Abstract
Emergent economic development policies reflect the challenges urban growth coalitions face in attracting the footloose tech-entrepreneurs of the global economy. This convergence between the focus on place and the harnessing of global capital has led to the proliferation of innovation-igniting urban developments (IIUD)—place-based economic development strategies to boost the local knowledge economy. Economic developers are using IIUD strategies to convert areas of the city into entrepreneurial “launch pads” for innovation. However, because these developments remain young, considerations to implement IIUDs lack an evidence-base to show the potential for negative consequences on the communities where they are embedded. This research addresses this gap through: 1) a review of studies of similar developments to identify negative consequences; and 2) using a quasi-experimental method composed of Propensity Score Matching and Average Treatment Effect analyses from IIUDs in three US cities (Boston, MA, St. Louis, MO, and Buffalo, NY). Combined, results demonstrate that the greatest implications of IIUDs are the increased polarized division of labor, housing unaffordability, and income inequality. As IIUDs gain in popularity, it is critical to correlate negative consequences with IIUDs to inform economic developers in assessing trade-offs.
Highlights
Policymakers and economic developers continually search for tools to transition post-industrial and lagging economies into knowledge economies (Bell, 1976; Porat & Rubin, 1977; Yigitcanlar, O’connor, & Westerman, 2008)
innovationigniting urban developments (IIUD) are young developments and this challenges the ability to derive a concrete evidence-base of negative consequences. We address this through a mixed-method approach that incorporates: 1) a synthesis review of theoretical and empirical works explaining potential negative consequences and counter-empirical studies testing such consequences; and 2) a quasi-experimental analysis of empirical cases composed of Propensity Score Matching (PSM) and Average Treatment Effect (ATE) analyses from three prominent cases in the United States (Boston’s Seaport Innovation District, MA, Cortex Innovation Community in Saint Louis, MO, and Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus [BNMC] in Buffalo, NY)
In this article we address the rise of IIUDs and their connection to place
Summary
Policymakers and economic developers continually search for tools to transition post-industrial and lagging economies into knowledge economies (Bell, 1976; Porat & Rubin, 1977; Yigitcanlar, O’connor, & Westerman, 2008). IIUDs, which are often developed over post-industrial sites—such as Boston’s Seaport Innovation District in the South Boston Waterfront (Drucker et al, 2019) or 22@BCN built over Barcelona’s Poblenou neighborhood (Charnock & Ribera-Fumaz, 2011)—rely on a master plan for the designated area of development. These sites depend heavily on design and placemaking to create an entrepreneurial ecosystem attractive to the firms and individuals closely associated with startup activities and the technology sector (Acs, Stam, Audretsch, & O’Connor, 2017; Rossi & Di Bella, 2017). Innovation districts are a good example of IIUDs, as are extensions of college campuses, such as Cortex Innovation Community in Saint Louis, MO, and Buffalo’s Niagara Medical Campus in Buffalo, NY (Drucker et al, 2019)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
