Introduction: German Cities in the World City Network;Einleitung: Deutsche Städte im Weltstadtnetzwerk

Raumforschung und Raumordnung

Volumn 69, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 141-146

  Thierstein, Alain ^a   Lüthi, Stefan ^a   Hoyler, Michael ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Germany; Knowledge economy; Polycentricity; Proximity; Relational economic geography

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859034805     PISSN: 00340111     EISSN: 18694179     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13147-011-0098-y     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Amin, A.; Roberts, J. (2008): Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. In: Research Policy 37, 2, 353-369.
2. Beaverstock, J. V.; Derudder, B.; Faulconbridge, J.; Witlox, F. (eds.) (2010): International Business Travel in the Global Economy. Farnham.
3. Blotevogel, H. H. (2000): Gibt es in Deutschland Metropolen? In: Matejovski, D. (ed.): Metropolen: Laboratorien der Moderne. Frankfurt am Main, 179-208.
4. Blotevogel, H. H. (2002): Deutsche Metropolregionen in der Vernetzung. In: Informationen zur Raumentwicklung 6/7, 345-351.
5. Blotevogel, H. H.; Schmitt, P. (2006): “European Metropolitan Regions” as a new discursive frame in strategic spatial planning and policies in Germany. In: Die Erde 137, 1-2, 55-74.
6. Boschma, R. (2005): Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. In: Regional Studies 39, 1, 61-74.
7. Cairncross, F. (1997): The Death of Distance. London.
8. Castells, M. (1989): The Informational City. Information Technology, Economic Restructuring, Urban-Regional Process. Oxford.
9. Castells, M. (2000): The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture, Vol. 1. Malden.
10. Davoudi, S. (2003): Polycentricity in European spatial planning: from an analytical tool to a normative agenda. In: European Planning Studies 11, 8, 979-999.
11. Davoudi, S. (2007): Polycentricity: Panacea or pipedream? In: Cattan, N. (ed.): Cities and Networks in Europe. A Critical Approach of Polycentrism. Paris, 65-74.
12. Dicken, P. (2007): Global Shift. Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. London.
13. ESPON (2004): ESPON Project 1.1.1. Potentials for Polycentric Development in Europe. Project Report. Final Report. Luxembourg. Online unter: http://www.espon.eu/mmp/online/website/content/projects/259/648/file_1174/fr-1.1.1_revised-full.pdf (accessed 02.11.2010).
14. European Commission (1999): ESDP: European Spatial Development Perspective: Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union. Brussels.
15. Faludi, A.; Waterhout, B. (2002): The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective. London.
16. Faulconbridge, J. R. (2007): London’s and New York’s advertising and law clusters and their networks of learning: relational analyses with a politics of scale? In: Urban Studies 44, 9, 1635-1656.
17. Florida, R. (2005): The world is spiky. The world in numbers. Globalization has changed the economic playing field, but hasn’t leveled it. In: The Atlantic 26, 3, 48-51.
18. Friedmann, J. (1986): The world city hypothesis. In: Development and Change 17, 1, 69-83.
19. Halbert, L. (2008): Examining the mega-city-region hypothesis: evidence from the Paris city-region/Bassin parisien. In: Regional Studies 42, 8, 1147-1160.
20. Hall, P.; Pain, K. (eds.) (2006): The Polycentric Metropolis. Learning from Mega-City Regions in Europe. London.
21. Hoyler, M.; Kloosterman, R. C.; Sokol, M. (2008): Polycentric puzzles – emerging mega-city regions seen through the lens of advanced producer services. In: Regional Studies 42, 8, 1055-1064.
22. Krätke, S. (2001): Strengthening the polycentric urban system in Europe: conclusions from the ESDP. In: European Planning Studies 9, 1, 105-116.
23. Kröcher, U. (2007): Die Renaissance des Regionalen. Zur Kritik der Regionalisierungseuphorie in Ökonomie und Gesellschaft. Münster.
24. Lambregts, B. (2008): Geographies of knowledge formation in megacity regions: some evidence from the Dutch Randstad. In: Regional Studies 42, 8, 1173-1186.
25. Lang, R.; Knox, P. L. (2009): The new metropolis: rethinking megalopolis. In: Regional Studies 43, 6, 789-802.
26. Massard, N.; Mehier, C. (2009): Proximity and innovation through an ‘accessibility to knowledge’ lens. In: Regional Studies 43, 1, 77-88.
27. MKRO (Ministerkonferenz für Raumordnung) (1995): Raumordnungspolitischer Handlungsrahmen. Düsseldorf.
28. Nonaka, I.; Toyama, R.; Konno, N. (2000): SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. In: Long Range Planning 33, 1, 5-34.
29. O’Brien, R. (1992): Global Financial Integration: The End of Geography. London.
30. Pain, K. (2008): Examining ‘core-periphery’ relationships in a global city-region: the case of London and South East England. In: Regional Studies 42, 8, 1161-1172.
31. Pike, A. (2007): Editorial: Whither regional studies? In: Regional Studies 41, 9, 1143-1148.
32. Porter, M. E. (1990): The Competitive Advantage of Nations. London.
33. Sassen, S. (2001): The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Oxford.
34. Simmie, J. (2002): Knowledge spillovers and reasons for the concentration of innovative SMEs. In: Urban Studies 39, 5-6, 885-902.
35. Sturgeon, T.; van Biesebroeck, J.; Gereffi, G. (2008): Value chains, networks and clusters: reframing the global automotive industry. In: Journal of Economic Geography 8, 3, 297-321.
36. Taylor, P. J. (1997): Hierarchical tendencies amongst world cities: a global research proposal. In: Cities 14, 6, 323-332.
37. Taylor, P. J. (2004): World City Network: A Global Urban Analysis. London.
38. Taylor, P. J.; Ni, P.; Derudder, B.; Hoyler, M.; Huang, J.; Witlox, F. (eds.) (2011): Global Urban Analysis: A Survey of Cities in Globalization. London.
39. Torre, A.; Rallet, A. (2005): Proximity and localization. In: Regional Studies 39, 1, 47-59.