城市经济

K. Kourtit, P. Nijkamp, Hans Westlund
{"title":"城市经济","authors":"K. Kourtit, P. Nijkamp, Hans Westlund","doi":"10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a call for papers, for the special issue to be devoted to \" Urban Economy \" late in 2015, that the Economies editors issued recently, I noted the increased attention that has been given to urban economies during the past quarter century. This is concomitant with the increased importance and role in policy that cities have attained. This is, in part, due to the diminished capacity of national and sub-national governments to find the funds needed for urban projects and services, and in part to the understanding that cities are the key to the economies and societies of most if not all nations. At first there was a fascination with the phenomenon of the largest of our cities—world cities, global cities, and most recently mega-cities and mega-city regions. Peter Taylor, Saskia Sassen, and a host of other researchers have gained prominence through their study and analysis of cities with populations in excess of 10 million. Partly, they were celebrated because of their roles as command centers or corporate headquarters centers or just their astonishing size. Much was made of agglomeration economies that are gained only through largeness. These large cities have airport hubs, collections of major universities, multiple clusters of technology-intensive production, and impressive collections of cultural institutions. They are also attractive to young, educated, technology savvy, and highly mobile workers who are the key element in any future urban economy. In bench-marking studies they were always at the head of the table of competitive cities, and so forth. Recently, however, questions were raised about the efficiency and viability of these largest of our cities. Were mega-cities beginning to look more like dinosaurs and less like lions? Were agglomeration economies turning into diseconomies, with increased congestion, pollution, and social marginalization? In regression analysis studies there was no positive correlation found between city size and competitiveness. Being well connected is not the same as being competitive. These concerns have shifted some of the attention of researchers from mega-cities to smaller cities, to cities with a population of 1–5 million or even to those with just hundreds of thousands of residents. Are smaller cities more agile, are they more pleasant places to raise a family, are they more efficient places to work in collaboration with other workers or firms? Smaller cities find that they can gain some of the benefits of location in a very large city through networking with other …","PeriodicalId":383686,"journal":{"name":"The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urban Economy\",\"authors\":\"K. Kourtit, P. Nijkamp, Hans Westlund\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0362\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a call for papers, for the special issue to be devoted to \\\" Urban Economy \\\" late in 2015, that the Economies editors issued recently, I noted the increased attention that has been given to urban economies during the past quarter century. This is concomitant with the increased importance and role in policy that cities have attained. This is, in part, due to the diminished capacity of national and sub-national governments to find the funds needed for urban projects and services, and in part to the understanding that cities are the key to the economies and societies of most if not all nations. At first there was a fascination with the phenomenon of the largest of our cities—world cities, global cities, and most recently mega-cities and mega-city regions. Peter Taylor, Saskia Sassen, and a host of other researchers have gained prominence through their study and analysis of cities with populations in excess of 10 million. Partly, they were celebrated because of their roles as command centers or corporate headquarters centers or just their astonishing size. Much was made of agglomeration economies that are gained only through largeness. These large cities have airport hubs, collections of major universities, multiple clusters of technology-intensive production, and impressive collections of cultural institutions. They are also attractive to young, educated, technology savvy, and highly mobile workers who are the key element in any future urban economy. In bench-marking studies they were always at the head of the table of competitive cities, and so forth. Recently, however, questions were raised about the efficiency and viability of these largest of our cities. Were mega-cities beginning to look more like dinosaurs and less like lions? Were agglomeration economies turning into diseconomies, with increased congestion, pollution, and social marginalization? In regression analysis studies there was no positive correlation found between city size and competitiveness. Being well connected is not the same as being competitive. These concerns have shifted some of the attention of researchers from mega-cities to smaller cities, to cities with a population of 1–5 million or even to those with just hundreds of thousands of residents. Are smaller cities more agile, are they more pleasant places to raise a family, are they more efficient places to work in collaboration with other workers or firms? Smaller cities find that they can gain some of the benefits of location in a very large city through networking with other …\",\"PeriodicalId\":383686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0362\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在《经济学人》编辑最近发布的2015年末“城市经济”特刊的征稿中,我注意到,在过去的25年里,城市经济受到了越来越多的关注。与此同时,城市在政策中的重要性和作用也在增加。这部分是由于国家和地方政府筹集城市项目和服务所需资金的能力下降,部分是由于人们认识到城市是大多数国家(如果不是所有国家)经济和社会的关键。起初,人们对我们最大的城市——世界城市、全球城市,以及最近的特大城市和特大城市地区——的现象感到着迷。彼得·泰勒(Peter Taylor)、萨斯基亚·萨森(Saskia Sassen)和许多其他研究人员通过对人口超过1000万的城市进行研究和分析而获得了突出的成就。部分原因是它们作为指挥中心或公司总部中心的角色,或者只是它们惊人的规模。只有通过扩大规模才能获得集聚经济。这些大城市有机场枢纽、主要大学、多个技术密集型生产集群和令人印象深刻的文化机构。它们对年轻、受过教育、精通技术、流动性强的工人也很有吸引力,这些工人是未来城市经济的关键因素。在基准研究中,他们总是在竞争城市的表格中名列前茅,等等。然而,最近,人们对这些最大城市的效率和生存能力提出了质疑。大城市是不是开始变得更像恐龙而不像狮子了?随着拥堵、污染和社会边缘化的加剧,集聚经济是否正在变成不经济?在回归分析研究中,没有发现城市规模与竞争力之间的正相关。人脉好并不等于有竞争力。这些担忧已经将研究人员的一些注意力从大城市转移到较小的城市,转移到人口在500万到500万之间的城市,甚至转移到只有数十万居民的城市。小城市是否更灵活?它们是否更适合养家糊口?它们是否更适合与其他员工或公司合作?较小的城市发现,通过与其他城市建立网络,他们可以获得大城市中地理位置的一些好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Urban Economy
In a call for papers, for the special issue to be devoted to " Urban Economy " late in 2015, that the Economies editors issued recently, I noted the increased attention that has been given to urban economies during the past quarter century. This is concomitant with the increased importance and role in policy that cities have attained. This is, in part, due to the diminished capacity of national and sub-national governments to find the funds needed for urban projects and services, and in part to the understanding that cities are the key to the economies and societies of most if not all nations. At first there was a fascination with the phenomenon of the largest of our cities—world cities, global cities, and most recently mega-cities and mega-city regions. Peter Taylor, Saskia Sassen, and a host of other researchers have gained prominence through their study and analysis of cities with populations in excess of 10 million. Partly, they were celebrated because of their roles as command centers or corporate headquarters centers or just their astonishing size. Much was made of agglomeration economies that are gained only through largeness. These large cities have airport hubs, collections of major universities, multiple clusters of technology-intensive production, and impressive collections of cultural institutions. They are also attractive to young, educated, technology savvy, and highly mobile workers who are the key element in any future urban economy. In bench-marking studies they were always at the head of the table of competitive cities, and so forth. Recently, however, questions were raised about the efficiency and viability of these largest of our cities. Were mega-cities beginning to look more like dinosaurs and less like lions? Were agglomeration economies turning into diseconomies, with increased congestion, pollution, and social marginalization? In regression analysis studies there was no positive correlation found between city size and competitiveness. Being well connected is not the same as being competitive. These concerns have shifted some of the attention of researchers from mega-cities to smaller cities, to cities with a population of 1–5 million or even to those with just hundreds of thousands of residents. Are smaller cities more agile, are they more pleasant places to raise a family, are they more efficient places to work in collaboration with other workers or firms? Smaller cities find that they can gain some of the benefits of location in a very large city through networking with other …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Garden Cities Mixed‐Income Developments Technopole Neighborhood Development Neighborhood Change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1