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

1. The City and the Civic University
John Goddard OBE
Emeritus Professor of Regional Development Studies
Formerly Deputy Vice Chancellor

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. The Civic University
THE ACADEMY
TEACHING
RESEARCH
Enhancement
Transformative,
responsive,
demand led
actions
Widening
participation,
community work
ENGAGEMENT
Socioeconomic
impact
Soft
Boundary
SOCIETY

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. 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. 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. 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. Innovation is essential if communities and societies
thrive in times of rapid, transformational change?

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. 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. 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. Why is it different?
Different ways of
allocating capital
and people
Different
knowledge
Different
entrepreneurs
Different
selection
mechanisms
21

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. 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

24. SUSTAINABLE /
HOME /
INSULATION /
FOR /
EVERYONE /

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

26. REDUCTION IN
COST FOR
CONSUMER
50% OF
PLASTIC
BOTTLES
RECYCLED
REDUCTION IN
WASTE SENT
TO LANDFILL
REDUCTION IN
USE OF
MINERAL
WOOL
OTHER
PLASTICS NOT
RECYCLED
REDUCTION IN
COST MEANS
WIDER
MARKET FOR
INSTALLATION

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. 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. 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. 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?