Infrastructures for innovation(2)

H l kHelsinkissinkisin nTallinnsinkisinki
S khkhTallinTallinelssTs
StocktockkkTTOO
HeHOOslo
HeH
StStoto hhholmhollll
gRigaholmholmholmholm
s
ckM
SSStoctMalm
SSalmö
Stoctoc gRig
VVilniu
RC MalmöCopenhagenennnRR
VVVVVVViVi
openhagMalmöm
VilnB lVVBerliinBerliinnVVVV
Infrastructures for Innovation

3
sampo ruoppila
panu lehtovuori
nina von hertzen
Infrastructures for Innovationenhancing innovation activity through urban planning in baltic metropolises

4
Authors
Net Effect Ltd, Helsinki
Sampo Ruoppila (sampo.ruoppila@neteffect.ﬁ)
Nina von Hertzen
Helsinki University of Technology,
Centre for Urban and Regional Studies
Panu Lehtovuori (panu.lehtovuori@tkk.ﬁ)
Publisher
BaltMet Inno Project
Copyright
The document may be freely reviewed or abstracted
provided due acknowledgement is made to the source.
Maps, photographs
The published photographs and maps are in the courtesy of the
institutions who have delivered them. In addition, some of the
photos were taken by the authors.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like thank all the experts interviewed for the study,
and Klaske Havik (TU Delft) for co-authoring the chapter 2.
Design
Jaakko Pesonen
Printing
Lönnberg Print 2007
ISBN 978-952-223-041-6

5
Foreword 7
1. Introduction 9
Linkage between urban planning and innovations 9
Structure of the book and the empirical data used in the analyses 10
2. Enhancing innovation activity through planning: theory and concepts 11
Focus on‘innovation activity’ 11
Urban space and innovation activity 11
Planning for innovation 16
Exploratory mapping of the spatial underpinning of innovation activity 18
3. Addressing innovation issues in the city strategies 20
Broadly 20
More speciﬁcally 21
4. Concrete developments of innovation infrastructure and creative environments: case studies 23
Berlin Berlin Adlershof 24
Wasserstädte Berlin Oberhavel & Rummelsburger Bucht 26
Copenhagen Copenhagen Biotechnical Science Park (COBIS) 28
Hvide Kødby 30
Ørestad 32
Helsinki Arabianranta-Suvilahti 34
Aviapolis 36
Viikki 38
Malmö Moving Media City 40
Det Medicinska Malmö 42
Oslo Fjordcity 44
Riga Castle of Light – Latvian National Library 46
Latvian Contemporary Art Museum 48
Riga Concert Hall 50
Riga Science and Technology Park 52
Stockholm Hammarby Sjöstad 54
Karolinska/North Station 56
Kista Science City 58
Telefonplan 60
Tallinn Kultuurikatel 62
Tehnopol 64
Ülemiste City 66
Vilnius Paupio Historical Crafts and Industries Centre 68
5. Planning for innovation twines into contemporary urban development 70
Innovation activity as a target, by-product or a resource 72
Focal points of transforming urban areas 72
Process led by cities 73
6. Proposals for project ideas 74
References 76
Appendix 78
List of strategies 78
List of interviewees 79
Contents

7
Baltic Metropoles Network (BaltMet) represents a forum for capitals and large metro-
politan cities around the Baltic Sea. It brings together the cities of Berlin, Copenhagen,
Helsinki, Malmö, Oslo, Riga, Stockholm, St. Petersburg,Tallinn,Vilnius and Warsaw.The
main goal of the network is to promote innovativeness and competitiveness in the Bal-
tic Sea region by engaging cities, as well as academic and business partners, into close
cooperation. Another focus area is identity building and marketing of the Baltic Sea
region.The European Union is striving to be a role model for competitive knowledge-
based economy in the world by 2010. Metropolises play a central role in the realisation
of the Lisbon agenda.
The Baltic Metropolises Innovation Strategy project (BaltMet Inno) was initiated
by the BaltMet Network and implemented as its“flagship”project. It was co-financed
by the Baltic Sea Region INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme.The primary aim
was to investigate, identify and strengthen the role of large metropolitan areas as in-
novation actors at local, regional, national and transnational levels. A special emphasis
was on the enhancement of regional and international cooperation of metropolises,
businesses and universities. For that purpose, a common innovation policy framework,
including concrete proposals for future joint actions was produced.
This study,“Infrastructures for Innovation – Enhancing innovation activity through
urban planning in Baltic metropolises”, is one of the many significant outputs produced
during the three-year BaltMet Inno project.The study explores how cities seek to en-
able and accelerate innovation activity through measures of urban planning. It contains
valuable theoretical and strategic viewpoints for understanding the link between
innovation policies and urban planning. Furthermore, it examines more than twenty
concrete case examples from nine cities.The authors also present three very concrete
proposals for further joint actions.
I would like to thank warmly the research team and the more than 40 experts from
Baltic metropolises for their contribution to this study. I would also like to thank the
members of the BaltMet Inno project team for their efforts.
Helsinki 21 December 2007
Matti Ollinkari
Head of Lord Mayor’s Office
City of Helsinki
Foreword

9
1. Introduction
Linkage between urban planning and innovations
Metropolitan areas acting as hubs of flows of goods, capital, technology and knowledge
are significant motors of economic growth.Their role in the knowledge-based society
has become even stronger.The regions’economic development is continuously more
dependent on the science and knowledge base, as well as how the potentials can be
turned into benefits. Being increasingly aware about this, the cities have adopted an
active role in innovation policy.Transnational approaches are also searched to secure
the know-how.The Baltic Sea Region (BSR) is already a successful economic and cultural
zone, globally known for its innovative capacity.The BSR metropolises share the com-
mon will and vision to develop the knowledge-based economy and society in a sustain-
able way.This has been the basis of the BaltMet Inno -project that has focussed on the
transnational complementary innovation policies of the metropolises in relation to the
urban policies and spatial planning.
The increased interest on the linkage between innovation policy and urban plan-
ning is related to broadly agreed notion that in the increased global competition the
success of cities or city regions is guaranteed by creativity – turned into product or
service innovations.The physical city planning is considered as a means to support the
realisation of the inventive potential of the city regions.
Broadly, contemporary urban planning is influenced by two interpretations of the
role of urban space in fostering creativity and innovation.The notion of‘innovative mi-
lieu’addresses regional economic systems and well-defined innovation networks, while
‘creative city’can be seen to provide a basis for inventions in the‘fuzzy’realm of human
encounters and in the mixes of cultural flows that urban centrality (Lefebvre 1991) facili-
tates. A third, place-based and embedded approach is emerging.
The starting point of this study was to approach the linkage between innovation
policy and urban planning as such strategies, development plans and measures related
to land use, traffic and spatial development which affect, promote and enable the pro-
cess of innovation, knowledge creation, and creativity in the metropolitan areas. In the
theory chapter, we reformulate this, identifying three approaches to plan for innovation,
each with specific contexts, targets and outcomes.
In the BaltMet Inno project the link between innovation policy and urban planning
was initially understood to include all the following topics: development of science
and technology parks as well as campus areas; advancement of connections, e.g. traffic
connections between the knowledge concentrations; development and adaptation of
old industrial areas or other brown-field areas to new purposes (e.g. renovating old fac-
tories for the needs of knowledge-based start-up companies and/or creative industries);
establishment of new (green-field) and development of existing innovative environ-
ments, city districts, facilities, and test-beds for new technology and service innovations;
and improvement of housing and the residential environment in the knowledge con-
centrations or zones and in their vicinity. In addition, redevelopment of urban water-
front areas was a special interest.

10
The task of the study has been to examine (1) how the city strategies tackle the
development of innovation infrastructure, as well as innovative and creative environ-
ments by the means of urban planning, and (2) examine 24 concrete cases how the
cities in the Baltic Sea Region are developing infrastructures for innovation and creative
environments, and to draw analytical conclusions about it, as well as (3) to propose
further project ideas to transnational cooperation in the field.
Structure of the book and the empirical data used in the analyses
The second chapter discusses a set of theory-laden approaches that valorise the link
between innovation activity and urban space. A list of concepts, each providing an
understanding of the spatial underpinning of creativity and innovation, is introduced to
the reader.These theoretical approaches are used in analysing the results of case stu-
dies and they underpin also assessing policy recommendations for BaltMet cities.
The third chapter presents results of a brief mapping of existing city and regional
level strategies that include elements related to development of innovation infrastruc-
ture, and innovative and creative environments.The main question addressed is how
do the city strategies tackle the development of innovation infrastructure, as well as
innovative and creative environments by the means of urban planning? As to the data,
a comprehensive set of strategies was obtained from the cities of Helsinki, Stockholm
and Tallinn.The analysis cover also Copenhagen and Riga, based on English translations
of some of their recent strategies. In cases of Copenhagen, Riga and Tallinn the data
was complemented by interviews of city planners.
The voluminous fourth chapter presents 24 case studies from nine cities in the Bal-
tic Sea Region. It addresses the question how infrastructures for innovation and creative
environments are currently being developed in the region.The analysis concentrate
on the aim and features of the projects, their relation to the on-going urban change,
the leading agent and important partners as well as the time span of the projects.The
analysed cases and the experts interviewed were selected by BaltMet project partners
in each city.The relatively large sample provides a valuable perspective how the innova-
tion activity is enhanced through planning in BSR, although it is slightly biased due to
emphasis of the BaltMet Inno project (this issue is discussed in the fifth chapter).The
authors travelled to Berlin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Malmö, Riga, Stockholm and Tallinn
between October and December 2007 to conduct interviews in these cities as well as to
visit the development sites.The cases of Oslo and Vilnius were analysed as desk studies
and via e-mail or telephone interviews. Altogether 41 interviewees were conducted in
the 9 case cities.
In addition to the interviews, the authors used various other materials to ana-
lyse the cases, including project internet pages, architectural and development plans,
studies, and other information material received from the interviewees and/or contact
persons in each city or discovered by the authors themselves.
The fifth chapter discusses and concludes the result of the case studies; planning
for innovation twines into contemporary urban development. Nonetheless, the cities
could perform better.Therefore, the final chapter makes proposals for further projects.
The cities are recommended to cooperate in (1) strategic spatial planning of emerging
clusters, (2) developing attractive public spaces, and (3) arranging a residency pro-
gramme for technologically and culturally creative professionals.

11
2. Enhancing innovation activity through planning:
theory and concepts1
Focus on ‘innovation activity’
The many-sidedness of the notion of innovation is well reflected by altogether 33
entries involving the term in the OECD statistical glossary (stats.oecd.org/glossary). An
elemental definition goes: ”an innovation is the implementation of a new or signifi-
cantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a
new organisational method in business practices, workplace organisation or external
relations”(ibid.). It includes public sector and private sector as well as the civil society;
social processes as well as technologies; practices as well as products.
In the context of this study, ’innovation’refers to multiple processes of invent-
ing and re-inventing, which are recognized as a source of growth in the informational
economy. As to link with urban planning, the focus is on‘innovation activity’, which
takes place in spatial, functional and sometimes organisational‘environment’ that ur-
ban planning can address and support.While refraining from discussing psychological,
anthropological or socio-technical intricacies of innovation(s)
2
, as well as the difficulty
to quantify innovation
3
, the task of finding an appropriate theoretical basis for plan-
ning for innovation is not trivial. In the increasingly complex, globalising context, cities
have difficulties in finding policies that can be directly linked to the success of local
businesses (Kostiainen 2000, 86). Same holds for physical planning. Questions that
both planning projects and policy initiatives should address include appropriate scale
(site, city, or region) of the intervention, the targeted economic diversity (Feldmann &
Audretsch, 1999), and the degree of openness of the planning process. A theory-based
view is necessary for finding workable planning approaches.
Urban space and innovation activity
Broadly, contemporary urban planning is influenced by two interpretations of the role
of urban space in fostering creativity and innovation.The notion of‘innovative milieu’
addresses regional economic systems and well-defined innovation networks, while
‘creative city’can be seen to provide a basis for inventions in the‘fuzzy’realm of human
encounters and in the mixes of cultural flows that urban centrality (Lefebvre 1991) facili-
tates. A third, place-based and embedded approach is emerging.
1The first section is written in cooperation with Klaske Havik (TU Delft). See Lehtovuori, Panu & Havik,
Klaske (forthcoming 2008). Planning creative spaces. In O’Connor, Justin and Kong, Lily (eds.),Creative
Economies, Creative Cities: Asian-European Perspectives. Springer.
2
Examples of such approaches would be the ’innovation cycle’of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), based on
the contested idea of making tacit knowledge explicit to again internalise it, with the suitable places
(Ba’s) of the different phases of the cycle (Staffans 2004; Lehtovuori 2007), or Latour’s (1996) notion of
innovation as unique and embedded socio-technical process, modifying actor-networks in real time and
space.
3
See Kostiainen & Sotarauta (eds.) (2000), ”Kaupungit innovatiivisina toimintaympäristöinä”for a clarify-
ing Finnish discussion of the problem.

12
a. Innovation in cities – centrality and diversity
Even though creative city theories are embraced by both politicians and planners as
‘new’approach to urban development, these theories are strongly rooted in 1960’s criti-
cal comments on mainstream, rationalized urban planning. Jane Jacobs, in The Economy
of Cities (1969) claimed that historically, cities have been the origin and engine of
innovation and economic growth.This still powerful argument explains how new ideas
and new fields of economy are invented in cities, driving economic diversification and
thereby growth.The evidence is strong: indeed, from pre-historic trade settlements
through mediaeval urban networks to 19th century urban industrial capitalism, cities’
dense agglomeration of people and resources has been necessary for innovation. Jacobs
holds that innovation is clearly linked to the spatial and social condition of the city
– to the chaos, diversity and inefficiency of city life. It is in the dynamics of the city that
small companies have the possibility of breaking out of mainstream, and innovating by
means of trial and error. Jacobs predicted that “cities will be more intricate, comprehen-
sive, diversified and larger than today’s, and will have even more complicated jumbles
of old and new things. (…) The bureaucratized, simplified cities so dear to our present-
day city planners and urban designers (...) run counter to the processes of city growth
and economic development.”(1969, 97) This statement rings true in the contemporary,
globalised cities and urban regions.
Peter Hall reiterated Jacobs’argument in Cities in Civilisation (1998, also Hall 1999).
He defined three types of innovation, all needing city as the breeding ground: cultural
/ intellectual, technological / productive, and technological / organisational.The latter
Hall (1999, 36) also calls“urban innovation”. Cultural novelties often emerged in cities
with excess wealth and conflictual social condition, so that “creative cities are not likely
to be stable or comfortable places”(ibid., 39), while technological innovation seemed to
flourish on the edges of urban systems, in upstart places like late 18th century Man-
chester or early 20th century Detroit. Hall’s notion of urban innovation, which refers to
innovations cities have done to manage their own growth, has become important for
the current Creative City agenda. Cities have near endless“cultural resources”(Bianchini
1996), and any process can be rethought to increase urban diversity and attraction.
b. Innovation as regional process – innovative milieu
In the contemporary informational economy (Castells 1989), innovation activity has a
different locational logic. Large companies’production processes have been globally
distributed a long while, but also the‘core’processes of management and R&D are
not self-evidently bound to place (city) anymore. Flows of data and ideas underpin the
distributed“network society”(Castells 1996). On the other hand, researchers have noted
that in competitive environment, outsourcing and horizontal organisation of produc-
tion create new regional agglomerations, which can be based for example in sectored
synergy, common value-chain or clustering around a shared science-base (e.g. Storper
1995; Porter 1991). A dual process of decentralisation and qualitatively new recentralisa-
tion can be observed (Gottdiener 1985 / 1994).
“Innovative milieu”, as defined by the GREMI group
4
in the 1980s, provides a socio-
spatial notion of the regional condition of innovation activity. It is based on Philippe
Aydalot’s insight, emphasing the interdependency of companies and their local milieu.
4
Groupe de Recherche Européen sur les Milieux Innovateurs, www.unine.ch/irer/Gremi/accueil.htm

13
The notion valorises cultural norms and social relationships into the type of infrastruc-
ture that could nurture innovation and creativity. A milieu is conceived as a coherent
whole in which a territorial production system, a technical culture, and firms and insti-
tutions are linked (Maillat and Lecoq 1992; Maillat 1991). An effective innovative milieu
is characterised by high levels of trust and norms of reciprocity among actors, and
the development of a set of institutions that link these actors. In this way, the milieu
provides positive externalities to actors within it by reducing uncertainty (Camagni
1991, also Goldstein 2005). Silicon Valley in California is the paradigmatic example of an
innovative milieu, combining university-based networks, hard-working culture, Asian
immigrants, local venture capital, regional job market and‘garage’as the iconic / practi-
cal locus of start-ups. Other standard example is the fashion and design networks of
Emilia Romagna around Milan. In BSR, Medicon Valley is an example of Ørestad region’s
strategy to establish an innovative milieu.
Innovative milieus need both‘hard’and‘soft’elements, e.g. good infrastructures
and institutions, combined with favourable local culture. In urban planning, the idea
has led to promoting technopoles and thematic economic corridors. For instance in the
Helsinki Metropolitan Area, the“campus network”and“know-how routes”are targeted
to produce a technologically innovative region, based on science parks and hard infra-
structures. Certain neighbourhoods, e.g. Arabianranta and Forum Virium in Pasila, are
designated as“living laboratories”, in other words everyday test-beds of new products
and services. Developing connectivity within the Stockholm Science City is another
example.
c. Spatial and temporal niches of innovation
– emerging urban places
Mark Gottdiener (1985 / 1994) has theorised further the contemporary, informational
production of space, showing that multi-centred metropolitan region is the appropriate
frame of analysing spatial processes, e.g. real-estate investment. However, central cities
and especially old industrial areas close to historic cores are not insignificant for the
discussion about links between urban space and innovation activity – on the contrary.
Sassen’s global city thesis (1991) points to possible extreme centralisation of certain
“command and control”functions of global networks in the informational economy.
Manhattan in New York City, as well as certain parts of London, Paris and Tokyo, can be
interesting exemplars of a wider re-valuation of city centres and an intensified cul-
ture and consumption-led gentrification of derelict industrial zones. Zukin (1992), for
example, points to“fashion, finance and food”as the drivers of Manhattan’s change;
Roppongi Hills in central Tokyo boast an art museum on top of skyscraper and extensive
program of street furniture-cum-art. Such environments do play a role in the inter-
urban competition for business-locations, tourists and upper-middle class residents,
attracting members of the so-called“creative class”(cf. Florida 2002; 2004). Numerous
case areas analysed in this study also follow this route.
Nevertheless, for our discussion, new sites of cultural production are more impor-
tant than arenas of consumption. It is well known that the rough aesthetics of indust-
rial wastelands and left-over spaces attract artists, designers and other creative profes-
sionals. Dutch harbours, canals and industrial zones of England, as well as industrial
monuments of Nordic cities have become breeding grounds of cultural and creative
economies. Cable Factory in Helsinki, Northern Quarter in Manchester, NDSM wharf in
Amsterdam, Luma factory in Stockholm or temporary uses of waterfront of the River
Spree in Berlin are just some examples of the European scene of post-industrial sites

14
of urban cultural production.The study at hand introduces Hvide Kødby (meat packing
district) in Copenhagen, Suvilahti (gas factory premises) in Helsinki and Kultuurikatel
(old thermal power station) in Tallinn also as such locations.The appreciation of the
un-designed and indeterminate coincides with the wish to develop something new, in-
novative – just there. Place, or the concrete situatedness, is the key. Adaptive reuse, new
social forms and new business models lead to real innovations in such circumstances
(Lehtovuori & al. 2003; Pruijt 2004).This cultural / atmospheric / alternative interest
is not new, but the growing European trend to manage very large redevelopments,
including ofﬁces among other programmes, in a fresh,‘cultural’manner might repre-
sent urban innovation in Peter Hall’s sense. Amsterdam, Barcelona, Hamburg are clear
examples, but also Dublin, Oslo and Riga show signs of the new approach. Not acciden-
tally, waterfront is an element in all these cases.
In these projects – from small and alternative to big and commercial – the mean-
ing of place shifts from mere‘pragmatic’location, with focus on availability of mate-
rial, labour and infrastructure, to a focus on the experience and appropriation of place.
According to Florida, cities striving for economic growth should invest in ’creative
spaces’and offer circumstances (in the form of challenging working and living environ-
ment, but also ’tolerance’in atmosphere and nightlife) by means of which the so-called
‘creative class’can commit to a city. In recent years, we have seen cities deliberately
TEMPORARY USES AS A TOOL
Temporary uses could become much stronger parts of the
urban planning and governance than is currently the case.
Temporary uses facilitate a multiple coding of a site.They may
also provide an opportunity to preserve the existing values and
interesting features of the site better than other development
options.They are a research tool, which helps the planner in
testing different uses and spatial patterns. After a while, the
different situations can be analysed, leading to potentially
wiser decisions. (Lehtovuori, Hentilä & Bengs 2003, 57-60)

15
CULTURAL PLANNING
‘Cultural planning’ is an alternative and integral approach to
urban development. It can be defined as 1) the strategic use of
cultural resources for the integrated development of commu-
nities at the local, regional and national level, 2) an action-re-
search approach based on broad definitions of ‘culture’ and ‘cul-
tural resources’, which encompass the heritage, local traditions,
the arts, the media, the crafts, topography, architecture, urban
design, recreation, sports, entertainment, tourism and the
cultural representations of places and 3) a culturally sensitive
approach to urban and regional planning and to environmen-
tal, social and economic policy-making.The key notion is that
of ‘cultural resources’, in which Bianchini (1996, 21) includes (lo-
cal) skills in arts and media; youth, minority and occupational
cultures; heritage and traditions; local and external perceptions
of the place (jokes, songs, literature, myths, Lonely Planet, etc.);
the qualities of the natural and built environment; the diversity
of retailing, leisure, cultural, eating and drinking facilities; the
repertoire of specific local products and skills.
’constructing’such circumstances, and developing techniques of branding as to attract
creative groups. But we can also reverse the idea of ’constructing’, stating that it is not
in every case the city (as an institution) that provides these places, but rather creative
people in search of affordable workspace, inspiration or freedom, that discovers and in
a way also produces such ’creative spaces’.Writers, performers and artists are often the
first to reveal the strong potential of urban places – which is often the start of altena-
tive bottom-up processes of urban regeneration. In this study, only Kultuurikatel in
Tallinn is a clear example of this process. Such ’found’socio-spatial realities can play a
major role in urban development.“Every crevice in the city had a hidden story or undis-
covered potential that could be re-used for a positive urban purpose”, as Charles Landry
(2000, 7) states.

16
Planning for innovation
Urban planning can be understood as any systematic work that aims to control and
influence urban process and settlement form. In recent decades, planning style (if not
paradigm) has gradually changed from traditional blueprint planning towards com-
municative practice (Taylor 1998).Without going in any detail of planning theory, it
is justified to say that in different situations, the links between innovation activity
and planning measures take very different forms. As noted above, questions of scale,
content and process typically frame a planning project.We identify three approaches to
plan for innovation, each with specific contexts, targets and outcomes.
As defined earlier, with ’innovation’we refer to multiple processes of inventing and
re-inventing, which are recognized as a source of growth in the informational economy.
Concerning planning, the focus is on‘innovation activity’ that takes place in an‘environ-
ment’, which urban planning can address and support.
a. Innovation activity as a target
Direct efforts to plan for innovation include projects to provide for the spatial re-
quirements of science parks and create other physical infrastructures (roads, public
transport, ICT systems) that are assumed to be necessary hard elements of an innova-
tive milieu (Rönkä & al. 2004;Yhdessä huipulle… 2005).These elements cater for the
recognised protagonists of innovation activity, such as universities, research institutes
and established companies. Planning style is often a quite traditional mix of distribu-
tive economic planning and physical blueprint planning, but it can take the form of
strategic development planning. Innovation activity (eg. science park) is seen as a
“programme”(like leisure, housing or anything else), and the complexities of innova-
tive milieu are superficially understood.The target of planning effort is nevertheless to
increase innovation activity, and – at least in theory – the success can be quantitatively
measured in increased high-tech jobs, patents or absolute or relative change of regional
GDP.Top-down projects to create cultural clusters or centres for creative industries
(CI) belong to these direct planning efforts.To take an international example, the City
of Shanghai has several tens of creative industry clusters, which are set up using the
model of business incubator and science park.
5
Also regional promotion, combined with
infrastructural initiatives, can be regarded in this planning category, a good example
being the Ørestad region’s“Medicon Valley”concept.
b. Innovation activity as a resource
An enabling, low-key approach to support ‘found’places of innovation includes a wide
variety of planning measures and examples. Cultural planning (see BOX), utilisation of
temporary uses in planning (Lehtovuori & al. 2003), policies to harness local cultural
actors to start alternative cultural breeding places (example of Amsterdam, Havik
2004), Creative Industries business support systems (eg. CIDS, www.cids.co.uk), as
well economic and regulatory tools to slow down real estate speculation to provide
cheap space for innovative start-ups are among them. In enabling practices, innovation
activity is understood rather as a resource of planning than a target in itself. Innovative
practices, people and products are the resources to be nurtured to create an attractive
5
For more details on Shanghai’s projects. see e.g. http://www.contractmagazine.com/contract/magazine/
article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003625878; http://www.tdctrade.com/imn/06020701/design007.
htm

17
/ alternative / thriving place. Enabling planning can be conceived as“curating” the con-
tents of urban space (Bunschoten & al. 2001), as an organic and processual approach to
built from the existing.The formation of such‘organic’innovative spaces is often con-
nected to urban regeneration; changing uses of former industrial areas or equivalent.
To maintain the rent low is a typical problem, since clusters of creative industries tend
to attract also developers, which causes price pressure. Refined policies of“actively let-
ting it be”are needed, combined with accessibility by public transport (Söderlind 1999).
Tallinn’s Kultuurikatel might become a relevant BaltMet example.
c. Innovation activity as a by-product
Other planning agendas, for example pedestrianisation, beautification of public spaces,
ecological sensitivity, heritage preservation, equality access to services, or social housing
may indirectly provide for innovation. Creating culturally attractive and socially central
urban places and neighbourhoods is the key to success. Lively urban settings are self-
organising.They continuosly attract new, creative people, sustaining the metropolitan
social mix and codes of behaviour which are crucial for strangers to adapt and act
positively (Jacobs 1961).While the close-knit street-neighbourhoods, Jacobs observed
in 1960s Greenwich Village are hard to achieve today, active use of public spaces has
not lost importance. New,‘liminal’forms of social organisation may replace older ones,
creating similar positive effects.
6
Generally, high quality of urban life (not only physical
/ visual environment) should not be underestimated as an element of innovation policy
(eg. Raunio & Linnamaa 2000; Kostiainen 2004).We call this approach‘soft planning’
for innovation. Innovation activity is by-product of other planning efforts.The main is-
sue is that planners are aware of innovative actors and their needs, so that they do not
inadvertently harm the innovation potential of a site or area.‘Urban renaissance’should
not destroy the positive core characteristics of the urban.
In conclusion, planning for innovation hardly can happen in isolation of other agen-
das, but has to be coordinated with them. Organisational capacity is needed to achieve
“harmonious city”(van den Berg 2008), where economic, social and ecological issues
are reasonably settled.While a completely harmonious city is utopian (or boring), the
notion points to the necessity of inclusion and participation. Case by case, innovation
activity has surprisingly long institutional and spatial roots. Unlike roads or housing
districts, innovation activities cannot be planned in a detached manner. Strategic
participation of key actors is a condition for success.
6
We think of a heterogeneous informal organisations, such as skaters, temporal task groups in events or
conflicts, workers of cultural managed workspaces, environmental or social artists and art projects, and
real-life uses of the social media of web 2.0, to mention a few.

18
Exploratory mapping of the spatial underpinning of innovation activity
In an increasingly complex and connected urban process, both analysis of innovation
activity and planning for innovation can take very different forms.To help create an
overview of possible strategies, we suggest an exploratory mapping of the spatial un-
derpinning of innovation activity. Different notions are organised along two axes, those
of scale and planning style.The axes refer to the above discussed theoretical framings.

19
Innovative Milieu
‘Innovative milieu’refers to a larger urban area, eg. region. It is
not a geographic area, per se, but refers to geographically con-
nected networks, including both hard infrastructure (e.g. roads,
universities, firms) and soft infrastructure (e.g. local culture,
trust). It is seen as a“complex which is capable of initiating a
synenergetic process… an organisation, a complex system made
up of economic and technological interdependencies… a co-
herent whole in which a territorial production system, a techni-
cal culture, and protagonists are linked.”Maillat (1991, 113) Emilia
Romagna in Northern Italy is a classic example. In BSR, Medicon
Valley is an example of Ørestad region’s strategy to establish an
innovative milieu.
Growth Corridor
Regional entrepreneurial, innovation generating belt, based
around a particular traffic axis. For instance ITC agglomeration
around Route 128 in Massachuset, near Boston.The new City
Tunnel in Malmö may stimulate major development.
Thematic corridor, Opportunity area
Planning concepts that aim to support certain emerging zones
by directing attention and perhaps also financial support
towards them. Examples include the Art and Science axis in
Helsinki, Fjordcity concept in Oslo, Stockholm Science City and
waterfront redevelopments in central Riga.
Creative City
A concept of cultural planning that refers to a possibility to cre-
ate a positive upward spiral of economic success and cultural
vigoration in a post-industrial city. Key concept in implementa-
tion are ”cultural resources” that can be used broadly and crea-
tively (Bianchini 1996). E.g. the European City of Culture -projects.
Campus
A concentration of university functions and enterprises working
broadly in the same field. Usually situated outside of the core
city in greenfield site, providing a pleasant setting. In innovation
policy, the usage of the term is sometimes broader. E.g.Viikki
University District in Helsinki.
Science park, technology park
A concentration of high-tech companies with common support
services. Usually a planned one. Like campuses, science parks
tend to locate in green field areas, but not necessarily. At heart,
science parks are knowledge partnerships that foster innova-
tion. Sophia-Antipolis in Southern France in classic, full-grown
example.
7
Thematic district
A city district or neighbourhood developed under a common
theme or with reference to certain actors. Usually thematic
district is a tool of urban regeneration, and may involve both
gentrification and physical upgrading. For instance Temple Bar in
Dublin, Design District in Helsinki, SoFo in Stockholm.
Living lab
A city district or otherwise geographically framed area, in which
the inhabitants or local enterprises are used as product and
service developers in (commercial) R&D processes, typically in
mobile communication or ubicomp. A real life test-bed of user-
centred technology development. For instance Arabianranta in
Helsinki (cf. Kangasoja & Schulman 2007; Kangasoja 2004).
Cultural cluster
Any concentration of cultural activity, though usually geographi-
cally a rather small one with clear and perceivable bounders.
Often involves both production and consumption of culture. For
instance Tilburg Pop Cluster, Helsinki’s Cable Factory, as well as
Hvide Kødby (Meat Packing District) in Copenhagen and Moving
Media City in Malmö.
Urban fallowfield
Term used in real estate development. Refers to leaving a proper-
ty or larger area‘as it is’. Cheap rent and attractively robust milieu
provide possibilities for new and temporary actors – possibilities
that otherwise would not exist. Usually a temporal phase in the
development cycle. For instance Northern Quarter in Manches-
ter, parts of Stadhaven in Rotterdam and part of Refshaleøen in
Copenhagen.
Flagship project
A singular building, for instance a major cultural institution,
which is aimed to show the way of development (as a locomo-
tive) and bring a spill-over effect in the neighbourhood under-
going urban regeneration. E.g. the new city library in Marseille, or
construction of three major cultural buildings on the developing
waterfronts of the River Daugava in Riga.
7
Some researchers have questioned the benefits of science parks, claiming, for
example, that the same companies simply relocate, creating no net benefit
for regional (or national) economy. See Massey 1974 and Massey & al. 1992 for
empirical critique of the science park concept.

20
3. Addressing innovation issues in the city strategies
This chapter presents results of a brief mapping of existing city or regional level strate-
gies; how they broadly and more precisely address the development of innovation in-
frastructure, and innovative and creative environments.The main question addressed is
how do the city strategies tackle the development of innovation infrastructure, as well
as innovative and creative environments, by the means of urban planning.The analysis
below is based on the material obtained from ﬁve BaltMet cities: Copenhagen, Helsinki,
Riga, Stockholm and Tallinn.
Broadly
We will begin with the broad perspective, a framework appearing from the strategies; it
shows the core targets according to which the cities want to develop.The exact phras-
ing varies, but the main strategic goals are fairly similar from one city to another.
First of all, the strategies of all cities outline the importance of innovation and
knowledge (and creativity) related branches as a source of economic growth.They all
seek to foster knowledge-intensive industries, through co-operation between busi-
nesses, the city, and universities as well as other institutions of higher education.The
capitals and other large cities in BSR tend to be highest number of their national insti-
tutions of higher education, which adds positively to their development. In the Latvian
National Development Plan (2006, p. 33) the co-operation between entrepreneurs and
academia is even designated as a national assignment of the City of Riga.The impor-
tance of‘creativity’and creative industries is most notably pointed out in strategies of
Helsinki and Stockholm. Helsinki Business Development Strategy (2007, p. 21) notes that
in 2006 altogether eight per cent of Helsinki’s jobs were in the creative industries, and
that the number of these jobs is increasing.The Stockholm County’s Regional Strategy
for Entrepreneurship (2007) emphasises commercialisation of different kind of crea-
tivity through entrepreneurship. All in all, importance of entrepreneurship as well as
dynamic and innovative business life is highlighted in the strategies. All cities want to
create good conditions for these. All cities also provide support and counselling services,
including incubation, for small and medium size enterprises (SMEs).The role of educa-
tion is also emphasised. Equally, all the cities consider the labour force with high level of
education their asset.
Secondly, all cities seek to increase their international renown. Superlatives are not
avoided: Stockholm’s vision is to become“a versatile and experience-rich world-class
metropolis”, whereas the Helsinki Region visions to become ”a dynamic world-class
centre for business and innovation”. Copenhagen promulgates that its“status as an
international city will play an important part in its future development”. Riga and
Tallinn do not yet dare to use as extravagant wording, but they also increasingly posit
themselves in international perspective. Nonetheless,Tallinn reminds us in its“Strategy
2025”(2004, p. 10) that it was chosen as“one of the world’s most promising investment
locations”.To sum up, each city is eager to improve its international appeal in order to
become a selected destination among new residents, labour force, enterprises, invest-
ments and tourists.They also understand that to succeed in competition, attractive
environment for people and enterprises is needed. Copenhagen clariﬁes that it “must
be a city with quality of life”.The Helsinki Regional Innovation Strategy (2005, p. 22)
acknowledges“the importance of creative settings”, frankly“high standards in housing,
work and leisure opportunities.”

21
Thirdly, all cities aim to develop as poly-centric urban areas.The position of city cen-
tres as actual core areas is however uncontested, and the strategies emphasise keeping
these as attractive and active places.The strategies also underline the importance of
physical expansion of the core areas – related to redevelopment of former industrial or
harbour areas in or close to the city centres. Great expectations are laid on waterfront
revitalisation in particular. Poly-centralism is phrased with small variation. Stockholm
City Vision defines seven cores outside the city centre; the Spatial Plan of Riga speaks
about development of multi-functional local centres subordinated to the city centre,
and Copenhagen Development Plan about development areas, for instance. Invariably,
developing transport system is among the top subjects addressed in the strategies.
Often – but not always – the development of rail-based public transport is highlighted
and development of the areas around stations emphasised.
Inside and outside the core, redevelopment of areas with out-dated uses is linked
also to environmental sustainability. Cities and regions aim to increase efficiency of
their land-use, and subsequently densification where infrastructure permits; promote
urban growth within their built-up areas increasingly, in order to reduce expanding out-
wards.When developing areas, all cities emphasise mixed land-uses (instead of mono-
functionality), yet development of housing in particular.The following excerpt is taken
from Copenhagen’s Development Strategy (2005, p. 11), but could be from strategy of
almost any other city in the BSR: ”The new development areas must be developed with
a considerable element of housing and good public transport services.The stationary
parts of the new urban development areas should primarily be used for mixed hous-
ing and commercial areas with high density and a wide offer of service facilities and
cultural offers”.
Another viewpoint stated in the Copenhagen Development Strategy is also widely
shared:“If major investments have to be made in the infrastructure of a development
area, the development rate for the area must be high”(CPH, p. 62).
In addition to these three goal areas above, connected broadly with innovation
issues, all the cities also address mitigating social inequality, increasing safety, and
producing high-quality and cost-effective public services.
More specifically
As to the question how the strategies tackle the development of innovation infrastruc-
ture, or innovative and creative environments by the means of urban planning, the link
is seldom explicit.
Basically, the cities intend to create general conditions and solid“environments”for
entrepreneurship and innovation activity; whether organisational or physical ones is
not always clear. As presented above, the cities emphasise promoting innovation activ-
ity in their strategies, but most of their contribution in this field is else than urban plan-
ning. Nonetheless, a crucial planning question, and highly important in this respect too,
is development of the transportation system so that it supports connectivity between
most important nodes of activity.The Helsinki Regional Innovation Strategy states that
“in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area the city authorities have played an important role in
establishing the basic infrastructure for business and innovative activity.These general
conditions range from city planning to transport connections and a wide variety of
services such as basic education and business incubators.”
The Development Plan for Stockholm Region as well as the Business Development
Strategy of the Helsinki Capital City Region use the concept “innovative environment”,
referring broadly to centres of business support services and incubators for different

22
knowledge-intensive ﬁelds, for instance in science parks. Helsinki Region Innovation
Strategy emphasises reinforcing knowledge-based clusters and creating common
development platforms.The latter however are rather thematic networks than place-
bound. Clusters are also often mentioned in this context, with reference to various
thematic areas and spatial scales.The analysed strategies make no explicit reference
to“creative environments”. A business centre for creative sectors in Arabianranta is
though mentioned in Helsinki’s strategies.
In an illuminating interview,Tue Rex, a planner working for the City of Copenha-
gen, divided Copenhagen’s strategy to enhance“creative” through planning into two
qualitatively different measures. In terms of high-tech, the city is trying to facilitate a
better framework between the universities, research and new small companies. From
planning perspective, this means facilitating environments where private enterprises
and universities come together.This is considered less of an urban planning issue
though. In the“low-tech”end, meaning musicians, graphic designers etc., the city has
pointed out eight city areas where creative industries could ﬂourish.These are mostly
former industrial areas. Some low-key measures, which enable people to live and work
in the same place for instance, have been taken to strengthen their development proc-
ess. Critiques say putting the places on the map only increases prices and adds pressure
to property development as the locations get prominent.The measures were, however,
taken relatively recently, and no evaluation has yet been made how they have worked.

23
4. Concrete developments of innovation infrastructure
and creative environments: case studies

24
1992
The Berlin Senate decided to
establish“an integrated scien-
tific and business landscape”
on the Adlershof site and
made building investments
amounting 230 million Euros.
1994
WISTA-MANAGEMENT GMBH
emerged from EGA.
Berlin Adlershof
project in a nutshell
“Berlin Adlershof - City of Science,Technology and Media”is a new city district being created in the south-east
of Berlin.The core idea is to support connections between businesses and academia. At the heart of Berlin
Adlershof is the Science and Technology Park consisting of enterprises, science institutes and the mathematics
and natural science faculties of the Humboldt University.The Science City is surrounded by a Media City, an
industrial park, and residential areas.
Before unification of Germany, Adlershof was a home of East German Academy of Science’s scientific
institutes in the fields of physics and chemistry.
Adlershof is located outside the city centre near the Schönefeld airport.The city centre can be reached
within 30 minutes by public transport.
1991
The State of Berlin
founded the
“Adlershof
Development
Society”(EGA).
1998-2003
The departments
of the Humbolt
University moved
to the area.
2004
Construction of the
single-family houses
began.

25
basics
• The size of Berlin Adlershof is 420 ha, surrounded by a park
of 66 ha.
• Currently there are around 739 companies with 12,700 jobs. Out
of these 400 are“innovative companies”with around 4,300
employees, 12 non-university affiliated research institutes with
around 1,500 employees (of which 800 are scientists) and
138 media companies with 1,400 employees. Furthermore,
6 natural science institutes of the Humboldt-University Berlin
have altogether 130 professors, 6,400 students and 750 other
staff.
• The leading agent is WISTA-MANAGEMENT GMBH, which is
working under auspices of the Federal State of Berlin.
Important partners include the Investment Bank of the Federal
State of Berlin, Berlin Partners GmbH, Humboldt University,
science institutions and the Technology Foundation Berlin.
• The land is owned by the Federal State of Berlin.
• Investments to the Science and Technology Park have been
worth 1,5 billion EUR between 1991 and 2006.
• Contact person: Helge Neumann, Executive Manager
International Cooperation,WISTA-MANAGEMENT GMBH,
e-mail: helge@wista.de
• Internet: www.adlershof.de
Berlin
urban change
Since the development of the area started, the integration of
Adlershof to the overall urban structure of Berlin has
strengthened. Adlershof is benefiting from the development of
the Berlin-Brandenburg International Airport and a new city
district nearby.The infrastructure will ameliorate by construction
of a new railway station. Adlershof has also had its own highway
intersection since 1,5 years.
background
Adlershof has been a research and development area since the
German Experimental Institute for Aviation was established
there 1912.The first institute for the German Academy of Sciences
was built in Adlershof in 1949, and the East German television was
established there in 1952. Many buildings were constructed espe-
cially for the Academy of Sciences in the 1960s/1970s. Altogether
nine East German Academy of Science’s institutes in the fields
of physics and chemistry used to locate here. After the country’s
reunification the German Science Council (Wissenschaftsrat) was
ordered to evaluate Adlershof.The existing infrastructure was
considered to be adequate to utilize further and to develop into a
science, business and media park combined with residential areas.
The council decided on the most relevant business and research
areas for the Adlershof.The overall aim was to foster Berlin’s eco-
nomic development through technological development.
The Berlin Adlershof strategic focus is in line with the
innovation strategy of the Land of Berlin.The competence areas
developed for Berlin Adlershof Campus are as follows:
(1) information and communication technology,
(2) optical technologies and photonics,
(3) micro systems technology and new materials, and
(4) environmental, bio and energy technologies.
The land ownership of the Federal State of Berlin facilitated
rapid development.The tradition and infrastructure of a research
and development area has supported Adlerhof’s attractiveness.
To encourage innovative businesses to settle, modern specialized
centres were established on the premises, some in reconstructed
old buildings and others in new buildings with spectacular archi-
tecture.
The development of Adlershof has had many qualitatively
different challenges.The first was caused by the reunification
process: all the previous employees lost their jobs first. Although
most of the jobs could be saved, many of the former, skilled em-
ployees had by then left Adlershof for new jobs.The second big
challenge has been the development process as such: there were
no previous examples how to build up such a comprehensive sci-
ence, business and media park.The third big challenge has been to
make the area feasible both to residential and working purposes.

26
1992
The“Housing Construction
Strategies 95”was
approved by the Federal
State of Berlin.
Development Trust
Agencies were founded
to develop the areas.
Wasserstädte Berlin Oberhavel & Rummelsburger Bucht
Wasserstadt (“Water city”) Oberhavel and Rummelsburger Bucht are housing-biased mixed-use areas on the
riverbanks. Rum melsburger Bucht is located along river Spree in eastern central Berlin, only 5 km from the core
(Mitte) and Oberhavel by the river Havel, around the lake of Spandau, close to the Old Town of Spandau,
ca. 9 km northwest from Berlin.
At the beginning of the 1990s the number of Berlin’s inhabitants was expected to grow rapidly from 3 to
4 million.To increase housing supply considerably, the Senate approved an action programme called“Housing
Construction Strategies 95”(Wohnungs baustrategien 95) in 1992. At this point several former industrial areas
that located on the riverbanks and close to the city were deﬁned as housing development areas. Nonetheless,
it became clear already by the mid 1990s that the urban growth and thus demand for new housing was lower
than expected. Consequently, in both“water cities” the scale of construction was cut down considerably com-
pared with the original plans.
The solution to overcome the fragmented land ownership structure was to develop the areas as spe-
ciﬁc“urban development zones”using the urban development measures (Städtebauliche Entwicklungs-
maßnahme) under the German Federal Building Code.These are particular measures used to serve the public
interest, particularly in meeting the demand for housing and employment, for public amenities and associated
facilities, and in returning derelict land to productive use. Urban development measures may only be under-
taken where there is a public interest in uniform development and speedy implementation.
1990
New spatial
concept for Berlin
was approved: the
development
emphasis was laid
on the nodes of the
S-Bahn-Ring.
By the mid 1990s
It became clear
that the demand
for new housing
is smaller than
expected.
Subsidised housing
production was cut.
1997
New Development
Trust Agency
Wasserstadt
GmbH was
founded in
a merge.
2003
Quantitative
development
goals were
abandoned.
2007
The Development
Trust Agency
Wasserstadt GmbH
was abolished.
rummelsburger bucht wasserstädte berlin oberhavel

27
basics
• Wasserstadt GmbH, owned by the Federal state of Berlin, was
the leading agent in both areas.The land owners and the
districts that approve the plans were significant partners.
• Contact persons: Petra Nickel,
e-mail: petra.nickel@senstadt-verwalt-berlin.de
(Rummelsburger Bucht) and Gerald Schulze
e-mail: gerald.schulze@senstadt.verwalt-berlin.de
(Berlin Oberhavel),
the Senate Administration for Urban Development.
• Internet: www.wasserstadt.de and
www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/bauen/entwicklungsgebiete/
wasserstadt oberhavel
• Size: 206 ha.
• 7500 new dwellings with 13 000 inhabitants (planned).
3,800 new dwellings realised by now (90 % of them by the
government) as well as over 700 residential units for seniors.
• The planned gross floor space of new business premises:
910 000 sq m.
• Number of jobs: 4800.The idea has been to develop the area,
the Eiswerder Island in particular, as a media and event cluster.
• Fragmented land ownership: originally the Federal State of
Berlin owned one-fifth of the land, 14 big real estate owners a
half of the land, and the small real estate owners the rest.
• The total cost of the development was 610 million.The share of
the Federal State of Berlin was 450 million.
rummelsburger bucht
• Size: 131 ha.
• 2265 new flats and 205 single family houses.
• Share of housing developed by the government: 42 %.
• Gross floor space of new business premises: 300 000 sq m.
• Number of jobs: n.a.
• Fragmented land ownership: originally the Federal State owned
34 % of the land, the Confederacy 15 %, the State Railways 13 %
and diverse landowners the rest 27 %.
• The total cost of the development was 262 million.The share of
the Federal State of Berlin was 100 million.
Berlin
urban change
“Water cities”are waterfront redevelopments along the rivers
Spree and Havel.The areas were in industrial and warehous-
ing use until the reunification of Germany and redundant
afterwards.The environment was contaminated and consider-
able land and water cleaning operations were carried out in the
course of redevelopment.
background
The developments were realisations of Berlin’s housing strategy
of the early 1990s. Both developments were challenged – and
delayed – by the landowners who did not agree the development
plan and summoned to the court. A prerequisite to development
was thus their definition as urban development zones, which
enabled goal-oriented and more rapid development led by the
Development Trust Agency.The specific feature of“the urban
development zone”is the extended right to engage the land-
owners to develop the area. In case of reluctance, the community
is entitled to expropriate the land.
The development of Oberhavel had also financial challenges,
which were solved by revenue-dependent development: new
infrastructure was built only after land had been sold.
Participatory planning was arranged through a Development
Advisory Board. It consisted of representatives of the senate, the
Development Trust Agency and the Agency of Concerned. The
latter was elected by all of the people who live or work in or near
the area and consisted mostly of landowners, landlords, lease-
holders and craftsperson.

28
Late 1990s
The government initiated the idea.
Copenhagen Biotechnical Science Park (COBIS)
Copenhagen Biotechnical Science Park (COBIS) aims to strengthen the Medicon Valley’s position as a recognized biotechnological
growth environment and to become a show-centre of biotechnological innovations. Medicon Valley is a major bi-national life-sci-
ence cluster that connects academia, hospitals and companies in the Öresund Region, which includes the regions of Greater Co-
penhagen and Zeeland in Denmark and Skåne in Sweden. COBIS will be located in Copenhagen city in close proximity to the main
hospital, new Biotech Research and Innovation Centre (BRIC) and the University of Copenhagen, which form a dense cluster. COBIS
will be the physical facility to connect capital, research and business within life science.
COBIS is a commercially based science park owned by three leading science parks in Denmark. It is intended to work as a com-
mercialisation hub for the research institutions in close proximity, but also as a pipeline for these larger mother institutions. COBIS
will focus on facility management, business development and project partnering.
The business model is currently being developed and the fundraising is on its way.The constructions will start in 2008 and
COBIS is due to open in 2009.
2006
The three partners won the
tender to run the science park.
2008
Constructions will begin.
2009
COBIS will be opened.

29
basics
• Construction will take place in two phases.The first phase will
cover 4500 sq m and the total size of the project will be
10 000 sq m. 30 % of the building will be laboratories.
• When completed (10.000 sq m) COBIS will be home to
40-50 companies with 400-500 employees.
• COBIS is a commercial entity. It is a consortium of three science
parks Symbion (40%), Scion-DTU (40%) and
Science Park Århus (20%).
• Land ownership: COBIS (bought it from the state).
• Contact person:Torben Orla Nielsen, Chief Operation Officer,
e-mail: ton@sciontu.dk
• Internet: www.cobis.dk
Copenhagen
urban change
COBIS represents a node of activity that draws attention to
spatially dense cluster of life science research institutions and
related agents in the immediate surroundings as well as in the
Medicon Valley region.
The lot where COBIS will be built used to be part of hospital
premises, and is now part of the campus of University of Copen-
hagen for medical and pharmaceutical sciences.
background
COBIS is a concrete example of Öresund regions strategy to
establish an innovative milieu, promote interaction between
research and business and thus facilitate the innovation process.
The project is based on government initiative to locate a
science park in the immediate vicinity of a new biotechnical
research centre (BRIC) next lot. COBIS won a public tender
concerning the right to establish the science park and to buy an
attractive site with a moderate cost. Moreover, the government
and the capital city region provide a limited rent guaranty of
DKK 10 million for the first 10 years.The project has also a strong
backing from universities, largest biotech companies etc.
A crucial challenge for COBIS is its dependence of the
performance of university’s technology-transfer offices that
select the spin-offs, i.e. future clients of COBIS, and thus form a
pipeline from university’s side. Other challenges include drawing
a commercially sustainable business model, current low number
of new biotech companies, and a smooth cooperation between
the three owners.

30
2004
Initial analysis.
Hvide Kødby
Hvide Kødby (the white meat city), Copenhagen’s meat packing district, is being transformed into a spot where creative indus
tries are combined with food industries.The site has also opened to wider public.The meat city is located next to gentrifying
Vesterbro city district, near the central railway station. A decision has been made that the area’s functional division should be-
come 50/50 between the food industries and other – namely creative industries, restaurants, night clubs etc.The current division
is around 70/30, a few galleries and a nightclub/restaurant/art gallery are accessible so far.The transformation occurs gradually
through the tenant change: as the old leases come to an end, the creative entrepreneurs replace the food industries.“White”
refers to the colour of the buildings: the functionalist architecture dates back to 1934.The oldest “brown”part of the meat city is
already converted into new uses and the“grey”part is a mixed-use territory.
2005
First development
plan (expired).
2005
Decision that all
new tenants must
represent creative
functions.
2007
Second development
plan (MUTOPIA) and
decision to follow it.

31
basics
• Size of the area 10,5 ha.
• Leading agent: Copenhagen Property.
• Land owner: City of Copenhagen.
• Contact person: Line Maj Aagreen, Project Manager,
Copenhagen Property,
e-mail: lineaa@kff.kk.dk
Copenhagen
urban change
The transformation is driven by diminished necessity of a meat
processing district, a quest to find new locations to let for crea-
tive industries with sustainable prices as well as an attempt to
create interesting urban spot.
All the meat consumed in Copenhagen used to pass through
“the meat city”. Due to improved logistics such a place has
become unnecessary.Tightened requirements for hygiene are ad-
ditional challenge. However, the food processing business itself is
less willing to give up the traditional location.
The former outskirts of an industrial city provide potential in
what is today a rather central location.The successful renewal
of the neighbouring Vesterbro residential area also increases the
pressure for change.
The gradual transformation occurs through tenant change.
Although information has spread only by word of mouth, the
demand for rental space is high among creative entrepreneurs.
The Copenhagen Property chooses the tenants on the basis of
how they contribute to the transformation of the whole area.
The tenant restructuring is proceeding on a slow pace.
‘Den Hvide Kødby’is a national industrial heritage site, which
means that spatial changes in the grounds will be fairly limited.
background
The recognised importance of creative industries materialises
in the white meat city because the city owns the property. It may
be regarded also as an initiative to combine different kind of
industries in search for something new.
Two plans have been drawn for transforming the area.The
first one, expired later on, developed on an idea to locate the
School of Design in the area.The second one, drawn in 2007 by
MUTOPIA architects, suggests a more gradual change with multi-
functional uses.
The main challenge for the project is money. Currently all
investment in physical change is made from the rents. A more
rapid transformation would require financing from the city
budget. No such resources have yet been allocated. Moreover,
although an overall decision on the direction of change was
taken, to attain consensus on its specific course and timetable
among politicians and tenant organisation remains another
challenge.

32
Ørestad
Ørestad is a new mixed-use city district located between the centre of Copenhagen and the
Copenhagen Airport as well as the Öresund bridge connecting Denmark with Sweden. Ørestad
is a 5 km long and 600 m wide“linear urban development project”along a new metro line.
Ørestad’s planning began in 1991 after Danish and Swedish governments had agreed to
build the Öresund bridge.The mode of development has based on the Act on Ørestad (1992)
passed by the Danish parliament.The Act deals specifically with the establishment of an
Ørestad Development Corporation.The Ørestad-concept links investment in infrastructure, the
consequent land value appreciation and the final marketing of the building sites.The income
from the land has been used to finance the construction of Copenhagen metro.
Ørestad has developed rapidly during the last five years and the plan is that it will be deve-
loped over the next 20 years.
Ørestad will be developed over the next 20 years.
1991
Danish
and Swedish
governments
agreed to
build the
Öresund
bridge.
1991
Ørestad was
initially presented
as an urban
development
project and a
source of income
to finance the
Copenhagen
metro.
1992
Act on
Ørestad is
passed.
1994
International
ideas
competition
for the master
plan was held.
1995
Construction
of the Öresund
bridge began.
2000
The Öresund
bridge was
opened.
2001
The first major
constructions
were
completed
in Ørestad.
2002
The first
phase of
the metro
was opened.
.

33
basics
• The total area: 3.1 million sq m.
• Aimed number of inhabitants: 20,000+.
• Aimed number of working places: 80,000+.
• Already 20,000 people study in Ørestad.
• Leading agent: Ørestad Development Corporation.
• Land ownership: Originally common land ownership of the city
(55 %) and the state (45 %) state. In the course of development
the lots have been sold to developers.
• Contact person: Kresten Bloch, Head of Planning,
Port and City Development Corporation,
e-mail: kbl@arealudvikling.dk
• Internet: www.orestad.dk
urban change
Developing of the Ørestad district complements the urban
structure of Copenhagen and the whole Ørestad Region.
The regionalisation (bridge) and increasing importance of
air traffic has brought a new logic through which the former
outskirts – the land was formerly used as military shooting
fields and a junk yard – have gained new centrality. Frankly, the
new town is located in a major traffic junction of the
Ørestad Region.
Ørestad has aimed at providing attractive building sites for
offices between the city and the airport as well the Öresund
bridge. Another aim has been to establish attractive housing
areas for young families to hamper suburbanisation and to
keep these“good tax payers”within the city borders.The
Northern part also holds university departments, research
institutes and knowledge-based industries. Ørestad provides
ample space for new constructions that could not be fitted into
the existing quarters of Copenhagen due to their mere size.
The Ørestad Act defined the grounds in the left (Western)
side of the new district as a nature reserve area.
Copenhagen
background
The role of the development company has been to take care of
planning and construction of the infrastructure and then selling
the lots to private investors. After the development company has
finished its job it will be abolished and the city will take over the
maintenance of the district.
One of the main ideas has been that the development
company would secure that a new part of Copenhagen is built
with a high building standard. One way to do this was to show
a high standard of infrastructure, which the developers would
have to match. In fact, the main boulevard was built before a
single lot was sold.
Ørestad is divided into five sub-districts.The main features
of the areas are set in a local plan approved by the City of
Copenhagen.The plan regulates for instance the borders of
built-up area, maximum of height of construction, density
(construction 340 % of the area inside the block) etc.The land is
sold developers block-wise.The developer has discretion in
more detailed matters of development.The sale contract
requires the developer to draw a“master plan”(overall plan)
for the whole block, which the development company has
to approve, before they may develop a single lot in their block.
When the city later reviews the singular projects, they may take
the overall plan into account.
The Ørestad project (the income from land) is used to
finance all three lines of the Copenhagen metro.The decision to
build the metro was completely connected to this project.
A main challenge was to overcome starting problems; a lot
of people were doubtful about realisation of the project in the
beginning.The development corporation had to sell the first
lots with very buyer-friendly terms. But as favourable economic
development boosted demand for new housing and office
areas, the project suddenly started to roll.The development
pace has been rapid during the last five years. By now, the
district has established its position in the eyes of real estate
investors due to its high standard of infrastructure, including
the airport, in particular.

34
Arabianranta - Suvilahti
Central Helsinki is located on a peninsula by the sea.The inner city’s eastern waterfront is under a major redevelopment process that
is changing the shores which used to be characterised by manufacturing industries, harbouring, warehousing and adjacent workers’
housing areas.
Arabianranta (“the Arabia waterfront”) acquired its name from the Arabia porcelain and ceramics factory founded there in 1874.
The new Arabianranta, developed since the early 1990s, consists of a residential area as well as a cultural cluster created by the edu-
cational institutions and enterprises in the area. At the heart of the area, the University of Art and Design Helsinki and the Pop & Jazz
Conservatory locate in the old Arabia factory premises.
The development of the Arabianranta residential area has had several specific features which were made possible by the city’s
landownership and regulative planning measures. Specific terms of plot reservation included for instance“art percentage”; a rule that
1-2 % of construction costs of each residential building were to be budgeted in art works to be placed in yards, stairwells etc. An-
other term was a“fibre rule” that required all the housing associations (residential multifamily buildings) to connect to the area data
network. In developing Arabianranta, the city also continued its policy to mix different social groups in new residential areas through
provision of housing with different tenure.
As to development of the cultural cluster, the city, the state, the educational institutions located in Arabianranta and three compa-
nies that owned land in the area signed a letter of intent in 1995, with the aim of building a leading hub of design industry in the Baltic
context.To further purpose, a development company, Art and Design City of Helsinki (ADC) was established. ADC’s role has been most
visible in development of local area information network, the Helsinki Virtual Village.The district has developed as a well-known Living
Lab; a“research platform”where prototypes of things and services can be tested in a real life context.
Suvilahti gas factory area (dated from 1909) is located further south in the eastern waterfront, adjacent to the large Kalasatama
redevelopment area.The gas factory premises will be converted into a centre of urban culture and creative industries, providing perma-
nent and short-term rental space for different fields and forms of art, applied arts, education and happenings.
The late 1980s
Planning begins.
1986
The University of Art
and Design Helsinki
relocates to Arabia.
1992
Master Plan introduces
“the Science-Art -axis”.
2000
First new resi-
dents move in.
2008
Development
of Kalasatama
area begins.
2012
Development
of Arabianranta
is completed.

35
Helsinki
basics
• The size of the Arabianranta area is 85 ha and the Kalasatama
area further south 135 ha.Within the latter, the size of Suvilahti
gas factory premises is 1,25 ha.
• In Arabianranta, the expected total number of residents is
10,000 and the number of jobs 8,000.The area has also 6,000
students.
• The leading agent and the main landowner has been the
City of Helsinki.
• The development company Art and Design City Helsinki is a
public-private joint-venture.
• The management of Suvilahti is likely to be taken over by the
Helsinki Cable Factory which is an independent cultural centre
managing another big factory premises.
• Contact persons: Petri Hoppula, Project Coordinator,
the City of Helsinki Economic and Planning Centre,
e-mail: petri.hoppula@hel.fi
Kari Halinen, Managing Director, Art and Design City Helsinki,
e-mail: kari.halinen@adchelsinki.fi
• Internet: www.helsinkivirtualvillage.fi
urban change
The transformation of Helsinki’s eastern waterfront has its roots
in change of the city’s economic base, i.e. a gradual de-industri-
alisation, and consequent re-recycling of land use. In Kalasatama
area (including Suvilahti) the change is boosted by Helsinki’s
strategic decision to relocate cargo shipping to new Vuosaari
harbour (2008), which leaves vacant central waterfront areas.
An essential feature is also transformation in social stratifica-
tion, namely relative growth of middle strata. Consequently the
former working class areas are increasingly occupied by middle-
class residents in central locations in particular.
The character of new working places in eastern waterfront
represents the city’s will to consolidate its economic base today
– through supporting higher education, research and develop-
ment, knowledge intensive businesses and creative industries.
background
The planning of the new Arabianranta was initiated in the late
1980s, when it was decided that the undeveloped shorelines
would be used for housing production.The City Planning Depart-
ment started drafting plans for the area in the early 1990s.
The Helsinki Master Plan 1992 introduced the strategic
planning concept “Science-Art -axis”.The axis extends from the
university campus in the city centre to Viikki (see page 38) along
the eastern waterfront.
Technical challenges to develop Arabianranta have included
strengthening the ground for construction, cleaning the polluted
land, and constructing next to natural reservation area on the
other side of the Viikki bay. A usual planning challenge has been
also to agree matters with the numerous interest groups.
A strategic challenge is posed by a recent idea to establish
an Innovation University in the Helsinki Region.There is some
pressure for the University of Art and Design Helsinki to relocate
to another premises, which confronts with Helsinki’s aim to
develop the Science-Art -axis.

36
Aviapolis
Aviapolis is a marketing brand for a development area adjacent to Helsinki-Vantaa international airport.The Airport, located 19 km
north from the Helsinki city centre, dominates the spatial configuration of the whole central part of the City of Vantaa.The key area
locates south of the airport at the NW side of the crossroads of the Ring Road III and the Tuusula Motorway.This is an infrastructural
focal point since the Ring Road III is a part of the E18 TEN-highway, connecting Scandinavia with Russia, from Oslo to St Petersburg, and
the Tuusula Motorway is one of the main northbound arteries from central Helsinki.
Following increased internationalisation, the airport was recognised as a major regional location asset in the 1990s. Subsequently,
the area has developed successfully as a new major office construction zone. Furthermore, following the growth of the Helsinki metro-
politan area and expanding of the commuting area, major shopping developments have also concentrated on the central part of the
Ring Road III during the last decade. Nonetheless, despite these developments the area is still a sparsely built peripheral industrial
polygon.The City of Vantaa aims to develop it with more diverse and dense land-uses, including housing development.
1998
Master Plan for the Airport
Road marked the beginning
of Aviapolis as the office
development area.
2000
Aviapolis cooperation between
the city, the airport operator,
and commercial property and
business service developers
began.
2002–2006
Several idea
plans were
presented.
2007
Vantaa Master Plan
enabled the mixture of
housing and working
places.
2013
The railway connection
between the airport and the
city centre of Helsinki is due
to be ready.

37
Helsinki
basics
• The leading agent is the City of Vantaa since it establishes the
limits and functions within which the landowners are
permitted to develop the land. Other important actors are
Finavia (a state owned commercial enterprise that manages
the airport) as well as private landowners and real estate
developers.
• The land of the key area is owned by the City of Vantaa, Finavia
and corporate landowners including major construction
companies.The landowners together with several business
services providers form the Aviapolis Development Team.
The cooperation concentrates to marketing of the area.
• The Helsinki-Vantaa airport handled 12 million passengers
in 2006.
• Contact person: Matti Pallasvuo,
the City of Vantaa Urban Planning Department,
e-mail: matti.pallasvuo@vantaa.fi
• Internet: www.aviapolis.fi, www.vantaa.fi
urban change
Aviapolis exemplifies the development of airports as one crucial
node in transformation of urban regions.The increased impor-
tance of connectivity by air has paved the way to development of
a new centre of activity in what used to be a periphery.
The Helsinki airport was relocated to Vantaa in 1952 and the
Ring Road III was constructed in the 1960s. During the following
decades, the area developed as a peripheral zone of industries
and warehousing. Besides necessary node of logistics, the airport
was considered mainly as an environmental disturbance, espe-
cially problematic source of noise, as well as a claimant of eternal
improvements on developing the road access.
Increased internationalisation of business and other spheres
of life, and consequent requirements of connectivity, have turned
the airport to a critical asset. Furthermore, the airport operator
has assumed a new business orientation with a stronger focus
on landside development. Both of these are international trends,
which apply in the Helsinki Region since the mid-1990s.
background
The development of Aviapolis has a crucial part in the Entre-
preneurial Strategy of the City of Vantaa and its importance is
acknowledged also in the Innovation Strategy of the Helsinki
Region.
From the city’s perspective the area reserved for working-
places function is far too large for any growth scenario.Thus pri-
oritisation would rather be needed.To introduce a more diverse
and dense land-use, the City of Vantaa has considered housing
development in the area.
As to recent milestones of planning, the Master Plan for the
Airport Road (1998) enabled the first technology park Teknopolis
to be built in Aviapolis and commenced the office developments.
An overall development vision of connecting the airport to the
current city centre of Vantaa (Tikkurila) via an urban boulevard
was presented by Kaj Wartiainen & SRV Developers in the ambi-
tious“K2”plan (2002).The development opportunities around
the forthcoming (Marja-)railway stations were studied by LT Con-
sulting (2003). Studies by real estate agency Huoneistokeskus
(2004) and Catella Property Consultants (2004) were cautiously
positive on possibilities to develop housing in the area.The idea
of introducing residential units as in-fills was taken further in the
“Aviavillas”development plan (2006) by Harris & Kjisik architects.
The new Vantaa Master Plan 2007 enables residential develop-
ments, defining large areas for working places and/or residential
use.

38
1999 and 2003
Two business
incubators
were com-
pleted.
Viikki
“Viikki University District”is a new city district consisting of university campus, a science park and residential neighbourhoods.
The University of Helsinki’s teaching and research facilities for the agriculture and forestry, biosciences, pharmacy, and
veterinary medicine are located in Viikki.The adjacent Helsinki Business and Science Park business incubator buildings provide
facilities and services primarily for new companies in the biotechnology, drug development, health service technology, environ-
ment technology, and food technology business areas.
Of the several residential neighbourhoods in Viikki, one is an experimental area for ecological construction.To obtain a
building permit there, the residential projects have had to comply with strict ecological criteria. Several experiments on energy
efﬁciency, the use of solar energy, timber construction of blocks of ﬂats etc. have also taken place in the area.
Viikki is situated fairly close to central Helsinki, at amidst extensive green areas, near the intersection of Lahti Motorway
and the Ring Road I.
1992
Master Plan and
structural model
for Viikki was
approved.
1992
Helsinki Business
and Science Park
Ltd was founded.
1993
Initial land-use
agreement be-
tween the city, the
state and the Parish
Union of Helsinki.
1995–2006
University bio-
centres and new
faculty premises
were built.
1998
First new
residential
blocks were
completed.
2007
Commercial
centre was
opened.
By 2015
Residential
developments
are due to be
completed.

39
Helsinki
basics
• The built-up area is ca. 300 ha.
• By 2015 Viikki is due to have approximately 18,000 residents,
7,000 jobs and 6,000 students.
• The leading agent, i.e. planner and developer of infrastructure,
has been the City of Helsinki.
• The major landowners are the city, the state and the Parish
Union of Helsinki.Through transactions of the plots there are
now also private landowners.
• Helsinki Business and Science Park Ltd is owned by the Finnish
Government, University of Helsinki, the City of Helsinki,
Sitra and several business associations.
• Contact person: Heikki Rinne, the City of Helsinki,
Economic and Planning Centre
• Internet: www.helsinki.fi/viikki/english,
http://www.sciencepark.helsinki.fi/en_GB/
urban change
Viikki is a green-field investment, i.e. it was mostly constructed to
formerly unoccupied land.Viikki’s landscape is an extensive open
area consisting of lands formerly used for cultivation as well as
forests, the wetlands and open water areas.The explanation why
such a central area had been left unconstructed is that the state
had not had pressure to liquidate its land holdings, until the
university, whose properties are owned by the state, proposed to
expand to Viikki.
Viikki is a large“in-fill”in urban structure; it utilises the
infrastructure, especially the road network, already in place, and
connects new residents with broad recreational areas.The city’s
interest has been to develop a multifunctional district instead of
a traditional residential suburb.
background
The agricultural sciences of the University of Helsinki have
located in Viikki since the 1960s. In the early 1990s, the university
made a decision to concentrate its activities into four campus
areas, one being Viikki.The Science Park was developed together
with the university campus.This development was initiated by
the University of Helsinki in cooperation with the city.Viikki’s
excellent access to road network was considered as advantage to
create jobs there.
The idea of developing a university district with housing
areas was initiated in early planning phase.The fact that Viikki
is surrounded by large green areas, including natural protection
areas, and also an experimental farm (150 ha) of the University of
Helsinki, was a starting point in planning and gave also the idea
to experiment ecological housing there.
In the planning phase, the project was challenged with dis-
agreements between the major landowners. Construction next
to major natural protection area was also questioned.
A continued challenge has been to establish Viikki, located
in north-eastern Helsinki, as an attractive location for enterprises
despite the university campus and excellent access to road
network.The location of knowledge-intensive enterprises tends
to be central and westbound in the Helsinki Region. On the other
hand, the overall growth of bio-tech companies has been slower
than expected in the 1990s, independently of location.

40
Moving Media City
“Moving Media City”is a growth centre that will be established in Malmö’s rapidly redeveloping Western
Harbour area.The aim is to create an innovation setting for everything in and surrounding the ﬁlm,TV and
computer games industries in new media.The area is adjacent to Malmö University and the business incuba-
tor MINC for knowledge-intensive companies.The new Swedish television south (SVT) premises will also
locate in the area – close to customers, production companies and the university.
The“content manager”of Moving Media City is Media Mötesplats Malmö (MMM,“Media Meeting Place
Malmö”), which is one of the eight hubs of the Swedish creative industries and one of the driving forces
behind the moving image cluster development in the Skåne-Blekinge Region.
Rather then developing a particular property, the target is to establish the area as the location
(a“meeting place”creating conditions) for an exciting mix of students, researchers, and new companies with
innovative ideas.The key words are clustering, openness, ﬂexible spaces and low thresholds between actors
coming together.
1997
Kockum’s
shipyards
closed at
Western
Harbour.
1998
Malmö
University was
established with
half of the
faculties
locating in the
Western Har-
bour.
2001
Redevelopment
of Western
Harbour got a
kick start with
Bo01 housing
exhibition.
2005
Media
Mötesplats
Malmö was
established.
2006
Region of
Skåne started a
cluster project
Moving Media
Southern
Sweden.
1999 and 2003
Swedish
Television
South (SVT)
decided to
relocate to
the area.
2007
Media
Mötesplats
Malmö was
appointed as a
content
manager of
the Moving
Media City.
2008
The
construction
will begin.
2009
SVT moves in,
to be followed
by many other
companies

41
Malmö
basics
• Media Mötesplats Malmö is a leading agent in content
development of the Moving Media City, the City of Malmö
coordinates the physical land-use development.
• The landowner is Peab construction company.
• Contact person: Magnus Thure Nilsson,
Media Mötesplats Malmö,
e-mail: magnus.thure@mmmalmo.se
• Internet: www.mmmalmo.se
urban change
Moving Media City is part of major waterfront redevelopment in
Malmö’s Western Harbour area.The extensive premises of former
Kockum’s shipyards are being rapidly developed into a contempo-
rary residential and office district.
The place where the Moving Media City will be built is well
located in the southern part of the Western Harbour near the
university and the central railway station as well as the Malmö
Old Town which is the city’s commercial centre.
background
Media Mötesplats Malmö (MMM) is one of the eight Meeting
Places of the creative industries in Sweden which the Knowledge
Foundation (KK Stiftelsen) has set up since the year 2002.The
Meeting Places were first established around existing creative
clusters, for instance Rock City Hultsfred, a Meeting Place for
music industry following the Hultsfred Rock Festival. Sweden’s
major cities Stockholm, Göteborg and Malmö were appointed
as Meeting Places in 2005. MMM is financed by the Knowledge
Foundation, the City of Malmö and the Region of Skåne.
MMM defines itself as an“enabling agency”, which performs
constant market surveillance to understand novelties and com-
municate the needs between business, the City of Malmö, the
Region of Skåne, researchers and educational institutions. It thus
leans on the triple-helix model: collaboration between the public
sector, business and the academic world. MMM also provides
business development for companies, particularly by coordinat-
ing, facilitating, linking and developing cooperation and partner-
ships between different actors. MMM currently establishes a
media hub within the Minc incubator.
Development of a media cluster is one target of the city’s
enterprise development plan.The Region of Skåne has also had
a cluster project Moving Media Southern Sweden since 2006.
Consequently, one challenge has been to formulate the concept
of Moving Media City so that both the region and the city can
agree it.
The challenge to keep the rents low enough for starting
companies has been recognised. MMM, the construction com-
pany and the city property management board are working to-
gether to find a solution. It could be cheaper building techniques,
subsidies by the city council, or relatively bigger fees for the big
companies as for them the mixture of big and small companies
is also important.

42
Det Medicinska Malmö
Det Medicinska Malmö – the Medical Malmö – refers to the development plan of the so-called UMAS-Medeon-Triangeln -area in south-
ern Malmö which is developed as the place for medical care, health-care education and life science research and technology.
The Medical Malmö is a cooperation project between the University Hospital (UMAS), Medeon Science Park, the Malmö University
College (Malmö Högskola) and the City of Malmö.The collaborative effort is intended to strengthen Malmö’s position in the life sci-
ence and medical sector.The plan includes also housing and commercial developments in the area.The overall goal is to make Malmö
a more attractive city for businesses and residents.The Medical Malmö is thus both an urban development project and support for
research, education, and entrepreneurship in the ﬁeld of life sciences.
The focus of the project is on creating good physical pre-requisites for an expansion of the Medeon Science Park, which is in a
“bridge-building position”in creating a meeting place for academia and industry.
The development is stimulated by a new City Tunnel that provides a shortcut between the Malmö city centre and the Öresund
bridge.The tunnel, which is under construction and due to open in 2011, passes underneath the area, and the area will have also its
train station at Triangeln.The city tunnel will cut the travelling time between the Malmö central railway station and Copenhagen inter-
national airport to less than 20 minutes.
2004
The Municipal Executive Board commissioned
the City Planning Ofﬁce to design a
comprehensive plan for the area.
2008
The comprehensive
plan will be passed.
2011
The City Tunnel will
be opened.
The development is envisioned to
take place within the next
10-20 years.

43
Malmö
basics
• The size of the Triangeln-UMAS-Medeon area is ca. 70 ha.
• The area has now 3,000 residents and 9,000 jobs.
Both are due to increase.
• The leading agent is the City of Malmö in cooperation with
the University Hospital (UMAS), Medeon Science Park and
the Malmö University College (Malmö Högskola).
• Land owner: the City of Malmö.
• Contact persons:Tyke Tykesson, planner, the City of Malmö,
e-mail: tyke.tykesson@malmo.se
Charlotte Ahlgren, Managing Director, Medeon Science Park,
e-mail: charlotte.ahlgren@medeon.se
• Internet: www.malmo.se/medicinskamalmo
urban change
The former outskirts of Malmö South gain new centrality in the
Örestad regionalisation process. Provision of infrastructure in-
creases connectivity and initiates further development.The new
City Tunnel station will have a strong impact on its immediate
surroundings as it will make the area an important entry point
into the city and Malmö’s new“front side”.
The Öresund bridge, a ﬁxed link between Copenhagen and
Malmö, has made a tremendous change for the whole region.
The labour market is integrating and especially Swedes commute
to the booming Copenhagen area. Meanwhile also at least 6,000
Danes have moved to the Swedish side due to lower housing
prices.
background
To concentrate the premises for medical studies and related
functions in the university hospital area has been a strategic
decision in Malmö since a long time.The two health-related
Malmö University faculties were placed here 10 years ago. Also
one faculty of the University of Lund is located in the area, and
connected to the latter a new Clinical Research Centre (CRC) was
opened in 2006.The Medeon Science Park has also located in
at the southern end of the area already for 20 years, and in the
course of the Medical Malmö -development it will expand in the
university hospital area.The main components of the Medical
Malmö are thus already in place and it is conscious policy of the
city to strengthen its assets.
The Medeon Science Park concentrates to supporting knowl-
edge-intensive enterprises seeking to commercialise research
results in the ﬁeld of life science (pharmaceuticals, medical
technology, biotechnology and health care).
The Medical Malmö is part of Medicon Valley which is a
major bi-national life-science cluster that connects academia,
hospitals and companies in the Öresund Region, which includes
the regions of Greater Copenhagen and Zeeland in Denmark
and Skåne in Sweden. Altogether 60 % of life science industry in
Scandinavia is located in the Medicon Valley.

44
Fjordcity
The Fjord City development comprises a great deal of central Oslo’s waterfronts that will be
transformed from harbour and industrial uses to residential, commercial and recreational
purposes.The aim is to reconnect the urban life with the fjord comprehensively. By making
the waterfront accessible to the public and by locating cultural institutions along the water-
front, the city seeks also to attract “creative classes”and equivalent organisations.
The area comprises the central waterfront from Frognerstranda in the west to Orm-
sund in the southeast.The development area is sub-divided into 13 project areas, some of
which are already built and others not yet even planned.The Fjord City Plan, which currently
is under political discussion, focus especially on Filipstad,Vippetangen, Alna and Orsmund.
Oslo
1997
The report of the City
Planning and Build-
ing Authority recom-
mends the Fjord City
development.
1999
The decision to locate
the Norwegian Na-
tional Opera to Bjor-
vika was taken by the
central government.
2000
The City Council
approved the“Fjord
City”strategy, which
has been the basis for
further planning.
2002
The Oslo Water-
front Planning
Ofﬁce was
established.
2007
The proposal for
the Fjord City Plan
is under political
discussion.
By 2025
The area is due
to be completed .

Infrastructures for innovation(2)

Infrastructures for innovation(2)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Infrastructures for innovation(2)

Similar to Infrastructures for innovation(2) (20)

More from rigarquia

More from rigarquia (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Infrastructures for innovation(2)