Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Creative Firms as Change Agents in Creative Spaces Cover

Creative Firms as Change Agents in Creative Spaces

Quaestiones Geographicae
Volume 31 (2012): Issue 4 (December 2012)
By:  and    
Open Access
|Jan 2013
References

References

  1. Anderson P. & Petersen N., 1993. A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis., 39: 1261-1264.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  2. Beise M. & Stahl H., 1999. Public research and industrial innovation in Germany., 28: 397-422.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  3. Bergmann H., Japsen A. & Tamásy Ch., 2002.. Universität zu Köln, Universität Lüneburg, Köln-Lüneburg.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Charnes A., Cooper W.W. & Rhodes E., 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units.2: 429-444.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  5. Deeds D.L., DeCarolis D. & Coombs J., 1999. Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures: An empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms.15 (3): 211-229.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  6. Florida R., 2002.. Basic Books, New York.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Florida R., 2003. Entrepreneurship, creativity and regional economic growth. In: Hart D.M. (ed.),. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  8. Forte F., Fusco Girard L. & Nijkamp P., 2006. Smart policy, creative strategy and urban development., 35 (4): 947-963.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  9. Fusco Girard L. & Nijkamp P. (eds), 2011.Ashgate, Aldershot.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. Gang J., Higgins B., Rodriguez R.L., Simpkins A. & Zaikos M.M., 2011. From melting pot to mosaic: The cultural opportunities and challenges of immigration.. The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Chicago, Ill.: 45-60.
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. Golany B., 1988. An interactive MOLP procedure for the extension of DEA to effectiveness analysis.39: 725-734.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  12. Howkins J., 2001.Allan Lane, London.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. Jacobs J., 1961.Random House, New York.
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. Kourtit K. & Nijkamp P., 2012. In search of creative champions in high-tech spaces: A spatial application of strategic performance management.(forthcoming).
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  15. Kourtit K., Nijkamp P., Lowik S., van Vught F. & Vulto P., 2011. From islands of innovation to creative hotspots., 3 (3): 145-161.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  16. Kourtit K., Möhlmann J., Nijkamp P. & Rouwendal J., 2012a. The geography of creative industries and cultural heritage.(forthcoming).
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Kourtit K., Nijkamp P. & Arribas-Bel D., 2012b.The creative urban diaspora economy: A disparity analysis among migrant entrepreneurs. In: Kresl P. (ed.),(forthcoming).
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  18. Lagendijk A., 2001. Scaling knowledge production: How significant is the region? In: Fischer M.M. & Fröhling J. (eds),Springer-Verlag, Berlin: 79-100.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  19. Landry C., 2000.. Earthscan, London.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  20. Landry C., 2007.Earthscan, London.
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. Oughton C., Landabaso M. & Morgan K., 2002. The regional innovation paradox: Innovation policy and industrial policy., 27: 97-110.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  22. Pfirrman O., 1994. The geography of innovation in small and medium-sized firms in West Germany.6 (1): 27-41.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  23. Porter M.E., 2000. Locations, clusters, company strategy. In: Clark G.L., Feldman M.P. & Gertler M.S. (eds),. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 253-274.
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. Scott A.J., 2006. Creative cities: Conceptual issues and policy questions., 28: 1-17.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. Seiford L.M. & Zhu J., 2003.ment analysis - measuring attractiveness and progress., 31: 397.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  26. Suzuki S. & Nijkamp P., 2011. A stepwise-projection data envelopment analysis for public transport operations in Japan.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  27. , 4: 139-156.
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Suzuki S., Nijkamp P., Rietveld P. & Pels E., 2010. A distance friction minimisation approach in data envelopment analysis - a comparative study on airport efficiency, 207: 1104-1115.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  29. Suzuki S., Nijkamp P. & Rietveld P., 2011. Regional efficiency improvement by means of data envelopment analysis through Euclidean distance minimisation including input factors: An application to tourist regions in Italy.s, 90 (1): 67-90.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  30. Tellier L.-C., 2009.. University Press of Quebec, Quebec.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. Tone K., 2001. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis., 130: 498-509.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  32. Tone K., 2002. A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis., 143: 32-41.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  33. De Waal A., 2007.. Palgrave MacMillan, London.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10117-012-0032-6 | Journal eISSN: 2081-6383 | Journal ISSN: 2082-2103 (formerly 0137-477X)
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 19 - 31
Published on: Jan 16, 2013
Published by: Adam Mickiewicz University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
creative sector,
creative industries,
business performance analysis,
Flying Disc model,
Structural Equations Model,
new economy,
knowledge-based society,
data envelopment analysis,
strategic performance management,
spatial distribution,
geographical determinants
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geography

© 2013 Karima Kourtit, Peter Nijkamp, published by Adam Mickiewicz University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 31 (2012): Issue 4 (December 2012)
Previous article
Next article