘bad' practices across Europe. In other words, we will set out the contours of a research framework on economic competitiveness that aims to bridge the gap between academic research and urban practices by means of a policy-driven research agenda. The competitiveness of five European regions will be discussed in more detail: Munich, Warsaw, Madrid, Bucharest and Stockholm. Based on roundtable discussions with stakeholders in these cities, the missing blanks in urban research will be defined. This paper will go beyond the ranking lists based solely on economic productivity figures by discussing cities' competitiveness from an integral perspective. The underlying determinants of competitiveness (e.g. local economic sectoral structure, labour market) will be analysed to create a better understanding of the economic performance of cities. It is the aim of this study to make academic research on urban competitiveness applicable for urban practice by listing knowledge and research questions that are of interest for both researchers as well as urban practitioners.
Metropolisation is understood here as the process through which a loose collection of proximally located cities starts to become more functionally, culturally and institutionally integrated. It can be assumed that in theory metropolisation enhances performance, and indeed this conviction underlies many European metropolitan development strategies. Yet little is known about how this potential is realised in practice. This paper explores the process of metropolisation in three European 'twin cities': Linköping–Norrköping (Sweden), Rotterdam–The Hague (Netherlands) and Gdansk–Gdynia (Poland). We find preliminary evidence that metropolisation is an upward spiral of integration in which policy-makers play an active role.
The aim of this chapter is to draw on the Gallup World Poll to examine urban-rural happiness differentials across the world.[1] We begin with a general description of urban-rural differentials and gradually introduce more detail in order to reveal the complexity that underlines these differences. In particular, we contrast the differentials in North Western Europe and the Anglo-Saxon Western world with those in Sub-Saharan Africa and examine the degree to which these differentials are due to people-based place-based factors. For both cases we identify those whose well-being increases most in cities.
This chapter adds to the existing literature in several ways. First, we provide an empirical extension of the work by Easterlin, Angelescu and Zweig[2] on urban-rural happiness differentials by providing information on 150 countries. Second, we estimate the extent to which urban-rural differences in happiness are driven by place-based people-based factors. Third, we identify the degree to which certain groups are more likely to return higher levels of happiness in cities.