This week, Nature has a special issue about science cities. Which cities are the best for science? Where is science produced, and which cities publish the most influential science? The special issue is very informative and offers not only high quality articles but also interactive maps showing the scores of many cities in the world. As expected, large cities in the West and Japan dominate the ranks, with some smaller outliers like Boston. Asian cities are rapidly catching up. Amsterdam is in the main pack of Western European capital cities, and its position is relatively constant between 2000 and 2008.
The authors interviewed a number of leading researchers in the world. For me, as a urban economist, the interesting question is whether science produces wealth, and which cities are successful in transforming their knowledge base into economic activity. Here, the special issue offers little hard data, unfortunately, but quotes some interesting studies that confirm my own earlier research on knowledge cities. When it comes to generating wealth from science and technology, a few features seem necessary — but not sufficient. In general, bigger is better. A recent study found that new patents are granted disproportionately to larger cities. In this sense, great economic centres such as London, Tokyo and New York are bound to be science strongholds of a sort — even though their economic strength comes from other areas, such as financial markets. Some smaller cities capitalise on their knowledge base as well; the anchoring presence of a large private research and development laboratory can inject huge benefits. Eindhoven is a good example.
http://www.nature.com/news/specials/cities/index.html
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten