The Paradoxical Nature of Territorial Change: Science Parks and the Case of Trieste

  • Sandro Fabbro
Conference paper

Abstract

Despite the enormous difficulties arising during the establishment and development of a Science Park, and despite the numerous failed attempts (Castells and Hall, 1994), the appeals for ‘technopolitan’ policies continue unabated. The object of this report is not to question the reasons underlying this phenomenon, nor is it to judge its timeliness. The aim here is to show that the difficulties and failures of this policy may be due in part to over-simplistic conceptualisations of the territorial context in which they are located and an underestimation of the significance of self-organisation factors and autonomous local decision-making processes.

Keywords

Europe Coherence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argyris C., Schòn D. (1974) Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  2. Argyris C., Schòn D. (1978) Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  3. Bateson G. (1972) Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Chandler Publishing Company, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  4. Beveridge L. (1994) Cambridge Science Park, Nature, 368, 6467, 170–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Browne A., Wildavsky A. (1983) Implementation as Mutual Adaptation, in Pressman J.L., Wildavsky A. (eds) Implementation, University of California Press, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
  6. Bruhat T. (1990) Vingt technopoles, un premier bilan, La Documentation Française, Paris.Google Scholar
  7. Bruhat T. (1992) Evaluating the French Science & Technology Parks Experience, Paper for the Workshop on Science and Technology Parks Impact Evaluation, CEC DG XII, Bari, March 26–27.Google Scholar
  8. Castells M., Hall P. (1994) Technopoles of the World. The Making of 21st Century Industrial Complexes, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  9. Dematteis G. (1994) Sistemi locali e reti globali: il problema del radicamento territoriale, Paper for Incontri pratesi sullo sviluppo locale, IRIS, Artimino, September (mimeo).Google Scholar
  10. Drewett R., Knight R., Schubert U. (1992) The Future of European Cities, the Role of Science and Technology, report for the Monitor-Fast Program, CEC.Google Scholar
  11. Elster J. (1983a) Explaining Technical Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Elster J. (1983b) Sour Grapes. Studies in the Subversion of Rationality, Maison des Sciences de l’Homme and Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Friedmann J. (1987) Planning in the Public Domain: from knowledge to action, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hirschman A. O. (1967) Development Projects Observed, The Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  15. Hjern B., Porter D.O. (1981) Implementation Structures: a New Unit of Administrative Analysis, Organisation Studies, 2 /3.Google Scholar
  16. Maillat D., Lecoq B., Nemeti F., Pfister M. (1995) Technology district and innovation: the case of the Swiss Jura Arc, Regional Studies, 29, 3, 251–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mela A., Preto G. (1990) Alla ricerca della strategia perduta, in Curti F., Diappi L. (eds) Gerarchie e reti di città: tendenze e politiche, Angeli, Milan, 127–154.Google Scholar
  18. Watzlawick P., Weakland J.H., Fisch R. (1974) Change, Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Watzlawick P. (1988) Invented Reality, Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Weick K. (1977) Enactment Processes in Organizations, in Staw B.M., Salancik G.R. (eds.) New Directions in Organizational Behaviour, St Clair Press, Chicago.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandro Fabbro

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations