BOOSTING TECH - Recherche en IA spécialisée au MIT

BOOSTING TECH
INNOVATION

ECOSYSTEMS IN CITIES:
A FRAMEWORK FOR GROWTH AND SUSTAINABILITY
OF URBAN TECH INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

VICTOR MULAS, MICHAEL MINGES, AND HALLIE APPLEBAUM

Cities are increasingly emerging as the new centers of technological innovation.
A shift is under way from technology parks in suburban areas, where universi-
liens, research labs, and the private sector are located together, to entrepreneurial
activity within cities. Studies on venture capital (VC) investment in the United
States reveal that innovation is moving from suburbs to downtown cities (MPI,
2014). Aujourd'hui, San Francisco hosts more VC investment than Silicon Valley and

New York City, where the innovation start-
up scene was nascent a decade ago, a
become the second-largest tech startup
ecosystem in the United States, with over
$3.1 billion in VC investment in 2013 (Endeavor Insight 2014). This trend is not unique to the United States. Startups are burgeoning in major cities around the world, including London, Berlin, Madrid, Moscow, Istanbul, Tel Aviv, Cape Town, Mumbai, Buenos Aires, and Rio de Janeiro, to name a few (voir la figure 1.1). Factors such as proximity, density, and vari- ety of people and firms contribute to this phenomenon (Athey et al 2007). New tech- nology trends have lowered the cost of innovation and allowed entrepreneurs to enjoy the benefits from agglomeration economies. Cloud computing, open soft- ware and hardware, social networks, and global payment platforms, among other things, have made it easier to create a start- up with fewer physical resources and per- sonnel. If in the 1990s an entrepreneur needed $2 million and months of work to
develop a minimum viable prototype, aujourd'hui
an entrepreneur would typically need less
que $50,000 and six weeks of work (Center for an Urban Future 2012) et, in some cases, these costs can be as low as $3,000
(Mytton 2009). This trend is allowing entre-
preneurs to take advantage of city agglom-
eration effects to a greater extent than
before.

Entrepreneurs “want to live where the
action is” – that is, in places where other
young people, social activities, peers, et
entrepreneurs are located (Florida 2013).
Entrepreneurs look for conventional start-
up support, such as mentor networks or role
models, as well as nightlife, meetups, sociale
activités, and other potential “collision”

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

points, a combination best provided by
cities (Satell 2013). Innovation is becoming
urban; what was previously the preserve of
“innovation parks” is now growing organi-
cally within cities. In this paper, urban tech-
nology innovation ecosystems are defined
as the collection of stakeholders, assets, et
their interactions in city environments
resulting in technology (in particular ICT)-
based innovation and entrepreneurship.
The unit of study of this research is the city
area of influence, understood as the core
metropolitan area. The terms “urban” and
“city” are used interchangeably to refer to
the ecosystem.

URBAN TECHNOLOGY
INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS
RESULT IN NEW SOURCES
OF EMPLOYMENT AND
GROWTH

Urban technology innovation ecosystems
not only increase the number of technology
startups in cities but also result in new
employment and economic growth by cre-
ation of new businesses and employment
catégories. In New York City, the technolo-
gy sector has increased jobs faster than in
other sectors and accounts for 12 percent of
city tax revenue (HR & A Advisors 2014).
Depuis 2006 à 2013, the technology innova-
tion ecosystem in New York City created
over 500,000 new jobs (voir la figure 1.2). Le
positive correlation between growth in the

ICT industry of a city and job creation is
being observed in other cities as well.
Bangkok has been adding over 3,000 jobs a
year to its ICT industry (National Statistical
Office of Thailand). In Barcelona, ICT is
recognized as a key industry with 29 par-
cent of all companies and 48 percent of
employees involved in the knowledge econ-
omy (Barcelona City Council 2012).
Medellin generates over $100 million a year
from Business Process Outsourcing (BPO)
and has attracted a number of multination-
als to establish BPO centers in the city
(Keshetri et al 2012).

As the economy evolves into what many
think is a “third industrial revolution” (Le
Economist 2012) that may erode traditional
manufacturing jobs and those requiring
routine cognitive skills, the creation of new
sources of employment and growth is para-
mount to maintaining competitiveness,
reducing poverty, and increasing shared
prosperity.

THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
DEVELOPED AND
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

The emergence of technology innovation
ecosystems in cities presents an opportuni-
ty for developed and developing countries
alike. Globally, over half of the population
lives in cities (United Nations 2014), et
this percentage approaches 80 percent in
regions such as Latin America. The fastest

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Víctor Mulas is a Senior Program Officer with Innovation Acceleration Program-Innovation Labs
at the World Bank Group.

Michael Minges is the lead consultant at ictDATA.org.

Hallie Applebaum is an Open Innovation Specialist at the World Bank Group.

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 1.1. Startups Founded by Global City

Source: Florida, 2013.

urbanization rates in the world are in Africa
and Asia (Phillips 2014; United Nations
2013;
2014).
and United Nations
Developing countries can tap into the grow-
ing resource of human capital and talent to
produce innovation centers within their
own countries that generate growth, entre-
preneurship, and employability while
addressing local problems. Tech and entre-
preneurship skills have become easier to
develop for unskilled and unemployed pop-
ulations, especially young people. Pour
instance, coding and open hardware skills
that previously took years to learn can now
be trained in months or even weeks. Là
is anecdotal evidence that these programs
are increasing employability and entrepre-
neurship in these ecosystems (Meng 2013;
and Amirtha 2014).

Cependant, technology innovation ecosys-
tems are not growing equally in all cities.

Some cities are experiencing higher, faster,
and more sustainable growth of these
ecosystems than others, resulting in a high-
er number of startups, investissement, employ-
ment, and economic growth. It is as yet
unclear what factors cause different growth
rates and how this growth can be supported
with policy actions. Research suggests that
density of people and firms and agglomera-
tion effects play a critical role (Carlino and
Kerr 2014; and Pan et al 2013). There seems
to be a positive correlation between the size
and density of the city and the organic
growth of urban tech innovation ecosys-
thèmes, as the ecosystems tend to emerge first
in the largest cities, such as New York,
Londres, Mumbai, Sao Paolo, or Shanghai
(Pan et al 2013). Cependant, it is unclear why
some of the largest and densest cities grow
their ecosystems at different rates, or why
some smaller cities, such as Manchester or

100

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Chiffre 1.2. Technology Employment Impacts in New York City

Source: Adapted from HR&A Advisors, 2014.

Helsinki, have strong technology innova-
tion ecosystems.

Inputs from Field Experience: Connections
and Communities Play a Key Role

The World Bank has been involved in a
number of activities with client countries to
build ecosystems of technology-led innova-
tion. Through these activities, we have
observed factors that support the growth
and sustainability of urban technology

innovation ecosystems. We find that creat-
ing and supporting a community of tech
entrepreneurs, coupled with incentives for
kickstarting the ecosystem, for example
through competitions and challenges, et
provision of rapid skills programs, souvent
provides a formula to grow and sustain
technology innovation ecosystems. Tableau
1.1 lists some of the World Bank activities
related to technology innovation ecosys-

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

101

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 2.1. World Bank activities relating to technology innovation ecosystems

tems that follow this formula. Appendix B
provides more details on these activities.

Through these activities, we have observed
how urban tech innovation ecosystems
develop and grow in cities with different
population sizes and wealth characteristics,
ranging from three hundred thousand
inhabitants in Manizales to two million in
Beirut. Anecdotally, we have found that
connections and communities play a key
role in the surge and sustainability of these
innovation ecosystems. Partners in these
activités, including city governments and
entities supporting urban innovation from
Amsterdam, Barcelona, Helsinki, Nouveau
York, and the Republic of Korea, have
arrived at the same conclusions (voir
Appendix A for details of these partners).

This finding implies that the emergence and
sustainability of urban technology ecosys-
tems can be supported with policy actions,
and that those policy actions can obtain
results in the short term (that is, one to
three years). Some cities, such as New York,
are already creating technology innovation
ecosystems with this hypothesis in mind
(see text box).

A FRAMEWORK TO
ANALYZE URBAN
TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION
ECOSYSTEMS

Research Objective and Approach

Given that connections and communities
play a key role in the growth and sustain-

ability of innovation ecosystems, which can
be supported with policy actions, a research
project was developed to identify the key
success factors to grow, develop, and sustain
technology innovation ecosystems in cities
in order to inform policy actions.

Research began by identifying and review-
ing existing studies applicable to urban
technologie
ecosystems.
innovation
Following this review, and taking into
account experiences with working with
client countries and partners, a framework
was developed to test the following hypoth-
esis: Connections and communities are key
success factors for the growth and sustain-
ability of urban technology innovation
ecosystems. This hypothesis was tested for
New York City and initial results are pre-
sented in this working paper.

The framework identifies and categorizes
key success factors for the growth of an
urban technology innovation ecosystem
and compares the impact of such factors to
different
cities.
Finalement, it is expected that the frame-
work can be used to assess the impact of
policies to grow and sustain urban technol-
ogy innovation ecosystems.

ecosystems

across

LITERATURE REVIEW

A review of the literature on innovation
ecosystems in cities was conducted, d'abord
examining innovation and ecosystems and
then considering the applicability of these
concepts in the urban context. There are a
limited number of studies and frameworks

102

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

that specifically address urban technology
innovation ecosystems, so the review also
included studies on innovation and cities,
primarily indexes of city innovation and
competitiveness to identify key factors for
innovation in cities that could apply to the
technology innovation ecosystems. La clé
findings from this review are that:

•

There is only a limited consensus on the
how urban innovation ecosystems devel-
op and grow, et

A measurable framework is lacking that
enables urban innovation ecosystems to
be compared across cities.

Cependant, there is consensus on the critical
factors that impact innovation in cities.
Building upon these factors, opérations
expérience, and the experiences of partners,
a framework was developed.

INNOVATION AND
ECOSYSTEMS

The OECD (2005) defines two forms of
innovation:

Technological product innovation: “the
implementation/commercialization of a
product with improved performance
characteristics such as to deliver objec-
tively new or improved services to the
consumer.”

Technological process innovation: “the
implementation/adoption of new or sig-
nificantly improved production or deliv-
ery methods. It may involve changes in
equipment, human resources, fonctionnement
methods or a combination of these.”

This report is concerned with both of these
aspects and in their translation through
entrepreneurship into startups. The litera-
ture is ripe with studies relating innovation
to ecosystems (Durst and Poutanen 2013).
An innovation ecosystem parallels the envi-
ronmental concept where interrelated ele-
ments strive for equilibrium. The ecosystem

is modeled as an economic equilibrium
resulting from the interaction between vari-
ous innovation actors (for example, busi-
ness, universities, government) (Jackson
2011). There are several definitions of inno-
vation ecosystems in the literature. Mercan
and Göktaş (2011) define an innovation
ecosystem as consisting of “economic
agents and economic relations as well as the
non-economic parts such as technology,
institutions, sociological interactions and
the culture.” The Brookings Institution,
applying this concept to urban environ-
ments, but limiting it to districts, defines an
innovation ecosystem as “a synergistic rela-
tionship between people, firms, and place
(the physical geography of the district) que
facilitates idea generation and accelerates
commercialization” (Katz and Wagner
2014).

FACTORS FOR INNOVATION
AND COMPETITIVENESS IN
CITIES

This section begins with a review of indexes
and studies that include factors of innova-
tion in cities. This is followed by a review of
studies of models for innovation ecosystems
in cities. These elements are analyzed to
develop an urban tech innovation ecosys-
tem framework.

Several institutions compile city rankings
based on various measures of competitive-
ness, a number of which are related to inno-
vation aspects. These indexes can help iden-
tify factors to develop innovation within
cities and were used as a starting point in
developing our framework:

•

Hot Spots 2025: Benchmarking the future
competitiveness of cities (EIU 2013) notes,
“Global business is beginning to plan strat-
egy from a city, rather than a country per-
spective.” It defines a city’s competitive-
ness as the ability to attract capital, busi-
nesses, talent, and visitors, also important
criteria for city innovation ecosystems.
The index ranks 120 cities across the

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

103

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

New York City Policies to Create a
Sustainable and Vibrant Tech Innovation Ecosystem

The growth of New York City’s tech innovation ecosystem is not entirely random. Il a
received active support from Government of New York City, with targeted and strategic pol-
icy actions. New York consciously followed this strategy to create new sources of income
and competitiveness during the financial crisis. Despite the size and importance of New
York, the challenges faced by the city to develop a technology-based innovation ecosystem
were similar to those facing many other cities. This included: (je) lack of technology-special-
ized talent, (ii) insufficient sources of seed capital for startups, (iii) lack of physical space for
entrepreneurs, et (iv) a limited and uncoordinated community of tech-led innovators and
entrepreneurs.

New York addressed these challenges through a strategic program with targeted policies.
Specific actions included (je) promoting collaborator spaces linked to mentor networks and
incubators, (ii) fostering entrepreneurial funds to attract VCs into New York startups, (iii)
attracting engineering schools to develop programs in the city and providing basic skills
training and access to open hardware tools in public spaces (Par exemple, libraries), et (iv)
energizing the community through competitions and challenges (based on city problems).
This last strategy is accomplished by the city opening data, developing mentorship networks
for tech entrepreneurs, and promoting the tech community, including promotion cam-
paies, support of high-ranking city officials, and public awards. These actions were con-
ducted in partnership with the community and private sector, thereby providing incentives

world using 32 mainly qualitative indica-
tors grouped into eight categories: eco-
nomic strength, physical capital, financial
maturity, institutional character, humain
capital, global appeal, social and cultural
character, and environment and natural
hazards.

•

The Global Cities Index (GCI) (A.T.
Kearney 2014) states, “By creating an
environment that spawns, attracts, et
retains top talent, businesses, ideas, et
capital, a global city can generate benefits
that extend far beyond municipal bound-
aries.” The GCI measures the level of city
global engagement covering 84 cities
en utilisant 26 metrics in five categories: busi-
ness activity, human capital, information
exchange, cultural experience, and politi-
cal engagement.

•

A study ranking cities by GDP per capita
(OECD 2006) finds that labor productiv-
ity is the main factor in explaining differ-

ences. Innovation is intimately tied to
productivity; cities with high value-added
activities such as high-tech and advanced
services are closely linked to R&D activi-
ties and the generation of innovation. Le
study notes that applicants located in
cities file over 80% of patents in the coun-
tries studied.

•

The Most Innovative Cities in Asia Pacific
(Solidance 2013) uses six categories to
measure the level of innovativeness in 16
cities in the region: human talent, knowl-
edge creation, technologie, society, gov-
ernment, and global integration. Le
findings are aimed at informing compa-
nies about the “most attractive places” in
terms of an effective innovation ecosys-
thème. Key factors include availability of
educated and skilled people attracted by
diversity and amenities; ability of univer-
sities, enterprises and government to pro-
duce knowledge; the livability of a city
and its ability to sustain culture; the level

104

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

to the latter. The focus on community development, collaboration spaces, and mentorship
networks proved to be a success, attracting a community that is self-sustainable and contin-
ues to grow.

New York City’s success in developing a sustainable technology-led innovation ecosystem
presents lessons for cities around the world, in both developed and developing countries. Comme
its ecosystem grew, New York also actively engaged poor neighborhoods through training
and integration into new employment opportunities generated by the ecosystem. Almost
half of the jobs generated in the New York tech ecosystem do not require a bachelor’s degree
(HR & A Advisors 2014). Pilot initiatives targeting poor and unskilled population from
neighborhoods, such as the Coalition for Queens, confirm that rapid skills training with
mentorship results in direct employability. From the first batch of this program, 20 gradu-
ates, 70 percent obtained full-time employment, 15 percent became entrepreneurs, et le
rest entered formal education programs (Hsu 2014). Plus loin, almost a quarter of New York
tech startup founders do not have any technical background, and most of these startups
focus on non-tech sectors, introducing technology-driven innovation to existing industries
and businesses (HR & A Advisors 2014).

New York has been able to develop one of the largest tech-innovation ecosystems with lim-
ited tech talent, which is a constraint many cities face. New York is not the only city applying
these policies and support. Other cities—including Amsterdam, Barcelona, Helsinki, et
Londres, to name a few—are also actively supporting the growth and sustainability of their
innovation ecosystems with similar policies and areas of focus targeted to their local needs.

of technology in the city; a favorable reg-
ulatory environment; and global integra-
tion and future orientation.

•

The New York Economic Development
Corporation has created a New York
innovation index. The index tracks
progress in six dimensions related to
resources directed towards innovation
and the results of such innovation in the
city’s economy. Inputs to innovation
include R&D, Finance, Human Capital;
outputs include Intellectual Property,
High-tech Gross City Product, et
Entrepreneurship
and Employment
Dynamics (NYEDC 2011).

A review of the indexes in Table 2.1 shows
that similar factors are used in the reviewed
indexes to determine innovation within
cities. The factors that are most common in
these indexes are:

•

Human capital

•

Business activity

Government

Information/knowledge

Infrastructure

Finance

Social/cultural Aspects

Existing Frameworks to Understand
Urban Innovation Ecosystems

Few studies have proposed frameworks to
explain innovation ecosystems in urban
the review, six
environnements. Depuis
approaches were identified. These frame-
works and their key factors were compared
with those identified from the city indexes
revoir. This analysis formed the basis for
the proposed framework. This section
describes the six framework approaches
that were reviewed:

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

105

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Tableau 2.1. Comparison of Indexes Related to Competitiveness and Innovation in
Cities

Winden et al (2007) in a first approach
looking at the knowledge economy in cities
finds that the quality of city foundations
and successful organizing capacity are
important for generating human capital and
knowledge-based industries that then gen-
erate innovation. This framework focuses
on factors to develop the knowledge econo-
my in cities, including the knowledge base
(human capital), the industrial structure,
quality of life and amenities, accessibility
(infrastructure), diversity, scale, and social
equity.

Schaffers et al (2011), taking the perspective
of smart cities, propose a framework where
all city economic activities and utilities form
the innovation ecosystem, with citizens and
organizations participating in its develop-
ment via supply and consumption of goods
and services.

Crowley (2011) proposes a framework with
three main elements: urban firms and entre-
preneurs, institutions, and human capital
(see Figure 2.1). Firms and entrepreneurs
are at the core, driving the supply and
Institutions,
innovation.
demand
y compris
universities,
governments,
research centers, business organizations
et d'autres, create and spread knowledge, un

pour

key driver of innovation. The third compo-
nent in this framework is human capital.
Crowley (2011) argues, “The concentration
of highly skilled people in one place pro-
motes the exchange of ideas and learning,
facilitating the process of innovation.”
Cities need to attract talent by providing the
adequate environment. Three key drivers of
innovation are proposed: réseaux, mar-
kets, and wider conditions. Firms and
entrepreneurs connect with institutions and
people through networks. These networks
promote collaboration, and help generate
ideas and disseminate knowledge. Markets,
including consumer markets and public
procurement, drive the demand for new
products and services. People’s mobility
within the labor market contributes to
knowledge dissemination. Enfin, Crowley
finds that the wider conditions, such as
good schools, availability of financial
ressources, well-maintained infrastructure,
and adequate housing available, also con-
tribute to the success of an innovation
ecosystem.

The European Commission (EC) (2013)
considers a city innovation ecosystem to
consist of the processes linking citizens
(Personnes) with a built environment (Place)
and public organizations and policymakers

106

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

(Public) through business (Private) (voir
Chiffre 2.2). With over two thirds of
Europeans living in urban areas, the EC rec-
ognizes the importance of promoting inno-
vation to enhance economic growth and
increase citizen welfare.

Cloche (2014) proposes nine elements that
make innovation ecosystems succeed in
cities:

•

Talent: people with the right skills and
passion;

Customers: although clients can be found
around the globe thanks to the use of
internet, some product sales depend on
the local market;

Capital: financing available for new prod-
uct developments;

Academic institutions: supply skilled
labor and promote the development of
new ideas;

Heroes: examples of successful startups;

Guides: provide advice and help;

Support services: include lawyers, gov-
ernment officials, public relations firms,
advertising firms, etc.;

Gathering places: promote “collisions”
and the generation of ideas; et

Comparative advantages: unique charac-
teristics of the city.

The Brookings Institution focuses on inno-
vation districts (Katz and Wagner 2014).
This focus is limiting as it reduces the scope
of innovation across a city and ignores the
social connections generated beyond geog-
raphie. Cependant, some of the concepts and
factors identified can be applicable to the
city as a whole and inform a wider approach
of the city as the innovation ecosystem. Le
Brookings Institution’s framework finds
that economic, physique, and networking
assets are present in all innovation districts

(see Figure 2.3). These three assets classes
are described as follows:

Economic assets refer to institutions, organe-
izations and enterprises that drive, cultivate
or support innovation. Ainsi, économique
assets are categorized in three types: (je)
Innovation drivers, focused on developing
cutting-edge products and services (pour
exemple
(ii)
Innovation cultivators, support the growth
of entrepreneurs (for example incubators,
accelerators, coworking spaces, community
collèges); et, (iii) Neighborhood-building
amenities, provide support to workers and
residents (for example, coffee shops, retail
stores).

institutions);

recherche

Physical assets refer to private and public
buildings and infrastructure that allow col-
laboration and connectivity. Public assets
include parks and streets. Public spaces not
only bring people together, but they also
can serve as labs to test new products.
Private assets include private spaces and
buildings, such as office affordable office
spaces for startups. There are also physical
assets that help “knit the district together”,
such as sidewalks, bike lanes and public
les espaces, and others that connect the district
to the city and the world, such as trans-
portation and broadband.

Networking assets refer to the relationship
between the ecosystem’s actors. These net-
works and cultivate and accelerate innova-
tion through the exchange of information
and ideas, and the increased collaboration.
Networking assets can build strong ties (pour
exemple, workshops and conferences) ou
weak ties (for example, networking events
and hackathons).

A NEW APPROACH
TO URBAN TECHNOLOGY
INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

Through the literature review on indexes
and frameworks related to innovation in
cities and innovation ecosystems in urban

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

107

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 2.1. Crowley’s Innovation Ecosystem Framework

Source: Crowley 2011

environnements, four main categories to grow
and sustain innovation ecosystems emerge:

•

Human capital or people

Physical assets or infrastructure

Economic assets, et

Government and policy or enabling envi-
ronment

These
four categories are connected
through networks and markets. This last
element finds traction in the most recent
two frameworks proposed (Bell and The
Brookings Institution). The Brookings
Institution framework expands the concept

to networking assets, which include events
that create community, such as meetups or
challenges and collaboration spaces, tel que
coworking spaces, accelerators, or incuba-
tors.

Work with country clients on activities
related to developing and strengthening
urban innovation ecosystems corroborates
these categories. Several urban innovation
ecosystems have been mapped by the World
Bank and the Research Partners (voir
Appendix A for World Bank activities and
Appendix B
for Research Partners).
Through these mapping efforts, these four
categories have been identified as the main
components of city innovation ecosystems.

108

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Chiffre 2.2. European Commission Innovation Ecosystem Framework

Source: European Commission 2013

As urban innovation ecosystem growth and
development relies increasingly on commu-
nity building and sustainability, networking
assets have become more relevant and cen-
tral. This importance is also experienced by
city partners, which are focusing on devel-
oping and sustaining these communities
(see Appendix B).

The first four elements result from agglom-
eration effects and provide a picture of the
ingredients that the city must possess in
order to develop and grow its innovation
ecosystem. The networking element acts as
a multiplier of these factors that can boost
the size and rate of growth of the ecosystem.
As creators and sustainers of communities,
the networking element can increase the
number of “collisions” that result in innova-
tion within cities. Collisions are random
encounters with people one would normally
not meet. The theory of collisions argues

that these encounters bring new ideas, par-
spectives, and value for creating opportuni-
ties and innovation (Kaplan 2012). Le
more collisions individuals have with peo-
ple with different ideas, the more creative
and innovative these individuals may
become (Satell 2013). Ainsi, the potential
for collisions stimulates innovation and
entrepreneurial opportunities (Roberts
2014). Networking assets (as defined in the
following section) increase the potential for
collisions, acting as a multiplier of the exist-
ing elements produced by the agglomera-
tion effects in the city innovation ecosystem
(voir la figure 3.1).

Based on this premise and borrowing con-
cepts from the literature review, a holistic
framework to map and diagnose city inno-
vation ecosystems in developed and devel-
oping countries was proposed. The follow-

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

109

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 2.3. Brookings Innovation Ecosystem Framework

Source: Katz and Wagner 2014.

ing section describes this framework and its
elements.

A HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK
TO MAP AND DIAGNOSE
CITY INNOVATION
ECOSYSTEMS

The framework to map and diagnose urban
innovation ecosystems comprises two lay-
ers. The first introduces the four categories
that result from agglomeration effects and
that are common in the literature. The sec-
ond layer, which is a multiplier of the
agglomeration effects, is networking assets.
All these elements interact with each other,
but only networking assets function as mul-
tiplier for the ecosystem growth. Ce
framework is presented visually in Figure
3.2.

People are the basic element for innovation
to happen. Innovation results from the

que

resource

interactions and the work of people. A sur-
vey of tech entrepreneurs in the United
States highlighted the talent pool of employ-
ees as being the most important business-
related
cities offered
(Endeavour Insight 2013). The “creative
class” has been cited as an important factor
for generating economic output in cities
(Florida 2002). A number of characteristics
of a city’s population have a bearing on
innovation and growth. One of the most
important is that growing populations gen-
erate an increase in productivity (Hardesty
2013). Other people-related factors affect-
ing innovation include the share of immi-
subventions, number of residents with a college
degree, the labor force and its characteris-
tics, the number of patent holders, and so
sur. People also form part of the innovation
support network by serving as mentors and
guides and are a testing ground for innova-
tive products and services. Within the pro-
posed framework, this category maps the
characteristics of people that increase the

110

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Tableau 2.2. Comparison of Categories Related to Innovation Ecosystems in Cities

potential for innovation, including their
diversity, in terms of background and edu-
cation, their level of education, and the edu-
cation and training capacity of the city,
including provision of technology-related
entraînement.

Economic Assets include the elements that:
(je) interact with people to increase the num-
ber of ideas resulting in innovation and, (ii)
allow for implementing these ideas into
practical innovation. This category maps
elements such as the variety of industries,
business and sectors; the size, amount, et
diversity of companies and businesses; le
universities and research and development
facilities; the maturity and size of the tech-
nology and creative industries; et le
availability and size of innovation-oriented
investment firms, particularly for providing
seed financing.

Infrastructure facilitates interactions among
people and economic assets. This category
maps the infrastructure in the city that: (je)
provides basic living conditions, (ii) facili-
tates access to people and knowledge, ou
(iii) facilitates random collisions. Ce
includes
infrastructure,
broadband access, parks and venues for

transportation

events, festivals, cafes, restaurants, theaters,
et ainsi de suite. Green spaces attract talent to live
in the city and provide a venue for colli-
sions, in the same way as the amenity sector.
Offices are needed to house tech firms;
startups need inexpensive and adaptable
venues (that is, flexible office space).
Physical and digital connectivity—transport
and communications networks—bind city
neighborhoods “together and/or tie it to the
broader metro area” (Katz and Wagner
2014).

Enabling Environment refers to public poli-
cies and the government commitment to
promote innovation. This category identi-
fies: (je) the enabling environment provided
by the government for innovation to occur,
et (ii) the degree of commitment, promo-
tion and facilitation by the government for
development of the innovation ecosystem.
This category maps policies such as doing
entreprise, property and IP protection, busi-
ness associations, as well as specific policies
to promote the innovation ecosystem, tel
as open data, challenges, innovation pro-
mouvement, et ainsi de suite.

Networking assets increase the number of
collisions in the ecosystem, multiplying the

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

111

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 3.1. Networking Assets as Multipliers of Random Collisions

Source: Minges, 2014, adapted from Roberts, 2014.

par

provided

effet
une agglomération.
Innovation ecosystems will produce higher
results in terms of, for instance, (je)
increased number of startups, (ii) increased
value of startup exits, (iii) increased
employment in tech innovation related
activités, if the number of random colli-
sions increases. This category maps the
main networking assets, including meetups,
tech community events, bootcamps and
training programs, collaboration
skill
les espaces, accelerators,
incubators, angel
investors, venture capital, and networks of
mentors.

Accelerators, incubators, angel investors,
and venture capital are hybrid assets with
economic assets but the impact of their net-

work of mentors and entrepreneurs makes
them more valuable for the growth and sus-
tainability of the ecosystem; donc, ils
are categorized as networking assets. Le
financing functions of these assets are
included in economic assets under seed
capital and financing. Tableau 3.1 presents an
indicative list of networking assets.

Findings from Networking
Assets Analysis

If networking assets are multipliers of the
agglomeration effects in urban innovation
ecosystems this means that networking
assets are central to the ecosystem and that
connections among stakeholders are central
to the growth and sustainability of such

112

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Chiffre 3.2. City Innovation Ecosystem Framework

ecosystems. This rationale supports the
understanding of urban technology innova-
tion ecosystems as a community (or a com-
bination of communities) (see Appendix
B).

This hypothesis was tested through a com-
bination of qualitative (interviews) et
quantitative (data analytics) approaches in
New York City’s ecosystem. To familiarize
itself with the city ecosystem and its main
actors—government agencies, entrepre-
neurs, coworking spaces, and accelerator
spaces—the team conducted 21 interviews
with actors to learn about the development
of New York City’s tech innovation ecosys-
thème. From these discussions, the team
began to identify sources of data in New
York City that describe the tech innovation
ecosystem. The interviews also provided
insights on New York City’s ecosystem, its
growth, and the role of networking assets,
such as meetups, competitions and collabo-
ration spaces. The interviews also allowed

the team to learn about the policies of New
York City, its impact, its successes and fail-
ures, and how it evolved to support the
growth and sustainability of the ecosystem.

For the data analysis, the team used avail-
able data sources to quantify the value of
networking assets via their centrality in the
ecosystem as well as the impact of geogra-
phy on the ecosystem and how geographical
and social connectivity centrality affected
the performance of startups (in terms of
capital raising). Because it used mainly
CrunchBase and Angel List data, the team
focused the analysis on accelerators and
incubators. These are collaboration spaces
providing investment along with (et
sometimes as primary function to) their
networking functions. This phase of the
research did not analyze community build-
ing events or skills training programs and
events because insufficient sources of data
were available. In addition, because this
phase of research focused on testing the

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

113

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

effectiveness of the proposed social network
analysis methodologies against publicly
available data sources, research focused on
exploring the dataset at a static point in time
and did not explore impacts over time.
These additional perspectives can be
addressed in future research (see Chapter
4).

The findings from the analysis of four
research questions in relation to New York
City’s urban innovation ecosystem are sum-
marized below. As mentioned above, le
results presented here, and in more detail in
Appendix E, are interim findings resulting
from the data sources and limitations of this
recherche. Final outputs will be produced as a
result of forthcoming research and analysis.
Data sources and methodologies are also
described in detail in Appendix E.

In order to measure the value of networking
assets in urban innovation ecosystems,
research explored the impact of connections
on ecosystem success outcomes. Following
ce, the value of incremental connections
was quantified, enabling us to rank and
value individual networking assets by mul-
tiplying their success in creating new con-
nections by the value of incremental con-
nections.

Connections are defined as either social or
geographic. While there are multiple met-
rics that can be used to define success, ce
analysis considers the raising of a round of
funding as a successful outcome for startups
and by extension the ecosystem as a whole.
En tant que tel, the analysis focuses on examining
the interplay between the geographic, sociale,
and funding dynamics within New York
City’s urban innovation ecosystem.

The findings of this analysis (see Appendix
E) support the hypothesis that the social
dimension, or the connections and commu-
nités, of the ecosystem is critical for the
growth and sustainability of the ecosystem
and that networking assets, defined as com-
munity building events, skills training
events, collaboration spaces, and network-

ing of mentors, are central to this social
dimension. D'abord, networking assets (en utilisant
accelerators and incubators as a proxy) sont
central to the ecosystem’s social dimension,
being nodes of connection for startups and
other stakeholders. Deuxième, social momen-
tum of startups has a direct impact in their
success (in terms of funding). Cependant,
there is not such impact with the geographic
dimension of startups. Enfin, the social
dimension of startups expands and provides
diversity to the ecosystem beyond geo-
graphical clustering or technology districts’
boundaries.

Networking Assets are
Central to the Ecosystem

These initial findings support the hypothe-
sis that networking assets are central to
urban technology innovation ecosystems.
This implies that networking assets are the
connectors which: (je) sustain the social net-
work of the ecosystem, et (ii) have the
potential to boost the ecosystem’s growth by
increasing the collisions that result from
social connections. By being central to the
ecosystem and these connections, réseau-
ing assets would play a critical role in the
growth and success of urban technology
innovation ecosystems. Either the social
dimension of startups determines their suc-
cess (in terms of capital raising) or success
determines the of startups centrality for the
ecosystem (in its social dimension).

Compared to this social dimension, the geo-
graphic dimension or clustering of startups
does not seem to play a critical role in their
success (in terms of capital raising) or cen-
trality within technology urban innovation
ecosystems. This seems to imply that the
geographic dimension of startups is just one
of many mechanisms to contribute to the
social dimension of startups. In urban envi-
the geographic dimension
ronments,
becomes less relevant. En particulier, in New
York City, with an extensive, affordable and
fluid transportation network, the geograph-

114

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Tableau 3.1. Networking Assets

ic contribution seems to be rather small
compared to that of networking assets.

These initial findings have important impli-
cations because they position networking
assets as significant factors of technology
innovation ecosystems in cities. The signif-
icance of these assets combined with the
importance of a startup’s social dimension
compared with its geographic dimension
are important considerations that should
inform the policy of cities that support the
growth and sustainability of these types of
ecosystems (see section 3.4).

These findings are preliminary and based
on limited sources of data. Cependant, dans
combination, they provide support to the
hypothesis that: (je) fostering the increase of
relations, and building a community are
critical actions to grow and sustain technol-
ogy innovation ecosystems, et (ii) que
networking assets play a key role in creating
both of them. These findings are reinforced
by the insights from the interviews the team
conducted and the recent research pro-
duced in New York City’s technology inno-
vation ecosystem by Endeavor Insight. Ce
recherche (Endeavor Insight 2014) trouvé
that connections have been critical in the
growth and sustainability of the ecosystem
and that they provide a virtuous cycle for
growth. Endeavor Insight mapped the con-
nections of over 650 entrepreneurs and key

actors in the ecosystem, showing the growth
in size (à propos 25 per cent CAGR from 2003
à 2013) and complexity (voir la figure 3.3) comme
the ecosystem grew exponentially
à
become the largest in the United States dur-
ing that period of time.

These findings are limited by the character-
istics of the city object of this research (Nouveau
York City), the limitations of data sources
(see Appendix E) and scope of analysis
(limited
types of networking assets).
Transportation and connectivity (for exam-
ple, broadband) infrastructure in New York
City provides easy physical and digital tran-
sit within the city, and may reinforce the
importance of social connectivity compared
with geographic connectivity. In other
cities, different transportation and connec-
tivity infrastructure (Par exemple, long daily
commute, poor public transport, limited
broadband access), may impact this result.
Data from voluntary reporting by members
of the ecosystem may not provide a com-
plete or unbiased picture of reality. Enfin,
networking assets, such as community
building events and skill training programs,
are critical in the hypothesis of ecosystems
as a community (or combination of com-
les communautés). This research did not analyze the
impact of these events and programs. Pour
these reasons, the findings presented in this
paper should be considered as interim and
further research and analysis is planned in a

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

115

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

subsequent phase of the study (see Chapter
4).

expands the sense of belonging by provid-
ing cohorts of new members.

Policy Implications

The significance of networking assets for
the growth and sustainability of technology
innovation ecosystems in cities and the
importance of startups’ social dimension
compared with their geographic dimension
have policy implications for cities and other
policy actors that want to support the
growth and sustainability of technology
urban innovation ecosystems.

The most relevant implications for policy
design and implementation are that: (je)
technology innovation ecosystems in cities
need to be understood as a community or
combination of communities, et (ii) le
focus of policies to support these ecosys-
tems is the community (defined by its social
dimension) and not a geographic area (pour
exemple, a district or technology park)
within the city.

Addressing ecosystems as a community

By understanding the innovation ecosystem
as a community, where social connections
play a critical role, policies can better target
the bottlenecks and market failures preclud-
ing or slowing the growth of the ecosystem.

Policy to support the ecosystem should
focus on fostering the development of net-
working assets that kickstart communities
(for example, challenges, hackathons or
competitions), build networks (Par exemple,
meetups, networks of mentors), or provide
platforms for community building (pour
exemple, collaboration spaces). Bringing
legitimacy to the community can play a crit-
ical role in its initial growth and further
expansion. Promotion campaigns and sup-
port that produce role models and high-
lights the community of entrepreneurs help
to support this goal. En plus, providing
rapid skills training programs enlarges the
potential members of the community and

This is one of the approaches pursued by
New York City, and many other cities with
growing ecosystems are now following their
lead (see Box 1.1). En outre, ce
approach is also shaping the World Bank’s
innovation ecosystem-related activities (voir
Appendix B). The research team will review
policies adopted by cities and other relevant
actors as well as case studies and lessons
learnt in the following phase of this research
in collaboration with city partners to
expand the diagnosis tool (see chapter 4).

The focus of policies should be the communi-
ty and not a limited geographic area

If the focus of policies to support the growth
and sustainability of the ecosystem is the
community, these cannot be limited to a
geographic area (that is, a district or tech-
nology park). Policies that focus on the
geographic will have less impact and may
completely ignore the key factors that make
an ecosystem sustainable.

Ce, bien sûr, does not mean that policies
that target specific geographic areas (pour
exemple, neighborhoods or districts) peut-
not be effective. Cependant, if the objective of
such policies is to support the technology
innovation ecosystem, their target should
be the features of the ecosystem’s social
dimension. Geographically targeted policies
should only complement this broader
objective.

NEXT STEPS AND FUTURE
WORK

The findings presented in this working
paper are the outcome of the beginning of a
larger research. Some of the findings are
based on initial analysis and need further
travail, largely because of limited data and
because research was mainly restricted to
New York City.

116

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

For future research, the sources of data will
need to be expanded, additional cities will
need to be researched (including those in
both developed and developing countries),
and the analysis of networking assets will
need to include the remaining assets that
could not be covered in the initial phase.
This research will need to be carried out
with research and city partners (voir
Appendix A).

The scope of future research can be expand-
ed to investigate issues such as:

•

how technology innovation ecosystems
impact employment and economic
growth, with a particular focus on gener-
ation of new sources of jobs in both devel-
oped and developing country cities, et

how city governments can build effective
policies to support the growth and sus-
tainability of urban technology ecosys-
thèmes.

The first topic will provide insights into the
potential for employability and growth in
the current environment of economic trans-
formation where traditional sources of
employment are changing. Existing policies
and their impact on ecosystem’s growth and
sustainability will be analyzed as well as the
results in producing employability.

Additional resources and partnerships will
be required in order to undertake some of
this additional research. The next steps and
future work that the research team envi-
sions undertaking is described below.

Further research on the role of
networking assets

The team will plan to continue its research
on networking assets and their role and
impact on the growth and sustainability of
urban technology innovation ecosystems.
The team will need to access more data
sources (including enriched data from sur-
vey and interviews and social network data)
and will need to work in more cities as it

conducts data gathering with its city part-
ners (see below). The team will then explore
the role of community building networking
assets (Par exemple, events to kickstart and
sustain communities, collaboration spaces
and mentors of networks) and analyze
impacts over time.

Expanding scope to more cities
and refining the diagnosis tool

The scope of research will need to be
expanded to include more cities. Ce
includes working with partner cities to col-
lect data through a common methodology
agreed with the research partners. For the
data collection process, cities will be priori-
tized based on those in the Working Group
that have shown interest in participating in
this process. The list of city members of the
Working Group is shown in Appendix A.

Impact of technology innovation
ecosystems on employment and
economic growth

Research on the impact of urban technology
innovation ecosystems on employment and
economic growth will be expanded. Ce
will include exploring the relationship
between ecosystems and the creation of new
jobs, the role of the ecosystem as an ad hoc
skills training program, and the impact of
networking assets and rapid technical train-
ing programs on employability, with a par-
ticular focus on the poor and uneducated
population. It will also explore the impact of
the ecosystem on economic growth and
economic transformation within cities, et
in poverty reduction. Research will be
focused on developing country cities to
explore the potential of these ecosystems for
providing additional sources of inclusive
growth.

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

117

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Chiffre 3.3. The Growth of New York City’s Tech Sector from 2003-2013

Source: Endeavor Insight, 2014.

Compilation of policies and
analysis of impact

The team will also work with its city part-
ners to compile and analyze policies applied
to support urban technology innovation

ecosystems. This compilation will provide
additional resources for policymakers to
understand approaches to: (je) support the
growth and sustainability of urban technol-
ogy innovation ecosystems, et (ii) increase

118

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

the impact of the ecosystem for employ-
ment and growth. Case studies to highlight
best practice will be provided.

impact entrepreneurs as they grow their
entreprise.

APPENDIX A. RECHERCHE
PARTNERS

Computation Institute, Harris
School of Public of Policy,
University of Chicago

innovative

The Computation Institute (CI) was estab-
lished in 2000 as a joint initiative between
The University of Chicago and Argonne
National Laboratory to advance science
computational
through
approaches. Scholarship in the sciences,
arts, and medicine depends increasingly on
collection and analysis of large quantities of
data and detailed numerical simulations of
complex phenomena. Progress is gated by
researchers’ ability to construct complex
software systems, to harness large-scale
computing, and to federate distributed
ressources. The CI is both an intellectual
nexus and resource center for those build-
ing and applying such computational plat-
forms for science. As an intellectual nexus,
it brings together researchers from different
disciplines with common
dans
advancing the state-of-the-art in computing
and its applications. As a resource center, il
provides expert assistance to scholars whose
work requires the most advanced computa-
tional methods.

intérêts

Endeavor Insight

Endeavor Insight is the research arm of
Endeavor, which seeks to deepen under-
standing of how high-impact entrepreneurs
contribute to job creation and long-term
economic growth in order to educate key
constituencies, such as policy makers.
Endeavor Insight seeks to serve as a knowl-
edge center for high-impact entrepreneurs,
VCs and others in order to provide useful
information and tools that assist high-

Global Entrepreneurship
Research Network (GERN)

“A collaboration of research organizations
around the world whose goals are to gener-
ate useful and actionable knowledge for
entrepreneurs, policymakers, et d'autres; fill
gaps in what we know about entrepreneur-
ship; standardize data, especially longitudi-
nal survey work; conduct experiments and
evaluation of entrepreneurship education
and training programs; et, gain a better
understanding of policy barriers and what
the right policies are for fostering entrepre-
neurship. The organizations participating
in this network commit to collecting and
sharing research results so they are accessi-
ble, usable, and open. Key founding part-
ners, along with Kauffman, are Endeavor
Insight and the World Bank.”

MaRS Innovation and NESTA are also par-
ticipating in similar research on urban
innovation ecosystems as part of GERN.

City Partners

City partners include agencies and depart-
ments from local city governments as well
as innovation hubs and collaboration
les espaces. The list of city partners includes the
members of the Working Group on urban
innovation
le
ecosystems
Community of Practice of Open Innovation
in Cities. In addition, a ministry and a
national agency also participate. The list of
city partners is as follows:

depuis

•

Economic Affairs Department, CTO
Office, Amsterdam, Pays-Bas

Economic
Barcelona, Espagne

Promotion Department,

Fukuoka Directive Council, Fukuoka,
Japan

•

Forum Virium, Helsinki, Finlande

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

119

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

•

iHub, Nairobi, Kenya

Ruta N, Medellin, Colombia

Laboratorio para la Ciudad, Mexico City,
Mexico

New York City Economic Development
Corporation (NYCEDC), New York,
États-Unis

Metropolitan Region Government,
Santiago, Chili

National Entities

The list of national entity partners is as fol-
les plus bas:

•

Enterprise team, Ministry of Economy,
Lebanon

National IT Promotion Agency (NIPA),
Republic of Korea

APPENDIX B. WORLD BANK
OPERATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES

Innovation ecosystem-related projects the
team has been working with include, but are
not limited to:

Lebanon Mobile Internet
Ecosystem Project (MIEP)

MIEP’s objective is to strengthen technolo-
gy-led innovation ecosystem and foster
entrepreneurship and employability in
Lebanon. The project focus is to grow and
sustain the ecosystem community, expand
technical and entrepreneurial skills and to
expand the technology ecosystem through-
out the economic sectors in Lebanon.

The project is a 4-year program with a
budget of USD 12.8 MM with four main
activités:

Skills training for youth and entrepre-
neurs. The activity will develop a series of

crowdsourcing competitions, which will
include intense hand-on training (pour
exemple, bootcamp style) with a light
acceleration phase. The result of this
competition will be a series of startup
projects (that is, minimum viable proto-
type beta tested, a business plan and a
pitch). The competitions will also include
an international mentorship program
and exchange to connect the Lebanese
ecosystem to others. In addition, ce
activity will create a university-industry
platform for industry project training and
a series of technology skills activities for
schools. The university-industry platform
will provide final-year students to team
up with industry to solve real challenges
from companies through a start-up or
product projects in a 6-month timeframe.

Growth and sustainability of the tech-
innovation community. The activity will
develop network of mentors, links among
entrepreneurs and networking events (pour
exemple, meetups) to support existing
community. The activity will also com-
plement existing collaboration spaces and
provide technology tools (for example,
maker space), labs (for example, living
labs), and a space for community net-
fonctionnement. This space will be managed by
un
(the Mobile
Innovation Hub, MiHub), which will
serve to coordinate the community and
the community-building activities. Le
MiHub will also take the role of promot-
ing the community and its exemplary
members.

innovation hub

Innovation for legacy industry and
other sector of the economy. The activity
will develop a series of hands-on work-
shops and activities between technology
startups and entrepreneurs, and legacy
industries that have not integrated widely
technology in their production processes.
This activity will also develop exchange
activities with experts from other innova-
tion ecosystems globally. This project is
supported by a Trust Fund of the Korean-
World Bank partnership.

120

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

Smart City Gran Concepcion

Smart City Gran Concepción activity objec-
tives are: (je) to introduce open innovation in
municipal government, (ii) to use the gov-
ernment as a platform to kickstart the local
technology innovation ecosystem, et (iii)
create the mechanisms to develop a sustain-
able technology innovation ecosystem to
solve city challenges and create entrepre-
neurship and employability.

The activity focused on the transport sector
and follows four consecutive components
that result in the above-mentioned goals:

•

Hands-on skills training on open innova-
tion methodologies to city officials.

Cocreation of a vision for technology
support for urban transport with the city
ecosystem (for example, government,
academia, private sector, civil society,
technology hubs, citizens).

Challenge competition of city challenges
to kickstart the technology innovation
ecosystem and develop solutions to city
problems.

Cocreation of local innovation hub with
the stakeholders of the city ecosystem (pour
exemple, government, academia, private
sector, société civile, technology hubs, citi-
zens).

This activity was funded by the Spanish
Trust Fund for Latin America and the
Caribbean.

Colombia Open innovation for
Municipal Services

The objectives of this activity are to pro-
mote local government transparency, effi-
ciency and e-services delivery to improve
public service delivery and ultimately the
quality of life of the population. To achieve
this goal, the activity introduced open inno-
vation
in Colombia:
Barranquilla, Cali and Manizales.

three cities

dans

The activity worked in the sectors that each
city selected and followed a sequential
approach comprised of the following com-
ponents:

Cocreation of e-services (for example,
mobile apps) with city officials and rapid
prototyping.

Cocreation of a roadmap for technology
support to city services and eliminating
departmental silos.

Challenge competition of city challenges as
mechanism of open innovation for munici-
pal governments and development of local
entrepreneurship.

Development of strategic plan with local
ecosystem stakeholders (for example, gov-
ernment, academia, private sector, civil
society, technology hubs, citizens) to sup-
port government’s open innovation and
development of local entrepreneurship.

This activity was funded by the Information
(ICT)
Communications Technologies
Korean Trust Fund.

Global: Barcelona Urban Technology and
Innovation Hub

The objectives of this activity is the co-cre-
ation of new knowledge and the dissemina-
tion of good practices on urban technology
and innovation that the city of Barcelona
and its partners have developed over the
années. The main areas of focus relates to bot-
tom-up innovation and how city govern-
ment can engage with the city ecosystem to
develop innovation and entrepreneurship
that addresses urban challenges. The activi-
ty organizes Citisense (an annual event on
bottom-up approaches to urban innova-
tion) together with Smart City Expo World
Congrès, and the City as a Laboratory
training course (a practical program for pol-
icy-makers to introduce open innovation in
city government) and develops common
research on urban innovation and entrepre-
neurship

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

121

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Authors and Acknowledgements

Victor Mulas leads this research and is the
coauthor of this working paper with Hallie
Applebaum and Michael Minges. Kathy
Qian, Nga Phuong Nguyen and Mary
Alexander Sherman conducted the data
analyse. Matt Gee and Nick Eng from the
(Computation
University of Chicago
Institute and Harris School of Public Policy)
provided advice and guidance and partici-
pated in the research. Beatriz Eraso, Marta
Milkowska and Scott Henry supported the
team and contributed to the drafting and
Colin Blackman edited this working paper
and Samhir Vasdev was its creative director.
The following colleagues peer reviewed or
provided comments for this working paper:
Maja Andjelkovic, Elena Gasol, Nicolas
Friederici (Oxford Internet Institutue,
Oxford University), Justin Hill, Tim Kelly,
Stefano Negri, Arturo Muente-Kunigami
Eric Strobl (Paris Ecole Polytechnique) et
Ilari Lindy. Valerie Mocker, Kathleen
Stokes, Alice Casey, and Kristen Bound,
from NESTA, also provided support and
connected us with other partners. The team
would also like to express its gratitude to the
professionals, practitioners and entrepre-
neurs for agreeing to interviews and for
sharing their knowledge and experiences.

This research and its continuation would
not have been possible without the support
and encouragement of the research and city
partners that have engaged with the team
during this paper’s production (Appendix
UN). The team would like to especially thank
the University of Chicago (Computation
Institute and Harris School of Public
Policy), Matt Gee and Nick Eng; Endeavor
Insight, Rhett Morris and Matt Lerner; le
offices of New York Council members
Laurie Cumbo and James Vacca; et le
New York Economic Development
Corporation (NYEDC), Dmytro Pokhylko
and Gianluca Galleto for their active collab-
oration and support in this research. Le
generosity of these partners has made this
research possible and its results relevant by
increasing the resources available to the

team including providing insight and access
to essential data sources and methodologies
through
the Global Entrepreneurship
Research Network (GERN).

This research has been supported by the
City of Barcelona through the Barcelona
Urban Technology and Innovation Hub
and the Finish Government through the
World Bank-led Community of Practice on
Open Innovation.

Les références

Ajuntament de Barcelona. 2014. “Anuario
Estadístico de La Ciudad de Barcelona
2014.»
http://www.bcn.cat/estadistica/castella/dad
es/anuari/index.htm.

Amirtha, Tina. 2014. “Do Coding Bootcamps

Produce Inferior Engineers?” Fast
Company.
http://www.fastcolabs.com/3028635/do-
coding-bootcamps-produce-inferior-engi-
neers.

Athey, Glenn, Catherine Glossop, Ben

Harrison, Max Nathan, and Chris Webber.
2007. Innovation and the City: Comment
Innovation Has Developed in Five City-
Regions. NESTA.
http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/i
nnovation_and_the_city.pdf.

A.T. Kearney. 2014. Global Cities Index.

http://www.atkearney.com/research-stud-
ies/global-cities-index.

Atkinson, Robert D., and Adams Nager.

2014. Le 2014 State New Economy Index.
Washington, CC: The Information
Technologie & Innovation Foundation.
http://www.itif.org/publications/2014-
state-new-economy-index.

Baigorri, Manuel. 2013. “Spain’s Startups
Leave in Search of Venture Capital.”
BloombergBusiness.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2
013-04-21/spanish-preference-for-proper-
ty-over-startups-deepens-woe-tech.

Barcelona City Council. 2012. ICT Sector in

Barcelona.
http://barcelonacatalonia.cat/b/wp-con-

122

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

tent/uploads/2012/12/eng-ICT-23-03.pdf.

What-makes-a-city-innovative.

Barrera, Alex. 2013. “The Spanish VC

CrunchBase. 2014. CrunchBase Data Exports.

Industry Has One Big Problem: It Doesn’t
Exist”. tech.eu.
http://tech.eu/features/51/spain-vc-indus-
try-missing/.

Barth, Alex. 2013. “New York City and

OpenStreetMap Collaborating Through
Open Data”. Mapbox. https://www.map-
box.com/blog/nyc-and-openstreetmap-
cooperating-through-open-data/.

Belderbos, Rene, Shanqing Du, and Dieter

Somers. 2014. “Global Cities as Innovation
Hubs: The Location of R&D Investments
by Multinational Firms.” In DRUID
Academy. Aalborg, Denmark.
http://druid8.sit.aau.dk/druid/acc_papers/r
dv4by82h7nbyph96iuix18cu71s.pdf.

Cloche, Thatcher. 2014. “Elements of an

Innovation Ecosystem.” http://thatcher-
bell.vc/elements-of-an-innovation-ecosys-
tem/.

Bloomberg. 2014. “Silicon Savannah: Kenya’s

Billion Dollars Tech Bet.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b
/fa73fc02-c511-4824-806d-5656acdfae7c.

Burke, Adrienne. 2013. “Why Zappos CEO

Hsieh Wants To Enable More Collisions In
Vegas.” Forbes, Novembre 15.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/techonomy/20
13/11/15/why-zappos-ceo-hsieh-wants-to-
enable-more-collisions-in-vegas/.

Carlino, Gerald and William Kerr. 2014.

Agglomeration and Innovation. Harvard
Business School. http://www.hbs.edu/facul-
ty/Publication%20Files/15-007_e181fd00-
4426-4db8-8f70-89b1b5054a8f.pdf.

Center for an Urban Future. 2012. New Tech

City.
https://nycfuture.org/pdf/New_Tech_City.
pdf

Cowan, Matt. 2013. “The Origins of Silicon

Roundabout.” Wired, Avril 9.
http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/
2013/04/londons-moment/birth-of-a-
meme.

Crowley, Lizzie. 2011. Streets Ahead: What
Makes a City Innovative? The Work
Fondation. http://www.theworkfounda-
tion.com/Reports/306/Streets-Ahead-

2014.
http://info.crunchbase.com/about/crunch-
base-data-exports/.

Cushman & Wakefield. 2014. “Office Space

Across the World 2014.” http://www.cush-
manwakefield.hk/en-gb/research-and-
insight/2014/office-space-across-the-
world-2014/#anchor.

Durst, Susanne, and Poutanen, Petro. 2013.

“Success factors of innovation ecosystems –
Initial insights from a literature review.”
http://blogs.helsinki.fi/pkpoutan/files/2014/
03/Durst_Poutanen_CO_CREATE2013.pd
F.

L'économiste. 2012. “The Third Industrial

Revolution.”
http://www.economist.com/node/21553017
.

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). 2013.
Hot Spots 2025: Benchmarking the Future
Competitiveness of Cities. http://www.citi-
group.com/citi/citiforcities/pdfs/hotspots20
25.pdf.

Endeavor Insight. 2013. What Do the Best

Entrepreneurs Want in a City?
http://www.endeavor.org/blog/endeavor-
insight-report-reveals-the-top-qualities-
that-entrepreneurs-look-for-in-a-city/.

Endeavor Insight. 2014. The Power of

Entrepreneur Networks: How New York
City Became the Role Model for Other
Urban Tech Hubs.
http://www.nyctechmap.com/nycTechRepo
rt.pdf.

European Commission. 2013. européen

Capital of Innovation Award.
http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-
union/pdf/icapital/poster.pdf#view=fit&Pennsylvanie
gemode=none.

Florida, Richard. 2002. “The Rise of the
Creative Class.” Washington Monthly,
May.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea-
tures/2001/0205.florida.html.

— 2013. “The New Global Startup Cities”.

http://www.citylab.com/work/2013/06/new
-global-start-cities/5144/.

nouveautés / volume 11, number 1/2

123

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Victor Mulas, Michael Minges, and Hallie Applebaum

Hardesty, Larry. 2013. “Why Innovation
Thrives in Cities.” MIT News, Juin 4.
http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2013/why-inno-
vation-thrives-in-cities-0604.

HR&A Advisors. 2014. “The New York City

Tech Ecosystem.” http://www.nyctechecon-
omy.com.

Hsu, Jukay. Août 2014. Telephone inter-

voir.

International Labour Organization.

International Standard Classification of
Occupations (ISCO).
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/s
tat/isco/isco08/index.htm.

Jackson, Deborah J. 2011. “What Is an
Innovation Ecosystem?” http://erc-
assoc.org/sites/default/files/download-
files/DJackson_What-is-an-Innovation-
Ecosystem.pdf.

Kaplan, Saul. 2012. “The ‘random collision’
theory of innovation.” Fortune. http://pour-
tune.com/2012/05/09/the-random-colli-
sion-theory-of-innovation/.

Katz, Bruce, and Julie Wagner. 2014. “The
Rise of Innovation Districts: A New
Geography of Innovation in America.”
Metropolitan Policy Program. Brookings
Institution.
http://www.brookings.edu/about/pro-
grams/metro/innovation-districts.

Kshetri, Nir, Marleny Cardona, Hugo Diaz,

and Suelen Castiblanco. 2012. “The
Colombian Outsourcing and Offshoring
Industry: The Effects of Institutions and
Agglomeration Economies.” In Conferencia
Deslocalización de Servicios Y Cadenas
Globales de Valor: ¿Nuevos Factores de
Cambios Estructurales En América Latina Y
El Caribe? Santiago, Chili. http://www.red-
las.net/materiali/priloge/slo/colombian_out
sourcing_industry_nir_kshetri.pdf

Martin Prosperity Institute (MPI). 2014.

“Startup City: The Urban Shift in Venture
Capital and High Technology.” http://mar-
tinprosperity.org/media/Startup-City.pdf

Massachusetts Technology Collaborative.
2014. The Massachusetts Innovation
Economy Annual Index.
http://masstech.org/press-
releases/masstechs-annual-innovation-

index-shows-new-opportunities-and-
emerging-challenges.

Meng, Victoria. 2013. “The Ultimate Guide
to Coding Bootcamps: The Most Selective
Bootcamps.” Skilledup.
http://www.skilledup.com/articles/the-ulti-
mate-guide-to-coding-bootcamps-the-
most-selective-bootcamps/.

Miller, P.. and Bound, K. 2011. The Start Up

Factories. NESTA.
http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/t
he_startup_factories_0.pdf.

Morris, Keiko. 2014. “Widening Tech ‘Alley’
Outgrows Name.” The Wall Street Journal,
Avril 29.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142405
2702304393704579531812139707966

Mulas. 2014. “Categorizing the collaboration
and community promotion spaces that
make urban innovation ecosystems tick.”
http://blogs.worldbank.org/ic4d/categoriz-
ing-collaboration-and-community-promo-
tion-spaces-make-urban-innovation-
ecosystems-tick.

Mytton, David. 2010. “How much does it

cost to start a tech company?»
https://blog.serverdensity.com/how-much-
does-it-cost-to-start-a-tech-company.

NAICS Association. North American

Industry Classification System (NAICS).
http://www.naics.com.

National Statistical Office of Thailand.
Various years. Labor Force Survey.
http://service.nso.go.th/nso/nso_center/pro
ject/search_center/23project-en.htm.

NYCEDC. 2011. NYCEDC Innovation Index.
http://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/files/f
ilemanager/Resources/Economic_Data/Inn
ovationIndexReport.pdf.

OECD. 2005. Oslo Manual.

http://www.oecd.org/innovation/inno/oslo
manualguidelinesforcollectingandinter-
pretinginnovationdata3rdedition.htm.

—. 2006. OECD Territorial Reviews:

Competitive Cities in the Global Economy.
http://www.oecd.org/gov/regional-
policy/oecdterritorialreviewscompeti-
tivecitiesintheglobaleconomy.htm.

— 2010. Measuring Innovation: A New

124

nouveautés / Thriving Cities

Téléchargé depuis http://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/11/1-2/98/705208/inov_a_00251.pdf by guest on 07 Septembre 2023

Boosting Tech Innovation

in Asia-Pacific.” http://www.asiainnova-
tivecities.com.

Tammy, Johns, and Lynda Gratton. 2013.
“The Third Wave of Virtual Work.”
Harvard Business Review.
http://www.crowehorwath.com/folio-pdf-
hidden/TheThirdWaveofVirtualWork_FW
13206V.pdf.

United Nations. International Standard

Industrial Classification of All Economic
Activities. Revision 4.
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcs
.asp?Cl=27&Lg=1&Co=J.

United Nations. 2014. World Urbanization

Prospects.
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Highlights/W
UP2014-Highlights.pdf.

United Nations. Economic and Social

Commission for Asia and the Pacific. 2013.
Statistical Yearbook for Asia and the
Pacific 2013.
http://www.unescap.org/stat/data/syb2013/
ESCAP-syb2013.pdf.

US Census Bureau. 2014. “County Business

Motifs (CBP).»
http://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/.

—. 2014. “American Community Survey.”

http://www.census.gov/acs/www/.

Winden, Willem van, Leo van den Berg, et
Peter Pol. 2007. “European Cities in the
Knowledge Economy: Towards a
Typology.” Urban Studies 44 (3): 525–49.
est ce que je:10.1080/00420980601131886.

World Bank. 2014. Doing Business Database.
Février, 2015. http://www.doingbusi-
ness.org/Custom-
Query/chile.

Perspective.
http://www.oecd.org/site/innovationstrate-
gy/measuringinnovationanewperspective-
onlineversion.htm#agenda.

Owen, Vicki. 2014. “High Rents Driving
Technology Start-ups Out of London’s
‘Tech City’.” This is Money. Août 2.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/smal
lbusiness/article-2714273/High-rents-dri-
ving-technology-start-ups-Londons-Tech-
City.html.

Pan W., Ghoshal G., Krumme C. Cebrian M.
and Pentland A. 2013. “Urban characteris-
tics attributable to density-driven tie for-
mation.” Nature Communications.
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-dissemi-
nate/1721.1/92362.

Phillips. 2014. “African Urbanization.”

Harvard International Review.
http://hir.harvard.edu/archives/6038.

Roberts, Bryce. 2014. “Collision Hours.”

Bryce Dot VC.
http://bryce.vc/post/81685761115/collision-
hours.

Satell, Greg. 2013. “Why Cities Are Our Most

Important Innovation Platform”.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/201
3/11/09/why-cities-are-our-most-impor-
tant-innovation-platform/.

Schaffers, Hans, Nicos Komninos, Marc

Pallot, Brigitte Trousse, Michael Nilsson,
and Alvaro Oliveira. 2011. “Smart Cities
and the Future Internet: Towards
Cooperation Frameworks for Open
Innovation.” In The Future Internet, 431–
46. Lecture Notes in Computer Science
6656. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/9
78-3-642-20898-0_31.