Clicca qui per scaricare

Changing urban geographies through the suburbanization of universities. A case study of Naples, Italy
Titolo Rivista: ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI 
Autori/Curatori: Stefano De Falco 
Anno di pubblicazione:  2019 Fascicolo: 125 Lingua: Italiano 
Numero pagine:  27 P. 141-167 Dimensione file:  259 KB
DOI:  10.3280/ASUR2019-125007
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più:  clicca qui   qui 


Although many studies consider knowledge-based urban development processes, the multiple functions that universities can play in suburban areas are rarely taken into account. This paper has a dual aim. First, it provides a systemic view of the characteristics of universities that impact suburban areas, and second, it proposes Naples as a case study wherein university suburbanization is a phenomenon that results in the creation of new urban geographies characterized by new suburban externalities.

Sebbene molti studi considerino i processi di sviluppo urbano basati sulla conoscenza, le molteplici funzioni che le università possono svolgere nelle aree suburbane sono raramente prese in considerazione all’interno del dibattito scientifico. Il presente contributo fornisce una visione sistemica delle caratteristiche delle università che interessano le aree suburbane, e propone un caso di studio, relativo alla città di Napoli, nel quale sono evidenziate le diverse esternalità del recente decentramento universitario nell’area suburbana orientale.
Keywords: Università; suburbano; periferia; prossimità geografica.

  1. Boulton G. and Lucas C. (2008). What are universities for? LERU Leauge of European Research Universities -- www.leru.org (accessed 09 January 2018).
  2. Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Braunerhjelm P. and Carlsson B. (2010). The missing link: The knowledge filter and entrepreneurship in endogenous growth. Small Business Economic, 34(2): 105-125.
  3. Addie J.-P.D. (2016a). Theorizing Suburban Infrastructure: A Framework for Critical and Comparative Analysis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(3): 273-285.
  4. Addie J.-P.D. (2016b). On the Road to the In-Between City: Excavating Peripheral Urbanization in Chicago’s ‘Crosstown Corridor. Environment and Planning, 48(5): 825-843., 10.1177/0308518X1559493DOI: 10.1177/0308518X1559493
  5. Addie J.-P.D. (2016c). Engaging Universities as Partners and Proponents of the New Urban Agenda: Coordination, Spatial Strategies, Access. London: UNHabitat
  6. UNI and UCL City Leadership Lab. Addie J.-P.D. and Paskins J. (2016). University College London: Leveraging the Civic Capacity of London’s Global University. In: Goddard J., Hazelkorn E., Kempton L. and Vallance P., eds., The Civic University: The Policy and Leadership Challenges. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 257-277.
  7. Addie J.-P.D., Keil R. and Olds K. (2015). Beyond town and gown: Universities, territoriality and the mobilization of New Urban structures in Canada. Territory, Politics, Governance, 3: 27-50., 10.1080/21622671.2014.924875DOI: 10.1080/21622671.2014.924875
  8. Anderson M.B. (2010). The discursive regime of the ‘American Dream’ and the new suburban frontier: The case of Kendall County. Urban Geography, 31(8): 1080-1099., 10.2747/0272-3638.31.8.108DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.31.8.108
  9. Atkinson R. (2004). The evidence on the impact of gentrification: New lessons for the urban renaissance? International Journal of Housing Policy, 4(1): 107-131., 10.1080/146167104200021547DOI: 10.1080/146167104200021547
  10. Audretsch D.B. and Feldman M.P. (1996). R&D Spillovers and the Geography of and Production. American Economic Review, vol. 86, issue 3: 630-40.
  11. Audretsch D.B. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. Technology Transfer, 39: 313., 10.1007/s10961-012-9288-1.DOI: 10.1007/s10961-012-9288-1.
  12. Balducci A., Cognetti F. e Fedeli V. (2010). La città come campo di riflessione e di pratiche per le università milanesi. In: Balducci A., Cognetti F. e Fedeli V. (a cura di), Milano. La città degli Studi, Storia, geografia e politiche delle università milanesi. Milano: Abitare Segesta, 197-199.
  13. Bathelt H., Malmberg A. and Maskell P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines, and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28: 31-56.
  14. Beauregard R.A. (2006). When America became suburban. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  15. Benneworth P. and Charles D. (2005). University spin-off policies and economic development in less successful regions: Learning from two decades of policy practice. European Planning Studies, 13(4): 537-557., 10.1080/0965431050010717DOI: 10.1080/0965431050010717
  16. Benneworth P., Charles D. and Madanipour A. (2010). Building localizedinteractions between universities and cities through university spatial development. European Planning Studies, 18(10): 1611-1629., 10.1080/09654313.2010.50434DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2010.50434
  17. Blanchard R. (1935), Grenoble. Etude de géographie urbaine. Grenoble: Didier&Richard.
  18. Boffo S. e Gagliardi F. (2015). Un nuovo contenitore per i rapporti tra università e territorio. Territorio, 73: 67-72.
  19. Boucher G., Conway C. and Van der Meer E. (2003). Tiers of Engagement by Universities in their Region’s Development. Regional Studies, 37: 887-97.
  20. Carrillo F. (2006) (ed.). Knowledge Cities: Approaches, Perspectives and Experiences. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  21. Casaleiro P. (2011). Changing from a university city to a knowledge city: The case of Coimbra. International Journal of Knowledge Based Development, 2(2): 25-38., 10.1080/09654313.2013.79196DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.79196
  22. Charles D., Conway, C. (2001). Higher Education Business Interaction Survey. Bristol: HEFCE.
  23. Chatterton P. and Goddard J. (2000). The Response of Higher Education Institutions to Regional Needs. European Journal of Education, 35(4): 475-496.
  24. Cohen M. and Levinthal D. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128-152.
  25. Couch C., Fraser Ch. and Percy S. (2003). Urban Regeneration in Europe. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
  26. Couch C., Sykes O. and Börstinghaus W. (2011). Thirty years of urban regeneration in Britain, Germany and France: The importance of context and path dependency. Progress in Planning, 75(1): 1-52.
  27. Crosta P.L. (1998). L’interazione tra università e città come pratica di apprendimento. In: Archivio di Studi Urbani e Regionali, 60-61.
  28. Davidson M. and Lees L. (2010). New-build gentrification: Its histories, trajectories, and critical geographies. Population, Space and Place, 16(5): 395-411.
  29. De Falco S. (2014). Measuring the regional dimension of innovation through an economic model based on rectifying technology audits according to the AICTT-RTA protocol. Archives of Business Research, 2(6): 231-247.
  30. De Falco S. (2015a). Monitoring the performance of university technology transfer offices: the bias control. Archives of Business Research, 3(2): 2054-7404.
  31. De Falco S. (2015b). Territori, governance, sviluppo sostenibile prospettive italiane ed europee. Studi per lo sviluppo sostenibile.
  32. De Falco S. (2015c). Co-Creazione di Valore in Aree Urbane Geografiche Marginali: La Valorizzazione della Cultura Artigianale come Sorgente di Social Innovation. International Journal of European Studies, 1(6): 24-35.
  33. De Falco S. (2015d). Il ruolo del capitale intellettuale nella valorizzazione delle aree urbane marginali in ambito europeo. International Journal of European Studies, 1(3): 41-52.
  34. De Falco S. (2015e). Le politiche della Ue per la riqualificazione di aree geografiche marginali e ruolo del trasferimento tecnologico. International Journal of European Studies, 1(4): 37-45.
  35. De Falco S. (2015f). The role of geographical proximity from universities and research centers in growing resilience of marginal areas: the case of the east area of Naples. International Journal of Urban Planning, 8(2): 23-34.
  36. De Falco S. and Angrisani L. (2015). Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Smart Cities: A S-D Logic’s application to the role of Research Centres in deprived Urban Areas. Naplesforum 12 giugno 2015 Napoli.
  37. De Falco S. e Angrisani M. (2015). Il Trasferimento Tecnologico quale fattore di coesione sociale ed agente catalizzatore nei processi di riqualificazione urbana necessari ad “Abitare insieme”: un focus sulle aree urbane marginali attraverso il protocollo AICTT-RTT” Living Together, Napoli.
  38. De Falco S. and Polese F. (2015). Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Smart Cities: A S-D Logic’s application to the role of Research Centres in deprived Urban Areas. ECIE 10th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 17-18 September, Genoa.
  39. De Leo D. (2015). Università, istituzioni e territori: ripensamenti e opportunità tra opensource urbanism e prosumership. Territorio, 73: 73-78.
  40. Dotti N.F. (2007). Università conoscenza territorio. La capacità di attrarre studenti. Territorio, 43: 112-120.
  41. EU Ministers for Urban Development (2010). Toledo Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development. Toledo Declaration. -- Available at http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/newsroom/pdf/201006_toledo_declaration_en.pdf (accessed 09 January 2018).
  42. Fedeli V. (2015). Università nella città regione: un-bundling e re-bundling il rapporto tra città e università in Italia. Territorio, 73: 79-85.
  43. Fernàndez-Esquinas M.F. and Pinto H. (2014). The Role of Universities in Urban Regeneration: Reframing the Analytical Approach. European Planning Studies, 22(7): 1462-1483., 10.1080/09654313.2013.791967DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.791967
  44. Florida R. (2003). Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
  45. Franz P. (2010). Knowledge spill-overs for knowledge based development: Progression in theory and obstacles for empirical research. International Journal of Knowledge Based Development, 1(1-2): 25-38.
  46. Fritsch M. and Monz M. (2010). The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: An application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks. Annual Regional Science, 44: 21-38.
  47. Goddard J., Kempton L. and Vallance P. (2013). Universities and Smart Specialisation: challenges, tensions and opportunities for the innovation strategies of European regions. EKONOMIAZ. Revista vasca de Economía, 83(02): 83-102.
  48. Goddard J. (2009). Reinventing the Civic University. London: NESTA.
  49. Guiso L., Sapienza P. and Zingales L. (2004). The Role of Social Capital in Financial Development. American Economic Review, 94(3): 526-556. Guiso L., Sapienza P. and Zingales L. (2009). Cultural Biases in Economic Exchange? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(3): 1095-1131.
  50. Gunasekara C.S. (2006a). Reframing the Role of Universities in the Development of Regional Innovation Systems. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31: 101-123.
  51. Gunasekara C.S. (2006b). The generative and developmental roles of universities in regional innovation systems. Science and Public Policy, 33: 137-150.
  52. Hambleton R. (2006). Rethinking the role of the modern urban university. Insights from the USA. Dialoghi Internazionali, 2, ottobre.
  53. Harris R. and Vorms C. (2017) (eds.). What’s in a name? Talking about urban peripheries. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  54. Kearns A. and Paddison R. (2000). New Challenges for Urban Governance. Journal of Urban Studies, 37(6): 845-850.
  55. Keil R. (2013). Suburban constellations: governance, land and infrastructure, in the 21st century. Berlin: Jovis Verlag.
  56. Knieling J. and Othengrafen F. (2009). En route to a theoretical model for comparative research. In: Knieling J. and Othengrafen F., Planning Cultures in Europe – Decoding Cultural Phenomena in Urban and Regional Planning, Farnham: Ashgate, 39-62.
  57. Knox P.L. (2008). Metroburbia, USA. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.
  58. Kühn M. and Bernt M. (2013). Peripheralization and power – Theoretical debates. In: Fischer-Tahir A. and Naumann M., eds., Peripheralization. The Making of Spatial Dependencies and Social Injustice. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 302-317).
  59. Landry C. (2000). The Creative City. A Toolkit for Urban Innovators. London: Comedia – Earthscan.
  60. Lazzeroni M. (2004). Geografia della conoscenza e dell’innovazione tecnologica: un’interpretazione dei cambiamenti territoriali. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  61. Lazzeroni M. e Picaluga A. (2009). L’università che cambia: nuovi profili e nuovi metodi di analisi. In: Bramanti A. e Salone C., a cura di, Lo sviluppo territoriale nell’economia della conoscenza: teorie, attori, strategie, Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  62. Martinelli N. (2015). Diritto allo studio e diritto di cittadinanza nel rapporto università-città. Territorio, 73: 94-99.
  63. OECD (2007). Higher Education and Regions: Globally Competitive, Locally Engaged. Paris: OECD.
  64. Palmentieri S. (2017). Innovazione e ridisegno degli spazi urbani: dai “vuoti” ai poli di sviluppo. L’Area Est di Napoli. In: Aa.Vv., Innovazione, competitività e sviluppo nei territori dell’Unione Europea, a cura di Stefano De Falco. Edicampus Rome, 109-122.
  65. Parsi V. e Tacchi E.M. (2003). Quarto, Oggiaro, Bovisa, Dergano. Prospettive di riqualificazione della periferia di Milano. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  66. Phelps N.A. (2017). Old Europe, new suburbanization? Governance, land, and infrastructure, in European suburbanization. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  67. Portes A. (1998). Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 1-24. Portnov B. and Pearlmutter D. (1999). Sustainable urban growth in peripheral areas. Progress in Planning, 52: 239-308.
  68. Savino M. (2015). Il ruolo dell’università nel processo di trasformazione sociale dopo la crisi. Territorio, 73: 60-66.
  69. Scott P. (1997). The Changing Role of the University in the Production of the New Knowledge. Tertiary Education and Management, 3(1): 5-14.
  70. Trudeau D. and Kaplan J. (2016). Is there diversity in the new urbanism? Analyzing the demographic characteristics of new urbanist neighborhoods in the United States. Urban Geography, 37(3): 458-482., 10.1080/02723638.2015.106902DOI: 10.1080/02723638.2015.106902
  71. Trudeau D. and Malloy P. (2011). Suburbs in disguise? Examining the geographies of the new urbanism. Urban Geography, 32(3): 424-447., 10.2747/0272-3638.32.3.42DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.32.3.42
  72. Uyarra E. (2010). Conceptualizing the regional roles of universities, implications and contradictions. European Planning Studies, 18: 1227-1246., 10.1080/09654311003791275DOI: 10.1080/09654311003791275
  73. Varga A. (2002). Knowledge Transfers from Universities and the Regional Economy: A Review of the Literature. Pécs University of Pécs Press.
  74. Westhead P. (1997). R&D ‘inputs’ and ‘outputs’ of technology-based firms located on and off Science Parks. R&D Management, 27(1): 45-62.
  75. Wiewel W. and Knapp G.J. (2005). Partnerships for Smart Growth. University-Community. Collaboration for Better Public Place. New York: M.E. Scarpe.
  76. Youtie J. and Shapira P. (2008). Building an Innovation Hub: A Case Study of the Transformation of University Roles in Regional Technological and Economic Development. Research Policy, 37: 1188-1204.
  77. De Falco S. (2018). Vesuvius, pizza, coffee and… innovation: Is a new paradigm possible for the creative “Vesuvius Valley”, Naples, Italy? City, Culture and Society, 14: 1-13.

Stefano De Falco, Trasformazioni nelle geografie urbane indotte dalla suburbanizzazione delle università. Il caso della città di Napoli in "ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI" 125/2019, pp. 141-167, DOI:10.3280/ASUR2019-125007

   

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association associazione indipendente e no profit per facilitare l'accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche