Advertisement

Introduction to Part II

  • Tan Yigitcanlar
  • Tommi Inkinen
Chapter

Abstract

As much as having an in-depth understanding on the conceptual aspects of innovative geographies, it is also important to have empirical evidence on how these geographies are formed or being formed. This part of the book focuses on practical examples from the Nordic context identifying the most well-known and successful urban locations that may be deemed as forerunners in smart development. Nordic countries and Estonia are easily selectable locations as they all have gained interest as highly adopting ICT countries. All the other cities are from the Nordic countries except the Baltic state of Estonia. The chapter provides an introduction to this part of the book that searches for empirical evidence from the practice.

Keywords

Practice of innovation geography Smart development Best practice cases Nordic countries Baltic Sea capitals 

References

  1. Eurostat. (2018). Database. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database.
  2. Lichtenthaler, U., & Ernst, H. (2008). Innovation intermediaries: Why Internet marketplaces for technology have not yet met the expectations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 17, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Salles-Filho, S., Bonacelli, M. B., Carneiro, A. M., Castro, P. D., & Santos, F. O. (2011). Evaluation of ST&I Programs: A methodological approach to the Brazilian small business program and some comparisons with the SBIR program. Research Evaluation, 20, 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Suorsa, K. (2007). Regionality, innovation policy and peripheral regions in Finland, Sweden and Norway. Fennia, 185(1), 15–29.Google Scholar
  5. Yigitcanlar, T., & Lönnqvist, A. (2013). Benchmarking knowledge-based urban development performance: Results from the international comparison of Helsinki. Cities, 31(1), 357–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Yigitcanlar, T., Inkinen, T., & Makkonen, T. (2015). Does size matter? Knowledge-based development of second-order city-regions in Finland. disP-The Planning Review, 51(3), 62–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Queensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Maritime Studies, Brahea CentreUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations