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

Jan Ženka, Ondřej Slach, Andrej Sopkuliak

University of Ostrava, Faculty of Science, Department of Social Geography and Regional Development, Ostrava, Czechia

Received October 2016
Accepted May 2017

References

1. ASHEIM, 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. AUDRETSCH, D., FELDMANN, M. (1996): R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production. The American Economic Review, 86, 3, 630–640.
3. BLAŽEK, 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. BLOTEVOGEL, 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. CAPELLO, R. (2000): The City Network Paradigm: Measuring Urban Network Externalities. Urban Studies, 37, 1925–1945. <https://doi.org/10.1080/713707232>
7. CHINITZ, B. (1961): Contrasts in agglomeration: New York and Pittsburgh. The American Economic Review, 51, 2, 279–289.
8. CICCONE, A., HALL, R. (1996): Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity. The American Economic Review, 86, 1, 54–70.
9. CRONE, 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. DIJKSTRA, 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. DOLOREUX, 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. DRUCKER, 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. DURANTON, 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. DURANTON, 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. FARHAUER, 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. FITJAR, 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. GORDON, 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. GRECO, 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. HAMPL, M., BLAŽEK, J., ŽÍŽALOVÁ, P. (2008): Faktory – mechanizmy – aktéři v regionálním vývoji: aplikace konceptu kritického realizmu. Ekonomický časopis, 56, 7, 696–711.
26. HAMPL, M., MARADA, M. (2015): Sociogeografická regionalizace Česka. Geografie, 120, 3, 397–421.
27. HASSINK, 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. HAVLÍČEK, 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. HENDERSON, 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. HENDERSON, 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. HENDERSON, 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. HOBOR, 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. ILLERIS, 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. ISAKSEN, 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. ISAKSEN, 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. JACOBS, 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. JENSEN, 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. KARLSEN, 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. KRZYSTOFIK, 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. LAGENDIJK, 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. LEBER, 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. MACHÁČEK, 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. MALMBERG, 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. MARKUSEN, 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. MARTIN, 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. MARTIN, 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. MERINO, 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. MÜLLER, 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. MULLIGAN, G. (2013): The future of non-metropolitan areas. Regional Science and Policy Review, 5, 219–224.
55. MUSIL, J., MÜLLER, J. (2008): Vnitřní periferie v České republice jako mechanismus sociální exkluze. Sociologický časopis, 44, 2, 321–348.
56. NORTH, 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. ONSAGER, 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. PARR, 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. PAVLÍNEK, 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. PAVLÍNEK, 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. PAVLÍNEK, 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. PAVLÍNEK, 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. PERKMANN, 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. RUSNÁK, J., LEHOCKÝ, F. (2016): Priestorová distribúcia a sektorová štruktúra priemyslu na Slovensku. Acta Geographica Universitatis Comenianae, 60, 1, 69–102.
67. RODRÍGUEZ-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. SCHAMP, 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. SCOTT, 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. SONN, 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. SUORSA, K. (2007): Regionality, innovation policy and peripheral regions in Finland, Sweden and Norway. Fennia, 185, 15–29.
74. THERRIEN, P. (2005): City and innovation: Different size, different strategy. European Planning Studies, 13, 6, 853–877. <https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500187961>
75. TÖDTLING, F., TRIPPL, M. (2005): One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 8, 1203–1219.
76. TOWNROE, 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. YOUNG, 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. ŽENKA, 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. ŽENKA, J., PAVLÍNEK, P. (2013): Český automobilový průmysl v globálních produkčních sítích: regionální souvislosti rozvoje v období 1998–2008. Geografie, 118, 2, 116–137.
83. ŽENKA, 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.
front cover

ISSN 1212-0014 (Print) ISSN 2571-421X (Online)

Archive