5th Proximity congress Bordeaux 28 30 juin 2006 A proposal Indicators of territorial potentialities proxies for the Knowledge Society: new proposals. Maurice Baslé, professeur, Chaire Jean Monnet, CREM-CNRS-Université de Rennes 1, France Raphaël Suire, MCF, CREM-CNRS-Université de Rennes 1, France Janvier 2006 [email protected] [email protected] As suggested by experts, the key factors of success for the deepening, enlargement and integration of the European Union are better governance and greater ability to explain stakes and policies and particularly the Lisbon summit objective of a knowledge-based society, the Gothenburg objectives and the recent revision of the European agenda, following the Kok report. The European commission have to define elements of argumentation in favor of the new revised agenda and in favor of the European choice, targeting Competitiveness and Employment objectives in the perspective of a KBES (Knowledge-based European society) with a view to sustainable growth and not forgetting social inclusion, social acceptability and better governance (Baslé, M. Renault, M. Edrs 2004). Arguments for legitimization of European policies and for allocation of European structural funds have been well-designed in the past. Many studies and the process of Evaluations of ESF (for example, mid-term ESF evaluation, EC November 2004) have continued to explain the reasons for this bundle of objectives and justify the need to pursue the previous orientations of European structural policies. For structural funds, objective 1 is well legitimized (convergence). Objective 2, Competitiveness, not per se but on the issue of “how to do it” is not an “intouchable” fund. So, it has to be more analyzed and its implementation has to be more and more precise. Linking the totality of objectives (Lisbon plus Gothenburg agenda), and seeking an up to date argumentation, we can use two sources of inspiration : – new lessons from European past regional policies (European Commission, 2005) – and recent literature exploring the links between knowledge and growth and employment at a local or regional level. These new approaches postulate that Human capital and Social capital are factors of development (in a socioeconomic and sustainable sense). So, targeting the issue of legitimization of objective 2 structural funds, we are looking for more knowledge about necessary conditions for more and more competitiveness : these conditions are contexts, potentials and public interventions necessary for the deepening of a new knowledge society. Therefore, we will support indicators for monitoring and evaluating the KBES development through ESF objective 2. This will be twofold: conditions for a better information society, and conditions for becoming a deeper knowledge-based society. 1. A first proposal of indicators for the monitoring of KBES fostering. Using the simplified typology, we could present a first set of indicators concerning an attractivity supply strategy. It begins with a basic condition for interaction mechanisms : the accessibility to networks by means of ICT. And it adds some form of social capital resource. 1.1.ICT accessibility 1.2. Social capital resources. A sounder analyse could be presented, using the proximities theory. 2. Local sources of growth and the density of the local networks of excellence 2.1. A new set of indicators for production of human capital and educative contexts. 2.2. A new set of proxies : aids to international mobility and relocation at home 3. Good governance indexes We suggest the adoption or transfer of the index of Effectiveness of the government… An and index of Quality of laws and regulations. 4 A new table of proxies : KBES potentialities indicators (a proposal) 4 A new table of KBES development indicators (a proposal) source Maurice Baslé octobre 2005 Digital infrastructure and access Size and broadband access Attractivity and performance of ITC supply Use is stimulated with social environment What contents for which population Geographical proximity Physical Infrastructures Level, accessibility (time, social…) Firms Sector, size and nature of interactions Density of firms networks Firms and other actors Measuring the density of the local networks of excellence : clubs, groups, partnerships Telecommunications costs Socio-economic proximity Cognitive proximity Human capital and talents : Education Minimal education in basic disciplines Intermediate level in general education Professional training at an intermediate level Access to long-life training Higher education level (engineers, masters professional) Higher education-research level, PhD, doctorat, Number and density of researchers and universities professors Research, R/D Contracts between Universities and firms, Ph. D. students within firms Patents and amount of information contained in these patents Joint patents (public-private partnership) Good news channels, firms and salaries information specific Reputational mechanisms supports and their audience Researcher Mobility (departure and arrival) Attractivity for researchers Territorial openness and strong social capital in order to Relational proximity Social capital and social networks support friendly relationship : proxies such as : -Degree of trust into institution (opinions), -Degree commitment in social and associative activities -Number and density of associative and sports activities -Percentage of abroad born high wages population -Percentage of creative class (authors, designers, musicians, actors, painters, dancers, artists …) -Degree of tolerance regarding minorities and ethnical diversity Number of urban amenities and quality of life, collective goods and natural and cultural resources uses (nature, culture) Urban amenities, socio-environment, environmental and cultural goods To be created by the European commission Good governance indexes (Referring to theQuality of regulation World bank synthetic index, design of aEffectiveness of government specific European Commission syntheticAccessibility to essential facilities(water, energy, health…) index of good governance for each member state and at a regional level) Bibliography. Aghion, P, Cohen, E., Dubois, E., (2003), Education et croissance, Rapport du Conseil d’analyse économique, La Documentation Française. Paris. Agrawal A.K., Cockburn I.M., McHale J., (2003), “Gone But Forgotten: Labor Flows, Knowledge Spillovers, and Enduring Social Capital”, NBER Working Paper N°9950 Allen R., (1983), « Collective Invention », Journal of Economic and Organization Behaviour, vol 4, n°1, p 1-24. Altinok, N. (2005), vers une meilleure compréhension de la qualité du capital humain, Association française de science économique, congrès 2005. AMIN, A., COHENDET, P., (2003), Architectures of knowledge, Oxford University Press, New York. Amin, A., and Thrift, N. 1993. Globalization, institutional thickness and local prospects. Revue d'Economie Regionale et Urbaine 3, 405-27. Audretsch, D. B. and M. P. Feldman. 1996. « Knowledge Spillovers and The Geography of Innovation and Production. », American Economic Review, 86: 630-640 AUTANT-BERNARD, C., (2001), The geography of knowledge spilhovers and technological proximity, Economies of innovation and New Technology, vol. 10, n° 4, pp. 237-254. Ayoub, H. Kamal, A. (2005), Investissement direct étranger, croissance et gouvernance dans les pays sud de la Méditerranée. Une estimation sur données de panel. Association française de science économique, congrès 2005. Bachtler, J., Wishlade, F., (2004), Searching for consensus : the debate on reforming EU cohesion policy, European Policy research paper, n°55 ; Bapttista R., Swann P., (1998), “Do firms in clusters innovate more ?”, Research Policy, 27, p525-540. Baslé, M. Renault, M. edrs (2004), L’économie fondée sur la connaissance, questions au projet européen, Editions Economica, Paris. Baslé, M. (2006), Mesures multi-critères de la bonne gouvernance publique : questions d’évaluation adressées aux travaux de la Banque mondiale, to be published. Bengtsson M., Sölvell, Ö., (2004), « Climate of competition, clusters and innovative performance », Scandinavian Journal of Management, 20, p225-244. Blanc. C. (2004), “Pour un éco-système de la croissance”, rapport à l’Assemblée nationale française. Boshma R., 2005, “Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment”, Regional Studies, n°1, p61-74. Bouba Olga O. and Grossetti M. (2005) Une (re)définition des notions de proximité, Unpublished research note Breschi S., Lissoni F., (2003), “Mobility and Social Networks: Localised Knowledge Spillovers Revisited”, DRUID Academy Winter PhD Conference, Aalborg, Denmark, January 16-18 Bresnahan T., Gambardella A., Saxenian A.L., (2001), “Old Economy Inputs for New Economy Outcomes: Cluster Formation in the New Silicon Valleys”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), p835-860 Commissariat Général du Plan, (2001), Economie de la connaissance, SDTI, Paris. European commission, (2004), November, The mid-term Evaluation in objective 1 and 2 regions-Growing Evaluation capacity, see : http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/tech_fr.htm European commission, (2005), Les bonnes pratiques du développement régional, Inforegio panorama,Mai. Ferrary M., (2003),« The gift exchange in social networks of Silicon Valley », Californian Management Review, 45, 120-138. Florida R, (2002), The rise of the creative class, NY, Basic Books Florida R., (2001), « The economic geography of talent », Working Paper, Université de Carnegie Mellon. Florida R., (2002), « Bohemia and economic geography », Journal of Economic Geography, vol 2, n°1, p 55-71. Foray D., (2000), L’économie de la connaissance, La Découverte, Paris Galia, F. Lhuillery, S. (2005), The R/D kiss of death : empirical evidence of failure to cooperate. Working paper. Afse congress. Glaeser EL., (2004), ‘Review of Richard Florida’s The rise of the creative class” Glaeser EL., Saiz, A., (2003), “The rise of the skilled city”, NBER WP 10191. Goffman, E. 1973, La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne, Paris, Les éditions de Minuit Guerrieri, Paolo, Bernardo Maggi, Valentina Meliciani, and Pier Carlo Padoan Technology diffusion, services, and endogenous growth in Europe. Is the Lisbon Strategy still alive? Bruges European Economics Research paper n° 2 Hall, P., (2000), « Creative cities and economic development », Urban Studies, 37, p639-649. Hanshek E.A. and Kimko, D.D. (2001), Schooling, labor-force quality and the growth of nations, The American Economic Review, volume 90, issue 5, december, pp. 1184-1208. Jaffe A.D., Trajtenberg M., Henderson R., (1993), “Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations“, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), p577-598 Kirat T, LungY, 1999, « Innovation and proximities: territories as a loci of collective learning », European Urban and Regional Studies, 1999, Vol. 6, n°1, pp. 27-38. Markusen A., 1996, « Sticky places in slippery space: a typology of industrial districts », Economic Geography, 72, 293-313. Kolko J., 2002, « Silicon Mountains, Silicon Molehills, Geographic Concentration and convergence of Internet Industries in the US », Economics of Information and Policy, 14, p. 211-232. KOK, W., (2004), Relever le défi de la stratégie de Lisbonne pour la croissance et l’emploi, Rapport du groupe de haut niveau à la Commission européenne, novembre. KPMG (2003), European knowledge management survey, 2002-2003. Koski H., Rouvinen P., Ylä-Anttila P., 2002, « ICT Clusters in Europe : The Great Central Banana and Small Nordic Potato », Economics of Information and Policy, 14, p. 145- 165 MUTEIS, 2004, Macroeconomic and Urban Trends in Europe’s Information Society, IST programme : http://muteis.infonomics.nl Nonaka I., Takeuchi H., (1997), La connaissance créatrice, La dynamique de l’entreprise apprenante, De Boeck Université, Paris Nonaka I., Konno N., (1998), “The concept of ‘Ba’: building a foundation for knowledge creation”, California Management Review, 40(3), pp40-54 Nonaka I., Toyoma, Nagata, (2000), "A firm as a knowledge creating entity: a new perspective on the theory of the firm", Industrial and Corporate Change, 9, pp1-20 OCDE, (1996), L’économie fondée sur le savoir, Paris. OCDE, (2001), La nouvelle économie : mythe ou réalité ? Paris. OLINER, S., SICHEL, D., (2000), The resurgence of growth in the late 1990’s : is information technology the story ? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol.14, n° 4, pp 3-22. Pinch S, Henry N, Jenkins M, Tallman S, (2003), “From ‘industrial districts’ to ‘knowledge clusters’: a model of knowledge dissemination and competitive advantage in industrial agglomerations”, Journal of Economic Geography 3, pp. 373-388 Rallet A., Torre A., (2001), “Proximité géographique ou proximité organisationnelle? Une analyse spatiale des coopérations technologiques dans les réseaux localisés d’innovation”, Economie Appliquée, 3, pp147-171 Sapir, A. (2003), An agenda for a growing Europe, making the EU economic system deliver, Report of an independant high-level study group established on the initiative of the president of the european Commission, juillet. Saxenian A., (1994), Regional Advantage : Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Harvard, Harvard University Press. Saxenian A., (1999), Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Public Policy Institute of California Saxenian AL., Motoyoma Y., Quan X., (2002), Local and Global Networks of Immigrant Professionnals in Silicon Valley, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco Scott AJ., (1999), « The cultural economy: geography and the creative field », Media, Culture and Society, 21, p807-817. Scott AJ., (2000), The cultural economy of cities: essays on the geography of image producing industries, London Sage Publication Singh J., (2004), “Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns”, Working Paper, Harvard Business School, Boston Storper M., Venables, (2004), “Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy”, Journal of Economic Geography, 4, p351-370 Storper R., Stern S., (2001), “Innovation: location matters”, MIT Sloan Management Review, (Summer), p28-36. STEINMUELLER, W.E., (2000), Will new ICT improve the codification of knowledge ?, Industrial and corporate change, vol. 9, n° 2, pp. 361-376. Suire R., (2003), « Stratégies de localisation des firmes du secteur TIC : du cyber-district au district lisière », Géographie, Economie, Société, 5, 379-397. Suire R., (2004), “Des réseaux de l’entrepreneur aux ressorts du créatif : quelles stratégies pour les territoires ? », Revue Internationale des PME, vol 17, Torre A., Rallet A., 2005, « Proximity and localization », Regional Studies, 1, p 47-59. Torre A. and Gilly J.P. (2000) On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics, Regional Studies 34, 169-181 Van Winden, Van der Meer, Van den Berg, (2004), « The development of ICT clusters in European cities: towards a typology », forthcoming International Journal of Technology Management in 2005 Vicente J., (2002), « Externalités informationnelles versus externalités de réseau dans les dynamiques de localisation », Revue d’économie régionale et urbaine, vol , n° 4, p535-552. VICENTE Jérôme, SUIRE Raphaël (2004):, Observational vs. Interactive Choice:Evidences on “ICT Clusters” Formation and Stability, cahiers du Gres, n°10. Learning in Locational