Re-centring peripheries along ring roads under a smart growth agenda: case studies of Espoo Innovation Garden and Vantaa Aviapolis in Finland

References

• Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (1994). Living in the global (A. Amin & N. Thrift, Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anas, A., Arnott, R., & Small, K. A. (1998). Urban spatial structure. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(3), 1426–1464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelidou, M. (2014). Smart city policies: A spatial approach. Cities (london, England), 41(1), S3–S11. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2014.06.007
   Google Scholar
• Antikainen, J., & Vartiainen, P. (2005). Polycentricity in Finland: From structure to strategy. Built Environment, 31(2), 143–152. doi: 10.2148/benv.31.2.143.66257
   Google Scholar
• Ballon, P., Pierson, J., & Delaere, S. (2005). Test and experimentation platforms for broadbandinnovation: Examining European practice. The 16th European Regional Conference by the International Telecommunications Society, Porto, Portugal.
   Google Scholar
• Batten, D. F. (1995). Network cities: Creative urban agglomerations for the 21st century. Urban Studies, 32(2), 313–327. doi: 10.1080/00420989550013103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellandi, M. (1996). Innovation and change in the Marshallian Industrial District. European Planning Studies, 4(3), 357–368. doi: 10.1080/09654319608720351
   Google Scholar
• Benneworth, P., Danson, M., Raines, P., & Whittham, G. (2003). Confusing clusters? Making sense of the cluster approach in theory and practice. European Planning Studies, 11, 511–520. doi: 10.1080/09654310303651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., Ståhlbröst, A., & Svensson, J. (2009). A milieu for innovation: Defining living labs. 2nd ISPIM innovation symposium, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Camagni, R. P., & Salone, C. (1993). Network urban structures in Northern Italy: Elements for a theoretical framework. Urban Studies, 30(6), 1053–1064. doi: 10.1080/00420989320080941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, S. (2003). Case studies in planning: Comparative advantages and the problem of generalization. The Urban and Regional Research Collaborative (URRC) Working Papers Series, 07-02 (pp. 1–18).
   Google Scholar
• Carmona, M., & Punter, J. (1997). The design dimension of planning. London: E. & F. N. Spon.
   Google Scholar
• Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Cheshire, P., & Gordon, I. R. (1996). Territorial competition and the predictability of collective (in)action. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 20(3), 383–399. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.1996.tb00324.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• City Planning Department of Helsinki. (2009). From city to city-region; city of Helsinki strategic spatial plan. City of Helsinki: Author.
   Google Scholar
• City Planning Department of Helsinki. (2013). Urban plan - the new Helsinki city plan; vision 2050. City of Helsinki: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Collis, C., Felton, E., & Graham, P. (2010). Beyond the inner city: Real and imagined places in creative place policy and practice. The Information Society, 26, 104–112. doi: 10.1080/01972240903562738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collis, C., Freebody, S., & Flew, T. (2013). Seeing the outer suburbs: Addressing the urban bias in creative place thinking. Regional Studies, 47(2), 148–160. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.630315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copus, A. K. (2001). From core-periphery to polycentric development: Concepts of spatial and Aspatial peripherality. European Planning Studies, 9(4), 539–552. doi: 10.1080/09654310120049899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cumbers, A., & MacKinnon, D. (2004). Introduction: Clusters in urban and regional development. Urban Studies, 41, 959–969. doi: 10.1080/00420980410001675896
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2003). European briefing: Polycentricity in European spatial planning: From an analytical tool to a normative agenda. European Planning Studies, 11(8), 979–999. doi: 10.1080/0965431032000146169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Dicken, P. (2011). Global shift: Mapping the changing contours of the world economy (6th ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dieleman, F. M., & Faludi, A. (1998). Polynucleated metropolitan regions in north-west Europe: Theme of the special issue. European Planning Studies, 6(4), 365–377. doi: 10.1080/09654319808720468
   Google Scholar
• Dieleman, F. M., & Musterd, S. (1992). The restructuring of Randstad Holland. In F. M. Dieleman & S. Musterd (Eds.), The randstad: A research and policy laboratory (pp. 1–16). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Duany, A., Speck, J., & Lydon, M. (2009). The smart growth manual (1st ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
   Google Scholar
• EKA. (2014). Helsinki smart region: Pioneering for Europe 2020. Helsinki: Project Helsinki as a Forerunner Area EKA.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, M., Niitamo, V.-P., Kulkki, S., & Hribernik, K. A. (2006). Living labs as a multi-contextual R&D methodology. IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE), Milan.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON. (2004). Potentials for polycentric development in Europe; ESPON 111 final report. Stockholm: Nordregio.
   Google Scholar
• Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293–337. doi: 10.1177/05390184030423002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Spatial Development Perspective ESDP. (1999). Towards balanced and sustainable development of the territory of the EU. Luxemburg: CEC.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, P., Schuurman, D., Ståhlbröst, A., & Vervoort, K. (2017). Living Lab methodology handbook. U4IoT Consortium. Retrieved from https://u4iot.eu/pdf/U4IoT_LivingLabMethodology_Handbook.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. P. (2000). Location and innovation: The new economic geography of innovation, spillovers, and agglomeration. In G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, & M. Gertler (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic geography (pp. 373–394). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Følstad, A. (2008). Living labs for innovation and development of information and communication technology: A literature review. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10, 99–131.
   Google Scholar
• Gantt, H. (2002). Smart growth and urban revival. In T. S. Szold & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Smart growth: Form and consequences (pp. 192–199). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Giffinger, R., & Suitne, J. (2015). Polycentric metropolitan development: From structural assessment to processual dimensions. European Planning Studies, 23(6), 1169–1186. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2014.905007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaeser, E. L., Kolko, J., & Saiz, A. (2001). Consumer city. Journal of Economic Geography, 1(1), 27–50. doi: 10.1093/jeg/1.1.27
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism: Networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Granqvist, K., Sarjamo, S., & Mäntysalo, R. (2019). Polycentricity as spatial imaginary: The case of Helsinki City Plan. European Planning Studies, 27(4), 739–758. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1569596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, P. (2009). Looking backward, looking forward: The city region of the mid-21st century. Regional Studies, 43(6), 803–817. doi: 10.1080/00343400903039673
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, P., & Pain, K. (2006). The polycentric metropolis: Learning from the mega-city regions in Europe. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Han, S. S. (2005). Polycentric urban development and spatial clustering of condominium property values: Singapore in the 1990s. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 37, 463–481. doi: 10.1068/a3746
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, G. H. (2000). Firms, workers, and the geographic concentration of economic activity. In G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, & M. S. Gertler (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic geography (pp. 477–496). Oxford: Oxford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (2006). Spaces of global capitalism: Towards a theory of uneven geographical development. New York, NY: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (1995). Managing cities: The new urban context (1st ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Council. (2014). The Helsinki-Uusimaa regional program; vision and strategy 2040, strategic priorities 2014–2017. Helsinki: Uusimaa Regional Council a31.
   Google Scholar
• Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Council. (2015). Smart specialisation in the Helsinki-Uusimaa region; research and innovation strategy for regional development 2014–2020. Helsinki: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Hoff, M. v., & Wall, R. (2019). Business districts: The spatial characteristics of FDI within cities. European Planning Studies. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1651830
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollins, C., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (1997). The role of town centre management. In T. Oc & S. Tiesdell (Eds.), Safer city centres: Reviving the public realm (pp. 89–97). London: Paul Chapman.
   Google Scholar
• Hytönen, J., Mäntysalo, R., Peltonen, L., Kanninen, V., Niemi, P., & Simanainen, M. (2016). Defensive routines in land use policy steering in Finnish urban regions. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(1), 40–55. doi: 10.1177/0969776413490424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joutsiniemi, A. (2010). Becoming metapolis: A configurational approach. Tampere: DATUTOP.
   Google Scholar
• Joutsiniemi, A. (2016). Accessibility in Helsinki metropolitan region. Tampere: Institute of Urban Planning and Design.
   Google Scholar
• Kayden, J. S. (2002). The constitution neither prohibits nor requires smart growth. In T. S. Szold & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Smart growth: Form and consequences (pp. 158–179). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Keeble, D., & Nachum, L. (2002). Why do business service firms cluster? Small consultancies, clustering and decentralization in London and Southern England. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 27(1), 67–90. doi: 10.1111/1475-5661.00042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitson, M., Martin, R., & Tyler, P. (2004). Regional competitiveness: An elusive yet key concept? Regional Studies, 38(9), 991–999. doi: 10.1080/0034340042000320816
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kloosterman, R. C., & Musterd, S. (2001). The polycentric urban region: Towards a research agenda. Urban Studies, 38(4), 623–633. doi: 10.1080/00420980120035259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kluge, J., & Lehmann, R. (2013). Marshall or Jacobs? New insights from an interaction model. Jahrbuch fur Regionalwissenschaft, 33(2), 107–133. doi: 10.1007/s10037-013-0076-7
   Google Scholar
• Kostiainen, J. (2002). Urban economic policy in the network society. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuusi, T. (2015). The Finnish great depression of the 1990s: Soviet trade or home-made? (ETLA Working Papers No 32). Retrieved from http://pub.etla.fi/ETLA-Working-Papers-32.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lahti, J. (2008). The Helsinki suburbs of Tapiola and Vantaanpuisto: Post-war planning by the architect Aarne Ervi. Planning Perspectives, 23(2), 147–169. doi: 10.1080/02665430801906349
   Google Scholar
• Lorenzen, M., & Frederiksen, L. (2007). Why do cultural industries cluster? Localization, urbanization, products and projects. In L. Lazzeretti & P. Cooke (Eds.), Creative cities, cultural clusters and local economic development (pp. 155–179). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2002). The Elusive concept of localization economies: Towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 34(3), 429–449. doi: 10.1068/a3457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markkula, M., & Kune, H. (2015). From research to reality. In P. Lappalainen, M. Markkula, & H. Kune (Eds.), Orchestrating regional innovation ecosystems: Espoo Innovation Garden (pp. 15–22). Finland: Aalto University in cooperation with Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Built Environment Innovations RYM Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. N., & Wood, P. (1992). The role of services in urban and regional development: Recent debates and new directions. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 24(9), 1255–1270. doi: 10.1068/a241255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall, S. (2005). Streets & patterns: The structure of urban geometry. London: Spon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2003). Deconstructing clusters: Chaotic concept or policy panacea? Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5–35. doi: 10.1093/jeg/3.1.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., Kangasoja, J. K., & Kanninen, V. (2015). The paradox of strategic spatial planning: A theoretical outline with a view on Finland. Planning Theory & Practice, 16(2), 169–183. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2015.1016548
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, P. (2008). Globalization and economic geography: The world is curved, not flat. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1(3), 351–370. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsn002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijers, E. (2007). Clones or complements? The division of labour between the main cities of the Randstad, the Flemish Diamond and the RheinRuhr area. Regional Studies, 41(7), 889–900. doi: 10.1080/00343400601120239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moilanen, H. (2012). Regional development zones in spatial development in Finland: Governing spatial development through new territorial frames. Turku: University of Turku.
   Google Scholar
• Mukkala, K. (2004). Agglomeration economies in the Finnish manufacturing sector. Applied Economics, 36(21), 2419–2427. doi: 10.1080/0003684042000287655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulvenna, M., Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., Wallace, J. G., & Galbraith, B. (2010). Living labs as engagement models for innovation (pp. 1–11). Warsaw: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, A. (2002). How do we know smart growth when we see it? In T. S. Szold & A. Carbonell (Eds.), Smart growth: Form and consequences (pp. 82–101). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Niitamo, V.-P., Kulkki, S., Eriksson, M., & Hribernik, K. A. (2006). State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs. Milan: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Nuur, C., & Laestadius, S. (2010). Development in peripheral regions: Case studies in Sweden. European Urban and Regional Studies, 17(3), 293–307. doi: 10.1177/0969776409352156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Toole, R. (2001). The folly of “smart growth”. Regulation, 24(3), 20–25.
   Google Scholar
• Phelps, N. (2010). Suburbs for nations? Some interdisciplinary connections on the suburban economy. Cities (london, England), 27, 68–76. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (1998, November/December). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (2000a). Location, clusters, and company strategy. In G. Clark, M. Feldman, & M. Gertler (Eds.), Oxford handbook of economic geography (pp. 253–274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (2000b). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34. doi: 10.1177/089124240001400105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, T., & Jensen, O. (2000). Discourses of mobility and polycentric development: A contested view of European spatial planning. European Planning Studies, 8(4), 503–520. doi: 10.1080/713666421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld, S. A. (2002). Creating smart systems: A guide to cluster strategies in less favoured regions. . Carrboro, NC: Regional Technology Strategies.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. C. (2004). Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies. In V. Henderson & J.-F. Thisse (Eds.), Handbook of regional and urban economics (Vol. 4, pp. 2119–2171). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Rytkönen, E., Nenonen, S., & Eriksson, R. (2015). Scaling business opportunities to facilitate mobile knowledge work. In P. Lappalainen, M. Markkula, & H. Kune (Eds.), Orchestrating regional innovation ecosystems: Espoo Innovation Garden (pp. 281–296). Espoo: Aalto University in cooperation with Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Built Environment Innovations RYM Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Sabel, C. F. (1988). Flexible specialisation and the re-emergence of regional economies. In P. Q. Hirst & J. Zeitlin (Eds.), Reversing industrial decline - industrial structure and policy in Britain and her competitors (pp. 17–70). Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A. J. (2001). Capitalism, cities and the production of symbolic forms. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(1), 11–23. doi: 10.1111/1475-5661.00003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sieverts, T., & Lough, D. (2003). Cities without cities: An interpretation of the Zwischenstadt. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Siivola, M., Häsänen, M., Jäppinen, S., Mäkynen, A., Heikkola, J., & Kujala, R. (2016). A V I A P O L I S – frame plan: I came. I saw. I stayed. Vantaa: Land Use, Building and Environmental Department. Retrieved from https://www.vantaa.fi/instancedata/prime_product_julkaisu/vantaa/embeds/vantaawwwstructure/129457_Aviapolis_Urban_Blocks_Frame_Plan_text_eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Steiner, M. (1998). The discreet charm of clusters: An introduction. In M. Steiner (Ed.), Clusters and regional specialisation: On geography, technology, and networks (pp. 1–18). London: Pion.
   Google Scholar
• Storper, M. (1993). Regional “worlds” of production: Learning and innovation in the technology districts of France, Italy and the USA. Regional Studies, 27(5), 433–455. doi: 10.1080/00343409312331347675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storper, M. (1997). The regional world: Territorial development in a global economy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Storper, M. (2000). Globalization, localization, and trade. In G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, & M. S. Gertler (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic geography (pp. 146–165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Storper, M. (2013). Keys to the city how economics, institutions, social interaction, and politics shape development. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Susiluoto, I. (2016). Agglomeration factors in Finnish urban regions. Helsinki: City of Helsinki Urban Facts.
   Google Scholar
• The City of Vantaa. (2017). Aviapolis urban blocks: Open international ideas competition. Vantaa: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Tohmo, T. (2007). Regional economic structures in Finland: Analyses of location and regional economic impact. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Tuppurainen, S. (2016). Keilaniemi Tunnel and Towers planning case. A perspective of adaptations, systems analysis and path dependence (Master’s thesis). Aalto University, Department of Built Environment, Espoo.
   Google Scholar
• Vasanen, A. (2012). Functional polycentricity: Examining metropolitan spatial structure through the connectivity of urban sub-centres. Urban Studies, 49(16), 3627–3644. doi: 10.1177/0042098012447000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallin, S., & Staffans, A. (2015). From statutory urban planning to living labs. In P. Lappalainen, M. Markkula, & H. Kune (Eds.), Orchestrating regional innovation ecosystems: Espoo Innovation Garden (pp. 269–280). Espoo: Aalto University in cooperation with Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Built Environment Innovations RYM Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• von Wirth, T., Fuenfschilling, L., Frantzeskaki, N., & Coenen, L. (2019). Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: Mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation. European Planning Studies, 27(2), 229–257. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2018.1504895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publishing.
   Google Scholar