3.1 - EUniverCities Aveiro - Public Seminar


Published on

The City and the Civic University – John Goddard (CURDS, Newcastle University)

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • BJ
  • Hi we are ThermoLasticsOur mission is to provide sustainable home insulation for everyone.How did we start on this journey?We got together in March at the first Action 2013 meetingDiscussed problems in the north east that a social enterprise could help withIt was a cold day, during another cold winter in the north east…we got talking about how difficult it was to heat our homes, with energy prices as they areAs PhD students, we can can spend a large proportion of our income on fuel (we’re past spending it on alcohol)….
  • In fact, research shows that the north east has the second highest percentage of houses in fuel poverty in England.Second only to the west midlands.Nearly 25% of households are in fuel poverty!In the north east we have a ‘perfect storm’ of factors leading to fuel poverty:-low average household incomes-high unemployment-old housing stock, poorly insulated-some of the coldest winters in the uk.Fuel poverty is only going get worse in the NE…
  • 3.1 - EUniverCities Aveiro - Public Seminar

    1. 1. The City and the Civic University John Goddard OBE Emeritus Professor of Regional Development Studies Formerly Deputy Vice Chancellor
    2. 2. Published 25th January 2013 This book is based on original research into the experience of the UK and selected English provincial cities, with a focus on the role of universities in addressing the challenges of environmental sustainability, health and cultural development. The case studies are set in the context of reviews of the international evidence on the links between universities and the urban economy, their role in „place making‟ and in the local community.
    3. 3. Tensioned themes of The University and the City by John Goddard and Paul Vallance • Passive local physical ,social and economic impacts (campus footprint, students in the city, employment generation) vis a vis active engagement in the development of the city • Economic vis a vis more holistic views of engagement with civil society (community development, social inclusion, urban governance, health and well being, cultural life) • The „external‟ civic role of the university vis a vis „internal‟ processes within the university AND state higher education policies that shape these external relations
    4. 4. Sub- themes • The university as an institution and a set of academic sub-groups ( a loosely coupled organisation) • The role of physical sites and regeneration projects in facilitating and connecting university economic and community engagement to the city • Inter institutional relationships between multiple universities and other HEIs in the city • The inter-disciplinarity of many urban challenges and the institutional tension with existing disciplinary based academic structures • The role of intermediary organisations (e.g science parks/technology centres) vis a vis internal services (e.g.TTOs) • The city and its various communities as an urban laboratory for academic research, teaching and knowledge exchange
    5. 5. Knowledge based physical development • University involvement in local urban economic development partnerships mobilising other actors (local authorities, developers) around specific urban development projects. • Suburban science parks undergoing an „urban turn‟ towards sites that are more mixed in function and integrated into the fabric of the city • Universities contributing to cultural quarters and media hubs as physical and symbolic regeneration sites • BUT the optimal strategy for the expansion of the campus from the university‟s standpoint may not coincide in terms of location and function with projects designed to have an urban development or regeneration impact targeted to the needs of the city
    6. 6. Innovation and urban economic development • Shift from mode 1 (linear) to mode 2 (co-production) knowledge creation and innovation raises the question of the distinctive role of the university • Multi-faceted functions of the university as an educational and cultural institution not just a knowledge producer • Joining up direct commodification of knowledge via spin outs etc. with human capital upgrades in the urban labour market and social capital that builds trust and co-operative norms in local economic governance networks • The developmental as well as generative role of universities. • University influence on the city based political, institutional and network factors that shape innovation processes beyond input of knowledge capital
    7. 7. The city as a Living Lab • Empower citizens, as end users, to influence the development of innovative services and products that could eventually benefit society • Allow industry to develop, validate and integrate new ideas, to partner with other companies and to increase their chances of success during product and/or service launches • Facilitate the integration of technological innovation in society and increase the return on investment in research EU Information Society
    8. 8. The university and urban knowledge spillovers • Discourse about the concentration of diverse economic activity in cities being conducive to knowledge spillovers and innovation (e.g. Jane Jacobs ) has not been linked to the role of universities • Universities are constituents of urban heterogeneity as distinct from market based actors • As institutions partly protected by public funds for research and teaching they are sources of „slack‟ in metropolitan innovation systems by virtue of harbouring non-commercial activities that cannot be supported by the local production system, adding to its adaptive capacity
    9. 9. Opening the university ‘black box’ • Universities as loosely coupled systems with many relatively independent units and only limited co-ordination or feedback between their activities • Horizontal – between functional units (such as academic departments) with different goals and resources • Vertically – between different levels in the organisational hierarchy and limited influence across levels • Externally – such that changes outside do not immediately lead to changes within the university as a whole • Responding to change is easier at the level of the academic unit rather than the entire university • Organisational change is gradual and the uneven outcome of top down and bottom up forces
    10. 10. Business models of the university • The entrepreneurial university model with a strengthened steering core, enhanced development periphery, a diversified funding base and stimulated academic heartland (Burton Clark 1998) • The academic capitalist model with faculty engaging directly in competitive market like behaviour as state subsidised entrepreneurs, blurring the distinction between public and private (Slaughter and Leslie 1993) • The triple helix model of universities, business and government with semi-autonomous centres that interface with the external environment supported by specialist internal units (e.g technology transfer offices) and external intermediaries (e.g technology and innovation centres) (Etzkowitz et. al . 2000) • Strong focus on science, technology and business and a neglect of the humanities and social sciences, place based communities and civil society
    11. 11. The ‘un-civic’ university RESEARCH TEACHING FOCUS OF MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP THE ‘CORE’ Funding targets Hard Boundary between enabling and non enabling environments ‘THIRD MISSION’ ACTIVITIES THE ‘PERIPHERY’
    12. 12. The Civic University THE ACADEMY TEACHING RESEARCH Enhancement Transformative, responsive, demand led actions Widening participation, community work ENGAGEMENT Socioeconomic impact Soft Boundary SOCIETY
    13. 13. Seven Dimensions of the ‘Civic University’ 1. It is actively engaged with the wider world as well as the local community of the place in which it is located. 2. It takes a holistic approach to engagement, seeing it as institution wide activity and not confined to specific individuals or teams. 3. It has a strong sense of place – it recognises the extent to which is location helps to form its unique identity as an institution. 4. It has a sense of purpose – understanding not just what it is good at, but what it is good for. 5. It is willing to invest in order to have impact beyond the academy. 6. It is transparent and accountable to its stakeholders and the wider public. 7. It uses innovative methodologies such as social media and team building in its engagement activities with the world at large.
    14. 14. The „Civic University‟ Development Spectrum Embryonic Emerging Evolving Embedded Dimension X The spectrum describes the ‘journey’ of the institution against each of the 7 dimensions of the civic university towards the idealised model. It accepts that a university may be at a different stage of development on the different dimensions. This is intended to provide guidance in building a deeper understanding of where the university is currently positioned and help in future planning, and is NOT intended to be used as an assessment or ranking tool.
    15. 15. Newcastle University “ The combination of being globally competitive and regionally rooted underpins our vision for the future. We see ourselves not only as doing high quality academic work … but also choosing to work in areas responsive to large scale societal needs and demands, particularly those manifested in our own city and region” Chris Brink, VC
    16. 16. Reinventing the civic university We must ask not just what the University is good at, but what it is good for. Putting academic knowledge, creativity and expertise to work to help make a difference to realworld challenges. Delivering benefits to society as a whole (Local, regional, national, global) These are our 3 societal challenges: • Changing Age • Sustainability • Social renewal
    17. 17. Innovation is essential if communities and societies thrive in times of rapid, transformational change?
    18. 18. The way we innovate is changing User innovation Innovation in services Elberfelder Farbenfabriken vorm. Friedrich Bayer & Co Social innovation Open innovation Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ 18
    19. 19. Social innovation as the key • “Social innovations are innovations that are social in both their ends and their means. Specifically, we define social innovations as new ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs (more effectively than alternatives) and create new social relationships or collaborations. They are innovations that are not only good for society but also enhance society’s capacity to act. The process of social interactions between individuals undertaken to reach certain outcomes is participative, involves a number of actors and stakeholders who have a vested interest in solving a social problem, and empowers the beneficiaries.” (Board of European Policy Advisors, 2011: 9-10).
    20. 20. The quadruple helix • • “Quadruple Helix (QH), with its emphasis on broad cooperation in innovation, represents a shift towards systemic, open and user-centric innovation policy. An era of linear, top-down, expert driven development, production and services is giving way to different forms and levels of coproduction with consumers, customers and citizens.” (Arnkil, et al, 2010) “The shift towards social innovation also implies that the dynamics of ICTinnovation has changed. Innovation has shifted downstream and is becoming increasingly distributed; new stakeholder groups are joining the party, and combinatorial innovation is becoming an important source for rapid growth and commercial success. Continuous learning, exploration, cocreation, experimentation, collaborative demand articulation, and user contexts are becoming critical sources of knowledge for all actors in R&D & Innovation” (ISTAG 2010)
    21. 21. Why is it different? Different ways of allocating capital and people Different knowledge Different entrepreneurs Different selection mechanisms 21
    22. 22. Relevant partners: some old, some new 1. Local authorities 2. Public service organisations (NHS, schools...) 3. Charities and social enterprises (role of social finance) 4. “Civic” universities 5. National bodies (ODI, TSB, Nesta) 6. And more 22
    23. 23. ACTION 2013: So What is ACTION? • 6 month programme in which teams of researchers work to develop a commercial solution to a societal challenge • Focus this year on challenges impacting North East England 6 teams presenting solutions 4 finalists competing for the prizes today • Teams supported by 6 Enterprise Training Labs • Mix of internal and external trainers/facilitators/mentors • Competition supported by EPSRC, Changing Age, NISR, NIReS, British Science Festival
    25. 25. NORTH EAST FUEL POVERTY Highest unemployment (10.3%) Percentage of households in England in fuel poverty 30 25 Lowest disposable income % households in fuel poverty 20 15 10 5 Coldest winters in England 0 Lowest increase in new housing
    27. 27. The business model Waste plastic Marketing, R&D, Sales License manufacture Train and license installers Supply chain Plastic shredding Plasterboard panels Fit product to homes
    28. 28. Conclusion 1:Universities and urban innovation • The university as a source of „slack‟ in the city economy with the potential to enhance long term adaptability through generating new knowledge • A complementary role in developing capacity in civil society to shape future development in the public interest and in the process link the economic and social domains • The quadruple helix and social innovation models • Moving from the entrepreneurial university in which the principal driver is to act as a business to the civic university engaged across a wide range of disciplines and activities with an equally wide range of stakeholders in a diverse external environment
    29. 29. Conclusion 2:University/city partnerships in action • External city partnerships strengthening internal multi-disciplinary structures in old research intensive universities set up to meet urban challenges, especially when they give academics access to new funding opportunities, space and key stakeholders outside the university • Interconnection between internal and external structures a key feature distinguishing the civic and the entrepreneurial university (where the focus is on income generation with less explicit partnership with civil society). • In teaching led universities internal structures better match societal demands rather than disciplinary based knowledge supply • Urban university partnerships recognising institutional complementarities
    30. 30. Conclusion 3:Universities and cities in an age of austerity • Austerity in public finances leading universities AND cities to review their business models • Does this foreshadow a coming together of universities and cities on the basis of shared interests or a growing separation?