Download
1 / 10
120 likes | 288 Views
Paper presented at the ERES conference in Vienna, Austria 3-6 th of July 2013 Linking Creative Economy and Real Estate: Lessons and implications from a Swedish case. S tig Westerdahl Department of Urban Studies, Malmö University, Sweden E-mail: stig.westerdahl@mah.se.
E N D
Paper presented at the ERES conference in Vienna, Austria 3-6th of July 2013Linking Creative Economy and Real Estate: Lessons and implications from a Swedish case. StigWesterdahlDepartment of Urban Studies, Malmö University, SwedenE-mail: stig.westerdahl@mah.se
A CreativeEconomy? • A Cultural or CreativeEconomy on the rise. • Always existedas a sector or industry – nowseen as a driver for the wholesociety. • Essential part of city renewals– spectacularbuildings. • Opera House in Sidney • Guggenheim in Bilbao • Implications for Real Estate Industry and research? • Outline
Creativeindustry – define or characterise? • Definition – a trickyissue. Several international attempts and suggestions for statisticalclassification. • Examples: arts and crafts, audiovisuals, books, design work, films, music, new media, printed media, visual and performing arts, and creative services. • Characteristics: • Micro-enterprises (a few large actors) • Usually project-based • High risks • Low initial costs • Low transport costs
The creativeindustry and the urban bias • Short historicaloutline • Experienceindustry (Pine & Gilmore 1999) • A production system (Pratt 1997) • Policy for creativeindustry – UK in the 1980’s. • Othercountriesfollowed (Australia, Sweden withothers). • The general belief is how • Creativeindustry is growing • It is importantto the entireeconomy • Serves as an inspiration toothersectors. • An urban bias is established.
From productiontoconsumption • Richard Florida and hiswritings: • Place • Creativeclass: scientists and engineers, university professors, poets and architects, people in music, design, arts, entertainment and education. Health professionals and business managers.(30% of American workforce). • 3 T’s: Talent, Tolerance and Technology • Many critics. • Large impact in policy circles – manifested also in inititives (and buildings) • Competition and place marketing • Connections to the real estate sector. • From production (previous slide) to consumption.
Creativity and urban change • Jane Jacobs ”The Death and Life ofGreatAmericanCities”: “intricate sidewalk ballet”. • Not much on gentrification or real estate companies. • Zukin (1989) on “Loft Living” and (2009) on authenticity. • De-industrialisation • Empty production space became Lofts for artists • When filled with Cultural capital: property developers take over • Coincides with changes in the Art World: Galleries. • Production out – consumption in. • Pratt (2009) on Hoxton, London: A similar story. • Where are the policies to make use of creative industry – no major effects from new residential housing. • Currid (2007) on New York: “The Warhol Economy”. • Fashion/art/music much more important that realised. • Need for conscious political efforts. • The meeting places crucial to creative industry. • The joint view: Passive policymakers – and the property developers as culprits. Theyripe the fruits, when artists have infused the cultural capital.
The case: Färgfabriken Norr In the middleof Sweden – 600 km northof Stockholm Östersund - small town – 30.000 people. Sparselypopulated region of Jämtland. Closureof regimental garrisons An Art Hall ”Färgfabriken Norr” opened 2008 in oneof the former militarybuildings. Three year EU-fundedproject – tomerge art withtrade&industry. Morejobs in an area suffering from loss ofemployment The propertydevelopersofferedfree rent for threeyears and renovation/adjustmentof the premises. No proper calculations: ”gut feeling” and ”intuition” Property developersmorecommittedthan the public sector: Create an attractive area for industrial and residentialtenants.
Conclusions • Östersund-case • Focus on ”consumption” – less on ”production” • Gut-feeling and intutionratherthancalculations. • The overall situation of the area the mainissue. • Real estateindustry at large: • Tension ”Consumption” vs ”Production” ofcreativeproducts/services pointto • Long term perspectivenecessary – compare London & New York studies (Zukin, Pratt, Currid and others). • Valuesof mixed useunderestimated? • ”Gut-feeling and intuition” – • Valuesof co-operation with the creativesectorunderestimated? Alternative management methods, seethings in a new light? Important for a conservativeindustrysuch as real estate?
The final conclusion • Manyquestion-marks!Weknowlittle on the roleofpropertydevelopers – in spiteof research on • Planning • Creativeindustry and itsimportance at large • The logicsof art economy as opposedtofinancialeconomy. • Social consequencesofgentrification • And the manydisciplinesinvolved: • Human geography, economics, management, planning, humanities and others.. • Whatabout the real estate science? • Future research needstotakepropertydevelopers as pointofdeparture: • Linkagespropertydevelopers and financial institutions in urban development. • Linkagesdevelopers and public agencies: the roleofcreativeindustries? • Connections real estatesector and the creativesector – possiblecooperationprojects? Is a longertimehorizonpossible? • Arethereopenings for a rapprochementbetween real estate and the creativesector – beyondmerepurchasing the products? Whatcan the industrylearn from the creativesector?
