Relevant Locational Factors for Creative Industries Startups

Selected Findings from an Empirical Study on Stakeholder Perspectives in the Greater Region of Stuttgart
Chapter
Part of the FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship book series (FGFS)

Abstract

Creative industries startups are considered to have a positive impact on economic wealth and to ensure continuous innovation. Hence, countries, regions and cities start initiatives and support programs in order to create suitable framework conditions and a favorable entrepreneurial ecosystem to foster startups and entrepreneurs. In this light, this study is focusing on the special challenge, that Stuttgart and the surrounding area are facing: How to best prepare the region for the future and how to become less dependent on the automotive sector and the mechanical industry? Empirical findings demonstrate the relevant locational factors for entrepreneurs and startups within the creative industries. Another finding is that stakeholders’ perspectives (entrepreneurs versus external experts) differ on the relevance of particular locational factors. A main challenge for regions is to overcome the dilemma between a general positive economic situation and the development of a flourishing startup ecosystem. The study provides recommendations for destination management and regional development.

Keywords

Creative industries Startups Locational factors Entrepreneurial ecosystem Destination management Regional development 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Andrea Bohne for all of her support during the research project. And special thanks to the students of the IPW (Interdisziplinäres Projekt Wirtschaft) at Stuttgart Media University. It was a pleasure to work with you on that project.

References

  1. Baumol, W. (1996). Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive and imitative. Or the rule of the rules of the game. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birley, S. (1985). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blair, J. P., & Premus, R. (1987). Major factors in Industrial location: A review. Economic Development Quarterly, 1(1), 72–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bull, I., & Winter, F. (1991). Community differences in business births and business growths. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(1), 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, B. (2005). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Noble, A. F., & Galbraith, C. S. (1992). Competitive strategy and high technology regional/site location decisions: A cross country study of Mexican and US electronic component firms. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 3(1), 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Engstler, M., Nohr, H., & Lämmerhirt, J. (2012). Standortfaktoren für Verlage. MedienWirtschaft. Zeitschrift für Medienmanagement und Medienökonomie, 1(9), 12–23.Google Scholar
  8. Eurostat. (2008). NACE Rev. 2. Luxembourg: Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community.Google Scholar
  9. Fulton, M. (1971). New factors in plant location. Harvard Business Review, 49(1), 166–168.Google Scholar
  10. Galbraith, C. S. (1985, Fall). High technology location and development: The case of orange county. California Management Review, 28(1), 98–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Galbraith, C. S. (1990, Summer). Transferring core manufacturing technologies in high technology firms: A comparison. California Management Review, 32(4), 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Galbraith, C., & DeNoble, A. F. (1988). Location decisions by high technology firms: A comparison of firm size, industry type and institutional form. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13(Winter), 31–48.Google Scholar
  13. Gatfield, T., & Yang, C. (2006). New industrial space theory – A case study and empirical analysis of factors effecting newly emerging key industries in Queensland. Australian Journal of Regional Studies, 12(1), 47–61.Google Scholar
  14. Hack, G. D. (1984). The plant location decision making process. Industrial Development, 153(1), 31–33.Google Scholar
  15. Harris, C. C., & Hopkins, F. E. (1972). Locational analysis. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  16. Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. (2010). Voodoo Institution or Entrepreneurial University? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK. Regional Studies, 44(9), 1241–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hekman, J. S. (1982). Survey of location decisions in the south. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Economic Review, 67(1), 6–19.Google Scholar
  18. Holt, D. H. (1987). Networks support systems: How communities can encourage entrepreneurship. In N. C. Churchill, J. A. Hornaday, B. A. Kirchhoff, Q. J. Krasner, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurial research (pp. 44–56). Wellesley, MA: Babson College.Google Scholar
  19. Myers, D., & Hobbs, D. (1985). Profile of location preferences for non-metropolitan high-tech firms. In J. A. Hornaday, E. B. Shils, J. A. Timmons, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurial research (pp. 358–377). Wellesley, MA: Babson College.Google Scholar
  20. Neck, H. M., Meyer, G. D., Cohen, B., & Corbett, A. C. (2004). An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(2), 190–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prevezer, M. (2001). Ingredients in the early development of the US Biotechnology Industry. Small Business Economics, 17(1), 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schemenner, R. W. (1979). Look beyond the obvious in plant location. Harvard Business Review, 57(1), 126–132.Google Scholar
  23. Schemenner, R. W. (1982). Making business location decisions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  24. Schemenner, R. W., Huber, J., & Cook, R. (1987). Geographic differences and the location of new manufacturing facilities. Journal of Urban Economics, 21(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Scholz, C., Bollendorf, T. & Eisenbeis, U. (2005). Medienstandort Saar(LorLux). Bestandsaufnahme – Entwicklungsperspektiven – Umsetzungsstrategien, Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
  26. Sipola, S., Puhakka, V. J. & Mainela, T. (2013). Understanding and uncovering startup ecosystem structures. The First International Entrepreneurship Research Exemplar Conference, Catania, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
  27. Storper, M., & Christopherson, S. (1987). Flexible specialization and regional industrial agglomerations: The US Film Industry. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(2), 104–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hochschule der MedienStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations