Evolving Sustainable Development Framework for Knowledge Hubs: Planning for Spatial Response of Bangalore Metropolitan Region to Knowledge Economy

This abstract has open access
Abstract Summary
Knowledge economy drives spatial development, often resulting in agglomeration (Bentlage 2014, Luthi 2011). The transition of the world from service economy to knowledge economy prompts planners to shift focus from a mono-centric “city” to a polycentric “urban agglomeration” (Yao et all 2006). In the onset of the new economic order, “knowledge hubs”, which are defined as regions concentrating knowledge sharing, transfer and exchange (Bertinelli & Black 2004), become the future of urban planning. Knowledge hubs produce knowledge and resonate with concepts such as “learning regions” (Florida 1995), “network city” (Batten 1995) and extends itself to the idea of “global city region” (Scott 2001), “global city” (Zhou and Shi 1988) and an “international node” (Gottmann 1957). Sustainable development for these newly functioning spatial systems, knowledge becomes vital for future of cities. Sustainable development currently follows the 2030 Agenda, which is adopted worldwide and based on this, Sustainable Development Framework is formulated. It is the constitution guiding and enabling the development of sustainability indicators, which are considered as the functional tool to promote, measure and direct sustainable development (Cairns 1993, Shen 2011, Saheed & Isa 2014). Developed for universal applicability, these indicators are often encouraged to be overlapped by localized indicators for contextualized diagnosis. Evolving localized sustainable development framework for knowledge hubs for contextualized guidance for policy formulation and/or implementation becomes crucial, and is much essential. Localized indicators, specific to nations and their urban areas, are increasingly becoming desirable since they offer exclusivity in terms of context and priority (Dunning 2016, Niazi 2016). Hence, there is a requirement to make localized framework to guide the evolution of localized indicators. Knowledge hubs will be the focal organizing unit of the age of quaternary economy. As observed by Ohmae (2004), the agglomerative forces function at a regional scale, indicating that knowledge hubs function at a regional scale, often in the spatial structure similar to urban agglomeration (as defined by Cui, 1992). It is noted that region is the only scale, which doesn’t have a universal sustainability standard, wherein the UN has published agenda, index and guideline at global (2030 Agenda), national/state (Sustainable Development Indicators) and a neighbourhood (New Urban Agenda) scale. This necessitates developing a localized Sustainable Development Framework for knowledge hubs, to lay ground for developing sustainability indicators for the same. Knowledge hubs are megacities, which are rapidly developing into megalopolises. They facilitate a rearing ground for innovation, production and consumption. One such successful city in the knowledge economy within the Asian subcontinent is Bangalore (India), which functions as both a knowledge and consumer hub. Karnataka State in India has a strong base due to its unconventional policies in the field of commerce, industry, technology, research, education and culture amongst many. The city known as the “India’s Silicon Valley” has marked as a pioneer in the fields of software and IT, manufacturing, education and research, biotechnology, aviation and space technology. It contributes to 98% of the state’s software exports and is said to be the fastest growing economy by 2035 by Oxford Economics in its report Global Cities: The future of the world’s leading urban economies to 2035. Research indicates that the city has so far focused on codified knowledge in its economic contribution, and has the potential of developing a sizeable production base for tacit knowledge. To enable Bangalore to compete globally for its potential, Sustainable Development Framework must be formulated to guide for a balanced spatial development. An emphasis on economic subsystem must be considered, under which 7 other subsystems, namely, physical, social, environment, ecology, economy, institutional and infrastructure (Devadas, V. 1992) should be studied for an integrated sustainable development.
Abstract ID :
ISO365
Submission Type
Student (Master's)
,
Indian institute of Technology (IIT) Roorkee, India

Similar Abstracts by Type

Abstract ID
Abstract Title
Abstract Topic
Submission Type
Primary Author
ISO540
1: Limitless cities and urban futures: planning for scale
Paper
Wala Bashari
ISO247
4: Knowledge economies and identity: planning for culture
Paper
han zou
ISO183
1: Limitless cities and urban futures: planning for scale
Paper
Kangwei Tu
ISO118
2: Beside the megacity and the role of other cities and areas: planning for balance
Paper
Sunny Bansal
ISO398
2: Beside the megacity and the role of other cities and areas: planning for balance
Paper
Asher Yang
ISO473
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Swechcha Roy
ISO80
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Cynthia Goytia
ISO541
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska
ISO215
3: Liveable places and healthy cities: planning for people
Paper
Jingwei LI