Geografie 2017, 122, 281-309
https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2017122030281
Typology of Czech non-metropolitan regions based on their principal factors, mechanisms and actors of development
References
1. , B., COENEN, L., VANG, J. (2007): Face-to-face, buzz, and knowledge bases: sociospatial implications for learning, innovation, and innovation policy. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25, 5, 655–670.
<https://doi.org/10.1068/c0648>
2. , D., FELDMANN, M. (1996): R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production. The American Economic Review, 86, 3, 630–640.
3. , J., ŽÍŽALOVÁ, P., RUMPEL, P., SKOKAN, K. (2011): Where does the knowledge for knowledge-intensive industries come from? The case of biotech in Prague and ICT in Ostrava. European Planning Studies, 19, 7, 1277–1303.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.573136>
4. , H. H. (2001): Die Metropolregionen in der Raumordnungspolitik Deutschlands – ein neues strategisches Raumbild. Geographica Helvetica, 56, 3, 157–168.
<https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-56-157-2001>
5. BLOTEVOGEL, H. H., DANIELZYK, R. (2009): Leistungen und Funktionen von Metropolregionen. In: Knieling, J. (ed.): Metropolregionen. Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfähigkeit. Hannover, 22–29.
6. , R. (2000): The City Network Paradigm: Measuring Urban Network Externalities. Urban Studies, 37, 1925–1945.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/713707232>
7. , B. (1961): Contrasts in agglomeration: New York and Pittsburgh. The American Economic Review, 51, 2, 279–289.
8. , A., HALL, R. (1996): Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity. The American Economic Review, 86, 1, 54–70.
9. , M., WATTS, H. (2003): The determinants of regional sourcing by multinational manufacturing firms: Evidence from Yorkshire and Humberside, UK. European Planning Studies, 11, 6, 717–737.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/0965431032000108387>
10. ČSÚ (2013): Roční výkaz ekonomických subjektů vybraných produkčních odvětví za rok 2013. Český statistický úřad, Praha.
11. , L., GARCILAZO, E., McCANN, P. (2013): The Economic Performance of European Cities and City Regions: Myths and Realities. European Planning Studies, 21, 3, 334–354.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.716245>
12. , D., ISAKSEN, A., KARLSEN, J., DIONNE, S. (2012): Constructing regional advantage in non-metropolitan regions: A comparison between La Pocatière (Canada) and Tromsø (Norway). Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift–Norwegian Journal of Geography, 66, 3, 144–154.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2012.681687>
13. , J., FESER, E. (2012): Regional industrial structure and agglomeration economies: An analysis of productivity in three manufacturing industries. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 42, 1–2, 1–14.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2011.04.006>
14. , G., PUGA, D. (2000): Diversity and specialisation in cities: Why, where and when does it matter? Urban Studies, 37, 533–555.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098002104>
15. , G., PUGA, D. (2001): Nursery cities. American Economic Review, 91, 1454–1475.
<https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.5.1454>
16. ESSLETZBICHLER, J. (2007): Diversity, stability and regional growth in the United States, 1975–2002. In: Frenken, K. (ed.): Applied Evolutionary Economics and Economic Geography. Edward Elgar, Utrecht, 203–229.
17. , O., KRÖLL, A. (2012): Diversified specialisation – going one step beyond regional economics’ specialisation-diversification concept. Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, 32, 1, 63–84.
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s10037-011-0063-9>
18. FLORIDA, R. (2005): Cities and the Creative Class. Routledge, New York.
19. , R., RODRÍGUEZ-POSE, A. (2013): Firm collaboration and modes of innovation in Norway. Research Policy, 42, 1, 128–138.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.05.009>
20. FRIEDMANN, J. (1967): A general theory of polarized development. The Ford Foundation, Santiago, Chile.
21. FREY, W., ZIMMER, Z. (2001): Defining the City. In: Paddison, R. (ed.): Handbook of Urban Studies. Sage Publications, London, 14–35.
22. , I., MCCANN, P. (2000): Industrial clusters: Complexes, Agglomeration and/or Social Networks? Urban Studies, 37, 3, 513–532.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098002096>
23. , L., DI FABBIO, M. (2014): Path-dependence and change in an old industrial area: the case of Taranto, Italy. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 9, 3, 413–431.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsu012>
24. HAMPL, M. (2005): Geografická organizace společnosti v České republice: transformační procesy a jejich obecný kontext. DemoArt, Praha.
25. , M., BLAŽEK, J., ŽÍŽALOVÁ, P. (2008): Faktory – mechanizmy – aktéři v regionálním vývoji: aplikace konceptu kritického realizmu. Ekonomický časopis, 56, 7, 696–711.
26. , M., MARADA, M. (2015): Sociogeografická regionalizace Česka. Geografie, 120, 3, 397–421.
27. , R. (2007): The Strength of Weak Lock-Ins: The Renewal of the Westmünsterland Textile Industry. Environment and Planning A, 39, 5, 1147–1165.
<https://doi.org/10.1068/a3848>
28. , T., CHROMÝ, P. (2001): Příspěvek k teorii polarizovaného vývoje území se zaměřením na periferní oblasti. Geografie – Sborník České geografické společnosti, 106, 1, 1–11.
29. , V. (1997): Medium size cities. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 27, 6, 583–612.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-0462(96)02169-2>
30. , V., KUNCORO, A., TURNER, M. (1995): Industrial development in cities. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 5, 1067–1085.
<https://doi.org/10.1086/262013>
31. , J., DICKEN, P., HESS, M., COE, N., YEUNG, H. (2002): Global production networks and the analysis of economic development. Review of International Political Economy, 9, 3, 436–464.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290210150842>
32. HENNINGS, G., KUNZMANN, K. (1990): Priority to local economic development: industrial restructuring and local development responses in the Ruhr area – the case of Dortmund. In: Stöhr, W. (ed.): Global Challenge and Local Response, The United Nations University, London and New York, 199–223.
33. , G. (2013): Surviving the era of deindustrialization: the new economic geography of the urban rust belt. Journal of Urban Affairs, 35, 4, 417–434.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00625.x>
34. , S. (2005): The role of services in regional and urban development: A reappraisal of our understanding. The Service Industries Journal, 25, 4, 447–460.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060500092097>
35. , A., KARLSEN, J. (2013): Can small regions construct regional advantages? The case of four Norwegian regions. European Urban and Regional Studies, 20, 2, 243–257.
<https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776412439200>
36. , A. (2015): Industrial development in thin regions: trapped in path extension? Journal of Economic Geography, 15, 3, 585–600.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu026>
37. , W., KOSTER, H., VAN OORT, F. (2014): Co-agglomeration of knowledge-intensive business services and multinational enterprises. Journal of Economic Geography, 14, 2, 443–475.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs055>
38. , M., JOHNSON, B., LORENZ, E., LUNDVALL, B. (2007): Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 5, 680–693.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.006>
39. , J. (2013): The Role of Anchor Companies in Thin Regional Innovation Systems: Lessons from Norway. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 26, 1, 89–98.
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9266-4>
40. KNIELING, J., MATERN, A. (2009): Metropolregionen – Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfähigkeit. In: Knieling, J. (ed.).: Metropolregionen – Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfähigkeit. Forschungs – und Sitzungsberichte der Akademie für Raumordnung und Landesplanung (nr. 231), Hannover, 324–348.
41. KRAFT, S., HALÁS, M., VANČURA, M. (2014): The delimitation of urban hinterlands based on transport flows: a case study of regional capitals in the Czech Republic. Moravian Geographical Reports, 22, 24–32.
<https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2014-0003>
42. , R., TKOCZ, M., SPÓRNA, T., KANTOR-PIETRAGA, I. (2016): Some dilemmas of post-industrialism in a region of traditional industry: The case of the Katowice conurbation, Poland. Moravian Geographical Reports, 24, 1, 42–54.
<https://doi.org/10.1515/mgr-2016-0004>
43. , A., LORENTZEN, A. (2007): Proximity, knowledge and innovation in peripheral regions. On the intersection between geographical and organizational proximity. European Planning Studies, 15, 4, 457–466.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310601133260>
44. , N., KUNZMANN, K. (2006): Entwicklungsperspektiven ländlicher Räume in Zeiten des Metropolenfiebers. disP – The Planning Review, 42, 166, 58–70.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2006.10556963>
45. , J., SILOVSKÁ, H., ŘÍHOVÁ, G., JÍLEK, P. (2013): Regionální multiplikační efekt jako indikátor lokálního rozvoje. E+M Ekonomie a management, XVI, 3, 20–33.
46. , A., MALMBERG, B., LUNDEQUIST, P. (2000): Agglomeration and firm performance: Economies of scale, localisation, and urbanisation among Swedish export firms. Environment and Planning A, 32, 305–321.
<https://doi.org/10.1068/a31202>
47. , A. (1996): Sticky Places in a Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial Districts. Economic Geography, 72, 3, 293–313.
<https://doi.org/10.2307/144402>
48. , R., SUNLEY, P. (2006): Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6, 4, 395–437.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbl012>
49. , R., TRIPPL, M. (2014): System failures, knowledge bases and regional innovation policies. disP-The Planning Review, 50, 1, 24–32.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2014.926722>
50. McCANN, P. (2013): Modern Urban and Regional Economics. Second Edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
51. MEIJERS, E., BURGER, M. J. (2015): Stretching the concept of ‘borrowed size’. Urban Studies.
<https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015597642>
52. , F., RUBALCABA, L. (2013): Are knowledge-intensive services highly concentrated? Evidence from European regions. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 104, 2, 215–232.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2012.00739.x>
53. , E., DOLOREUX, D. (2009): What should we know about knowledge intensive business services. Technology in Society, 31, 1, 64–72.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2008.10.001>
54. , G. (2013): The future of non-metropolitan areas. Regional Science and Policy Review, 5, 219–224.
55. , J., MÜLLER, J. (2008): Vnitřní periferie v České republice jako mechanismus sociální exkluze. Sociologický časopis, 44, 2, 321–348.
56. , D., SMALLBONE, D. (2000): Innovative activity in SMEs and rural economic development: Some evidence from England. European Planning Studies, 8, 1, 87–106.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/096543100110947>
57. OECD (2012): Redefining Urban: a new way to measure metropolitan areas. OECD, New York.
58. , K., ISAKSEN, A., FRAAS, M., JOHNSTADT, T. (2007): Technology cities in Norway: Innovating in glocal networks. European Planning Studies, 15, 4, 549–566.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310601134896>
59. ÖZDEMIR, E. (2005): Different definitions of ‘periphery’ and different peripheries in the EU. Middle East Technical University.
60. , J. B. (2002): Missing elements in the analysis of agglomeration economies. International Regional Science Review, 25, 2, 151–168.
<https://doi.org/10.1177/016001702762481221>
61. , P. (2004): Regional development implications of foreign direct investment in Central Europe. European Urban and Regional Studies, 11, 1, 47–70.
<https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776404039142>
62. , P. (2012): The internationalization of corporate R&D and the automotive industry R&D of East-Central Europe. Economic Geography, 88, 3, 279–310.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2012.01155.x>
63. , P., ŽÍŽALOVÁ, P. (2016): Linkages and spillovers in global production networks: Firm-level analysis of the Czech automotive industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 16, 2, 331–363.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu041>
64. , P., ŽENKA, J. (2016): Value creation and value capture in the automotive industry: Empirical evidence from Czechia. Environment and Planning A, 48, 5, 937–959.
<https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X15619934>
65. , M. (2006): Extraregional Linkages and the Territorial Embeddedness of Multinational Branch Plants: Evidence from the South Tyrol Region in Northeast Italy. Economic Geography, 82, 4, 421–441.
<https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2006.tb00324.x>
66. , J., LEHOCKÝ, F. (2016): Priestorová distribúcia a sektorová štruktúra priemyslu na Slovensku. Acta Geographica Universitatis Comenianae, 60, 1, 69–102.
67. -POSE, A., FITJAR, R. (2013): Buzz, archipelago economies and the future of intermediate and peripheral areas in a spiky world. European Planning Studies, 21, 3, 355–372.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.716246>
68. RUMPEL, P., BORUTA, T., SLACH, O. a kol. (2011): Komplexní regionální marketing periferního rurálního regionu Jesenicko. Aleš Čeněk, Plzeň.
69. , E. (2005): Decline of the district, renewal of firms: an evolutionary approach to footwear production in the Pirmasens area, Germany. Environment and Planning A, 37, 617–634.
<https://doi.org/10.1068/a36275>
70. , A. J. (2009): Human capital resources and requirements across the metropolitan hierarchy of the USA. Journal of Economic Geography, 9, 207–226.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbn051>
71. SLACH, O., RUMPEL, P., KOUTSKÝ, J. (2013): Profilace měkkých faktorů regionálního rozvoje. Accendo-Centrum pro vědu a výzkum.
72. , J., LEE, D. (2012): Revisiting the branch plant syndrome: Review of literature on foreign direct investment and regional development in Western advanced economies. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 16, 3, 243–259.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2012.733589>
73. , K. (2007): Regionality, innovation policy and peripheral regions in Finland, Sweden and Norway. Fennia, 185, 15–29.
74. , P. (2005): City and innovation: Different size, different strategy. European Planning Studies, 13, 6, 853–877.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500187961>
75. , F., TRIPPL, M. (2005): One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 8, 1203–1219.
76. , P. (1975): Branch Plants and Regional Development. Town Planning Review, 46, 1, 47–62.
<https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.46.1.l2w0j2662l852071>
77. VITURKA, M., PAŘIL, V., TONEV, P., ŠAŠINKA, P., KUNC, J. (2017): The metropolisation processes: A case of Central Europe and the Czech Republic. Prague Economic Papers (v tisku). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.624.
<https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.624>
78. , S., HOOD, N., PETERS, E. (1994): Multinational Enterprises and Regional Economic Development. Regional Studies, 28, 7, 657–677.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409412331348566>
79. , J., NOVOTNÝ, J., SLACH, O., KVĚTOŇ, V. (2015): Industrial specialization and economic performance of microregions: evidence from Czechia. Norsk Geografissk Tidsskrift, 69, 2, 67–79.
<https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2015.1009859>
80. ŽENKA, J., NOVOTNÝ, J., SLACH, O., IVAN, I. (2017): Spatial Distribution of Knowledge-Intensive Business Services in a Small Post-Communist Economy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy.
<https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0260-9>
81. ŽENKA, J., SLACH, O. (2016): Ekonomická výkonnost a struktura českých nemetropolitních regionů: vstupní debata. Sborník Výroční konference ČGS, Jihočeská univerzita, České Budějovice, 235–246.
82. , J., PAVLÍNEK, P. (2013): Český automobilový průmysl v globálních produkčních sítích: regionální souvislosti rozvoje v období 1998–2008. Geografie, 118, 2, 116–137.
83. , J., SLACH, O., SOPKULIAK, A. (2017): Typologie českých nemetropolitních regionů z hlediska faktorů, mechanismů a aktérů regionálního rozvoje – datová a metodická příloha. Geografie, 122, 3, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319042064_Typologie_ceskych_ nemetropolitnich_regionu_z_hlediska_faktoru_mechanismu_a_akteru_regionalniho_ rozvoje_datova_a_metodicka_priloha.
