Survey research on network economy Otto Raspe

1. The Netherlands Institute for Spatial Research (RPB) Survey research on network economy Otto Raspe 2nd WORKS workshop onMeasuring changes in work by organisation surveys -Higher Institute of Labour Studies (HIVA) of the Catholic University of Leuven- Leuven (Belgium), March 19-20, 2007.

2. In the program of 'Works' Future challenges for organisation surveys. Measuring inter-organisational changes: How can surveys measure inter-organisational changes as outsourcing, networks and changes in the value chain?

3. The network economy • A 'new geography': increasing scale, variety in places, networks and interaction at different scales • spatial organization of firms • city extending interaction on personal, social and business relations • Besides local agglomeration also network externalities • 'Urban Networks' are the spatial popular counterpart of 'the network society' • In the Netherlands policy on 'Urban Networks', specific the Randstad

4. Urban networks as planners paradigm

5. Urban Networks • Expansion of scale • Complementarity: sum is more than individual parts • Business relations as one of the main crossbeams • But, empirically little known about business relations • Scarce data on low spatial scale • Scarce date on relations (flows and interaction) • Urban Networks in general and Randstad Holland specifically

6. 'Urban Networks' Randstad Holland

7. Recent developments: Randstad OECD Territorial Review of the Randstad (estimated April 2007): Commission Kok: Because of being a network Randstad from 4 to 1 province.

8. Question: • Randstad: does it function as an integrated functional system? • General: Is there a transitions from Central Place Model to Network Model ? • Our studies try to contribute empirically  survey on business relations

9. Business survey • Population: LISA database (all establishments by NACE code) • Stratification • es = sector  27 by NACE code • r = region  8 DUS ~ 140 municipalities (see next) • g = size  6 size classes • n = sample size • s2 = variance in population • N = population • b = reliability • 4 = significance level at 5% Baarda & De Goede (1993)

10. Regions and selection -Variety of 8 regions -15 km from central city -Most dense parts -Some exceptions

11. Population & Response

12. Steps in the survey Database establishments and addresses • Sampling (by stratification criteria) • First a letter (physical announcement) • Questionnaire • Internet application for survey / questionnaire (login code) • Monitoring response • Notification letter (reminder) • Results in database • Control, corrections etc… • Analysis

13. Items questionnaire (establishments) • Sectors (industry, business services, wholesale) • Knowledge intensity • Activities within establishment • Age establishment • Size establishment • Employment (growth 5 yrs) • Productivity (growth 5 yrs) • Supplier relations (5 most important) • Customer relations (5 most important) • Number and weight relations • Communication systems used • Location factors

14. Indicators in the research • Characteristics regions, sector, size • Open- & closeness (# in region / # outside region) • Centrality, monocentrism (correlation with prototype) • Crisscross relations (#relation periphery / # relations periphery and central city • Theil coefficient (integration, more or less than expected) • Gravity models (network characteristics besides mass and distance)

15. Maps Networks in the Region

16. Regional – National – International 37 % 63 % Average

17. Amsterdam Rotterdam

18. Groningen Eindhoven

19. Stedendriehoek Arnhem-Nijmegen

20. Maps Randstad Holland

21. What about scale?: DUS still dominant 3 % 5 % 9 % 17 % 48 % 92 % 97 % 91 % 15 % 52 % 37 % 74 % R'stad in or out Between DUS* in R'stad Within DUS* Commuting relations 2002 Shopping '01-'03 Business relations 2005 *DUS = Dailty Urban System

24. Gravity models: typology

25. Gravity models for the Randstad

26. Complementarities Randstad region Spatial functional complementarities = Specialization (LQ3) + -/- Integration (T3)

27. Complementarities: three sectors Manufacturing • Only a few indications on complementarity based on business relations • For commuting and shopping not a all • And weaker in time '92-'02 Distribution Business services

28. Conclusions • Business relations: 1/3 regional 2/3 (inter)national • Central cities spill (involvement 75%) • Regional: DUS dominant Randstad • Thé Randstad doesn't exist: a lot of cities does not make a Randstad • Centralplace model and Networking model • 'Urban networks' as anticipating policy concept? • Don't forget the cities/agglomerations as daily urban systems

29. The knoweldge economy

30. Lisbon agreement To become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world - capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and more social cohesion (EU 2000). High Level Group: 'Europe needs to improve its productivity and employ more people by streamlining the Lisbon strategy even more to the direction of increasing and improving investment in Research and Development (R&D), the uptaking of ICT and contributing to a strong industrial base (EU 2005).

31. Rationale for the research “The Dutch government aims to invest in the urban economy and work on building strong innovative regions. Knowledge development should aim at an applicable and competitive knowledge economy in which research and development (R&D) investments are crucial. The Eindhoven region (South- east Brabant), because of its leading international position in R&D-investments, is therefore appointed as brainport – and the region will be supported by spatial-economic and infrastructural policy incentives” National Document on Spatial-Economic Planning 2004

32. Definition knowledge economy Knowledge is the adding up of abilities (capabilities, creativity and persistency) to recognise and solve problems, by collecting, selecting and interpreting information. ‘Change’ is an essential element in this. The knowledge economy then is the use of knowledge in interactive relations between market actors and others, while producing and using goods and services, from the first idea to final products.

33. Indicators for literature survey (n=496) Educational level Research & Development ICT High- & Mediumtech Communicative abilities Knowledge economy Technological innovation Creativity Non-technological innovation

34. Factor analysis(varimax) F1 F2 F3 High- and medium tech -0.169 0.239 0.790 R&D 0.176 0.102 0.832 Innovation (tech) 0.129 0.899 0.217 Innovation (non-tech) 0.155 0.911 0.071 ICT sensitivity 0.764 0.369 0.233 Educational level 0.960 0.120 0.037 Creative employment 0.473 0.114 -0.350 Communication abilities 0.933 -0.003 -0.070 ‘Knowledge workers’ ‘Innovation’ ‘R&D’

35. Factor ‘Research &Development’

36. Factor ‘Innovation’

37. Factor ‘Knowledge-workers’

38. Background information

39. Indicator 1: Educational level of working population Operation RPB op basis van CBS & LISA

40. Indicator 2: ICT-intensity of employment Operation RPB op basis van CBS & LISA

41. Indicator 3: Communica-tive abilities (‘sweet-talk’ employment) Operation RPB based on CBS, LISA, McCloskey & Klamer (1995) en V.d.Laan (2000)

42. Indicator 4: Share of creative services in employment Operation RPB based on LISA, TNO (2004) & Kloosterman (2001)

43. Indicator 5: Share industrial ‘high-tech’ and ‘medium-tech’ employment Operation RPB based on LISA & Louter (2000).

44. Indicator 6: Share Research & Develop-ment (R&D) in employment Operation TNO Inro & RPB based on CBS & LISA

45. Indicator 7: Share employment in innovative firms (techno-logical innovation) Bewerking TNO Inro & RPB based on CBS & LISA

46. Indicator 8: Share employment innovative firms (non-technol. innovation) Operaration TNO Inro & RPB based on CBS & LISA

47. Background information

49. Theil (entropy) measure for integration