Advertisement

Chinese Geographical Science

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 247–260 | Cite as

Articulating China’s Science and Technology: Knowledge Collaboration Networks Within and Beyond the Yangtze River Delta Megalopolis in China

  • Yingcheng Li
  • Nicholas A. Phelps
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we reconsider the defining but often overlooked ‘hinge’ function of megalopolises by analyzing how megalopolises have articulated national and international urban systems in the context of a globalizing knowledge economy. Taking the case of China’s Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region, we particularly focus on knowledge circulation within and beyond the YRD region by analyzing the pattern and process of knowledge collaboration at different geographical scales during the 2004–2014 period. Results show that the structure of scientific knowledge collaboration as reflected by co-publications has been strongest at the national scale whereas that of technological knowledge collaboration as measured by co-patents has been strongest at the global scale. Despite this difference, the structure of both scientific and technological knowledge collaboration has been functionally polycentric at the megalopolitan scale but become less so at the national and global scales. The ‘globally connected but locally disconnected’ pattern of Shanghai’s external knowledge collaboration suggests that the gateway role of the YRD megalopolis in promoting knowledge collaboration at different geographical scales will take time before it is fully realized.

Keywords

urban network publication patent scale gateway Yangtze River Delta (YRD) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amin A, Thrift N, 1995. Globalization, Institutions, and Regional Development in Europe. Oxford: Oxford university press.Google Scholar
  2. Andersson D E, Gunessee S, Matthiessen C W et al., 2014. The geography of Chinese science. Environment and Planning A, 46(12): 2950–2971. doi: 10.1068/a130283pCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P, 2004. Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1): 31–56. doi: 10.1191/0309132504ph469oaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burger M, Meijers E, 2012. Form follows function? Linking morphological and functional polycentricity. Urban Studies, 49(5): 1127–1149. doi: 10.1177/0042098011407095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burger M J, van der Knaap B, Wall R S, 2014. Polycentricity and the multiplexity of urban networks. European Planning Studies, 22(4): 816–840. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.771619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Castells M, 2000. The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Volume 1. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Coe N M, Hess M, Yeung H W C et al., 2004. ‘Globalizing’ regional development: a global production networks perspective. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 29(4): 468–484. doi: 10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00142.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Goei B, Burger M J, Van Oort F G et al., 2010. Functional polycentrism and urban network development in the Greater South East, United Kingdom: evidence from commuting patterns, 1981–2001. Regional Studies, 44(9): 1149–1170. doi: 10.1080/00343400903365102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Derudder B, Taylor P J, Hoyler M et al., 2013. Measurement and interpretation of connectivity of Chinese cities in world city network, 2010. Chinese Geographical Science, 23(3): 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Florida R, Gulden T, Mellander C, 2008. The rise of the megaregion. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 1(3): 459–476. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsn018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gao X, Guan J C, Rousseau R, 2011. Mapping collaborative knowledge production in China using patent co-inventorships. Scientometrics, 88(2): 343–362. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0404-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gault F, 2013. Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gottmann J, 1957. Megalopolis or the urbanization of the northeastern seaboard. Economic Geography, 33(3): 189–200. doi: 10.2307/142307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gottmann J, 1961. Megalopolis. The urbanized Northeastern Seaboard of the United States. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.Google Scholar
  15. Gottmann J, 1976. Megalopolitan systems around the world. Ekistics, 41(243): 109–113.Google Scholar
  16. Griliches Z, 1990. Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4): 1661–1707. doi: 10.3386/w3301Google Scholar
  17. Hanssens H, Derudder B, Van Aelst S et al., 2014. Assessing the functional polycentricity of the mega-city-region of Central Belgium based on advanced producer service transaction links. Regional Studies, 48(12): 1939–1953. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2012.759650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harrison J, Hoyler M, 2015. Megaregions: Globalization’s New Urban Form? Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hennemann S, Derudder B, 2014. An alternative approach to the calculation and analysis of connectivity in the world city network. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 41(3): 392–412. doi: 10.1068/b39108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoekman J, Frenken K, van Oort F, 2009. The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe. The Annals of Regional Science, 43(3): 721–738. doi: 10.1007/s00168-008-0252-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li Y C, Phelps N, 2016. Megalopolis unbound: Knowledge collaboration and functional polycentricity within and beyond the Yangtze River Delta Region in China, 2014. Urban Studies. doi: 10.1177/0042098016656971Google Scholar
  22. Li Y C, Phelps N A, 2017. Knowledge polycentricity and the evolving Yangtze River delta megalopolis. Regional Studies, 51(7): 1035–1047. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1240868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu X J, Derudder B, Wu K, 2016. Measuring polycentric urban development in China: an intercity transportation network perspective. Regional Studies, 50(8): 1302–1315. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2015.1004535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lu L C, Huang R, 2012. Urban hierarchy of innovation capability and inter-city linkages of knowledge in post-reform China. Chinese Geographical Science, 22(5): 602–616. doi: 10.1007/s11769-012-0555-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lv Lachang, Li Yong, 2010. A research on Chinese renovation urban system based on urban renovation function. Acta Geographica Sinica, 65(2): 177–190. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  26. Ma H T, Fang C L, Pang B et al., 2015. Structure of Chinese city network as driven by technological knowledge flows. Chinese Geographical Science, 25(4): 498–510. doi: 10.1007/s11769-014-0731-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma X L, Timberlake M, 2013. World city typologies and national city system deterritorialisation: USA, China and Japan. Urban Studies, 50(2): 255–275. doi: 10.1177/0042098012453859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Matthiessen C W, Schwarz A W, Find S, 2002. The top-level global research system, 1997–99: centres, networks and nodality. An analysis based on bibliometric indicators. Urban Studies, 39(5–6): 903–927. doi: 10.1080/00420980220128372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Matthiessen C W, Schwarz A W, Find S, 2010. World cities of scientific knowledge: Systems, networks and potential dynamics. An analysis based on bibliometric indicators. Urban Studies, 47(9): 1879–1897. doi: 10.1177/0042098010372683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. National Science Board, 2016. Science and Engineering Indicators 2016. NSB-2016-1. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  31. Nijman J, 2011. Miami: Mistress of the Americas. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD, 2005. Oslo Manual: The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities. 3rd ed. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  33. Partha D, David P A, 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5): 487–521. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Phelps N A, Ozawa T, 2003. Contrasts in agglomeration: proto-industrial, industrial and post-industrial forms compared. Progress in Human Geography, 27(5): 583–604. doi: 10.1191/0309132503ph449oaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ren S L, Rousseau R, 2002. International visibility of Chinese scientific journals. Scientometrics, 53(3): 389–405. doi: 10.1023/A:1014877130166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rossi E C, Taylor P J, 2005. Banking networks across Brazilian cities: interlocking cities within and beyond Brazil. Cities, 22(5): 381–393. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2005.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scherngell T, Hu Y J, 2011. Collaborative knowledge production in China: Regional evidence from a gravity model approach. Regional Studies, 45(6): 755–772. doi: 10.1080/00343401003713373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scott A J, 2001. Global City-Regions: Trends, Theory, Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Shearmur R, 2012. Are cities the font of innovation? A critical review of the literature on cities and innovation. Cities, 29(S2): S9–S18. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2012.06.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Short J R, Breitbach C, Buckman S et al., 2000. From world cities to gateway cities: extending the boundaries of globalization theory. City, 4(3): 317–340. doi: 10.1080/713657031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Simmie J, 2003. Innovation and urban regions as national and international nodes for the transfer and sharing of knowledge. Regional Studies, 37(6–7): 607–620. doi: 10.1080/0034340032000108714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stokes D E, 1997. Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  43. Sun Y T, 2016. The structure and dynamics of intra- and interregional research collaborative networks: the case of China (1985–2008). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108: 70–82. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.04.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor P J, Catalano G, Walker D R F, 2002. Measurement of the world city network. Urban Studies, 39(13): 2367–2376. doi: 10.1080/00420980220080011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor P J, Evans D M, Pain K, 2008. Application of the interlocking network model to mega-city-regions: measuring polycentricity within and beyond city-regions. Regional Studies, 42(8): 1079–1093. doi: 10.1080/00343400701874214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taylor P J, Derudder B, Hoyler M et al., 2014. City-dyad analyses of China’s integration into the world city network. Urban Studies, 51(5): 868–882. doi: 10.1177/0042098013494419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. von Zedtwitz M, 2004. Managing foreign R&D laboratories in China. R&D Management, 34(4): 439–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wu Zhiqiang, Lu Tianzhan, 2015. Gravity and networks: network structure and characteristics of innovative city cluster in the Yangtze River Delta Region. Urban Planning Forum, (2): 31–39. (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ArchitectureSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Bartlett School of PlanningUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations