- Economic Development
- Industry Studies
- Science and Technology Policy
- Social and Urban Policy
- Urban Studies
Jennifer Clark is an Associate Professor at the School of Public Policy and Director of the Center for Urban Innovation at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Dr. Clark publishes work on the development and diffusion of regional policies and their effect on cities and their economic resilience.
Within the field of regional economic development policy, Dr. Clark focuses on the actors and processes that shape agglomeration economies (industrial and innovation districts) and innovation systems in and across city-regions. Using an interdisciplinary and mixed-methods approach, her work draws on economic geography, public policy, and regional planning. The resulting research program and publications focus on: 1) the co-location of innovation and production through firm networks (clusters), regional innovation systems, and institutional intermediaries with a focus on the connection between innovation and production, and 2) the governance (national and regional policies) behind the organization of resilient regional economies (and “smart,” sustainable cities).
Dr. Clark has published four books. Working Regions: Reconnecting Innovation and Production in the Knowledge Economy (2013) focuses on policy models aimed at rebuilding the links between innovation and manufacturing in the U.S. Remaking Regional Economies: Power, Labor, and Firm Strategies in the Knowledge Economy (with Susan Christopherson) won the Best Book Award from the Regional Studies Association in 2009. Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning (with Carl Patton and David Sawicki) is widely adopted in policy and planning courses. The Handbook of Manufacturing Industries in the World Economy (edited with John Bryson and Vida Vanchan) was published by Edward Elgar in June 2015. In addition to her books, Dr. Clark has published more than twenty book chapters and articles.
Dr. Clark writes, consults, and speaks on the subject of national and regional development policies related to innovation and manufacturing and production (esp. among small and medium sized firm networks). She has collaborated on manufacturing and innovation policy projects with a broad range of national and state/provincial governments and non-governmental organizations including: the OECD (the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), the European Union, the Canadian, United Kingdom, United States governments, professional academic associations such as the Regional Studies Association and the Industry Studies Association, and the National Science Foundation (US).
Dr. Clark's academic leadership includes serving as the recently elected Vice-Chair (2015-2016) with a subsequent term as Chair (2016-2018) for the Economic Geography Specialty Group (EGSG) of the Association of American Geographers (an academic association with over 10,000 members in 60 countries). Dr. Clark is an honorary senior research fellow with the Institute of Advanced Studies at the University of Birmingham, UK through 2016. She is also a Founding Member of the Industry Studies Association and served as the Regional Planning conference Track Chair for the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning from 2009-2012. She also served from 2012-2014 on the International Society for Optics and Photonics' (SPIE) Engineering, Science, Technology Policy Committee. Since the mid-1990s, Dr. Clark has studied the spatial and organizational dynamics of the optics, imaging, and photonics industry both in the U.S. and internationally.
Dr. Clark earned her Ph.D. in City and Regional Planning from Cornell University, a Master’s degree in Economic Development and Planning from the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, and holds a B.A. from Wesleyan University in Connecticut. Dr. Clark teaches courses on urban and regional economic development theory, analysis, and practice as well as research design and methods.
Working Regions focuses on policy aimed at building sustainable and resilient regional economies in the wake of the global recession. Using examples of four ‘working regions’ — regions where research and design functions and manufacturing still coexist in the same cities — the book argues for a new approach to regional economic development. It does this by highlighting policies that foster innovation and manufacturing in small firms, focus research centers on pushing innovation down the supply chain, and support dynamic, design-driven firm networks.
This book traces several key themes underlying the core proposition that for a region to work, it has to link research and manufacturing activities — namely, innovation and production — in the same place. Among the topics discussed in this volume are the issues of how the location of research and development infrastructure produces a clear role of the state in innovation and production systems, and how policy emphasis on pre-production processes in the 1990s has obscured the financialization of intellectual property. Throughout the book, the author draws on examples from diverse industries, including the medical devices industry and the US photonics industry, in order to illustrate the different themes of working regions and the various institutional models operating in various countries and regions.
This interdisciplinary volume provides a critical and multi-disciplinary review of current manufacturing processes, practices, and policies, and broadens our understanding of production and innovation in the world economy. Chapters highlight how firms and industries modify existing processes to produce for established and emerging markets through dynamic and design-driven strategies. This approach allows readers to view transformations in production systems and processes across sectors, technologies and industries. Contributors include scholars ranging from engineering to policy to economic geography. The evidence demonstrates that manufacturing continues to matter in the world economy.
Since the early 1980s, the region has been central to thinking about the emerging character of the global economy. In fields as diverse as business management, industrial relations, economic geography, sociology, and planning, the regional scale has emerged as an organizing concept for interpretations of economic change.
This book is both a critique of the "new regionalism" and a return to the "regional question," including all of its concerns with equity and uneven development. It will challenge researchers and students to consider the region as a central scale of action in the global economy, and at the core of the book are case studies of two industries that rely on skilled, innovative, and flexible workers - the optics and imaging industry and the film and television industry. Combined with this is a discussion of the regions that constitute their production centers. The authors’ intensive research on photonics and entertainment media firms, both large and small, leads them to question some basic assumptions behind the new regionalism and to develop an alternative framework for understanding regional economic development policy. Finally, there is a re-examination of what the regional question means for the concept of the learning region.
This book draws on the rich contemporary literature on the region but also addresses theoretical questions that preceded "the new regionalism." It contributes to teaching and research in a range of social science disciplines and this new paperback edition will also make the book more accessible to students and researchers in those disciplines, those individuals who will influence the re-structuring economies of the 21st century.
Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning presents quickly applied methods for analyzing and resolving planning and policy issues at state, regional, and urban levels.
Quantitative and qualitative methods are combined in a systematic approach to addressing policy dilemmas and urban planning problems. In addition to methods, the book presents the rationale and process of policy analysis as well as policy application cases. Many of today’s most important policy problems are resolved quickly, and time is seldom available for researched analysis. Planners and analysts must use quick, basic methods in order to generate, test, and even advocate alternatives in the time available and with the resources at hand—if they are to have an impact on public policy.
This book is for students and analysts who seek to learn quick, basic methods that can be applied to a range of policy problems. It should be especially useful for the beginning analyst or the person starting the study of policy analysis and planning. The book assumes no prior knowledge of advanced mathematics or economics on the part of the reader. We deliberately avoided methods that require such knowledge, but the reader who has these skills can certainly apply them to the exercises and cases. We also avoided methods that involve extensive research.
The book is divided into two parts: Part One: Methods presents quick, basic methods in nine chapters—organized around the steps in the policy analysis process. It also includes a review of the policy analysis and planning process and serves as a guide to recent literature on policy analysis and planning methods. Part Two: Cases presents seven policy cases, which range from brief mini-cases that can be solved in a day or two to longer, more complex cases that take substantially more time. The cases, like the methods chapters, are intended to lead the reader to integrate quantitative and qualitative approaches. Methods chapters include glossaries and exercises. All exercises and cases are taken from real experiences.
This article focuses on the role of regional intermediaries in the return of manufacturing---to cities and to the center of regional policy debates. Specifically, this article analyzes how supply-chain intermediaries, labor market intermediaries, and innovation intermediaries maintain, embed, and expand flexibly specialized production capacity in regions and create variation across places. The typology presented in this article highlights the diversity among intermediaries and underscores how they contribute to emerging models of 21st century manufacturing.
The article highlights how these emerging regional intermediaries support the small-scale producers in the Maker’s Movement and enable these firms to emerge and grow as an embedded, localized, networked group----effectively operating as a cohort not tied by sector or technology but by process---to how they produce not what they produce. These intermediaries recast manufacturing as a practice of working with others rather than working for others thus reintroducing both agency and collective action to the narrative about manufacturing in the US.
In this article, we engage the question of regional resilience theoretically and empirically. Our theoretical approach merges discussions of regional development in evolutionary economic geography (primarily UK based) with regional resilience in urban planning (primarily US based) using Markusen’s industrial districts as a framework for analysis (1996). We use data on ‘triadic’ patents (USA, Japan and Europe) to measure regional innovation, both per capita by region and categorized by firm size for regions in the USA. We then use this data to create a ‘typology of innovation districts’. Our analysis suggests that policies encouraging small-firm innovation have broad benefits for regional economies.
The question of how to shape regional policies to incubate, support, and sustain emerging manufacturing technologies and spur job creation in incumbent industries is the subject of extensive debate in the wake of the global recession. This issue of Regions focuses on the grand challenge facing academics and policymakers: how to rethink Regional Manufacturing Policy in and for a 21st century economy — both as an empirical issue for analysts and a question of policy innovation. These articles showcase scholarship on recent developments in manufacturing policies in advanced industrialized countries including the shift toward comprehensive regional strategies to support advanced manufacturing. These studies underscore the increasingly spatial dimension of manufacturing strategies as policymakers recognize the importance of linking research and design functions to local production networks. This goal places new emphasis on regional institutions as both the implementation framework and as a key factor differentiating regional capacities.
Discussions of university-based economic development practice have evolved from discrete discussions about constituent elements (ex. technology transfer, firm start-ups, etc…) to more integrated discussions about the role of the entrepreneurial university in shaping innovation districts. Policy analysts have identified “innovation ecosystems” connected to anchor institutions in Baltimore, Buffalo, Cambridge, Cleveland, Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Diego, and “Tech Square” in Atlanta. These innovation districts share characteristics in common with the “Triple Helix” thesis combining university, industry, and government partners to build innovation neighborhoods connected to anchor institutions. Although the success of these innovation districts has been widely noted, the elements underlying that success have not been systematically identified. This study contributes to this evolving scholarship by examining the development and evolution of Technology Square in Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
The “triple-helix” thesis articulated by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff argues successful innovation cultures are fostered by continuous and iterative interaction among universities, governments, and industry. The Brookings Institution’s innovation districts model further considers the physical space and relationship culture in which these triple helix interactions manifest: 1) Economic assets (the triple-helix actors); 2) Physical assets (public and private space, infrastructure, and connectivity); and 3) Networking assets (the relationships among the various actors that help advance new ideas).
This paper analyzes the “Tech Square” project. It was built from 2001 to 2003 and simultaneously expanded the size and scope of the Georgia Institute of Technology, a major public research university with an urban campus. The project was initially driven by the need for more programming and academic space, but multiple factors shaped it into the foundation of a growing innovation hub. This case study uses a review of the literature on university knowledge and technology transfer; archival records; interviews; contemporary accounts; and mapping to build an ex post evaluation of Tech Square based on evolving theories of innovation district design. This study makes key contributions through a close examination of the physical form of Tech Square and how it was shaped by its particular Triple Helix environment.
In addition, the Tech Square case highlights how the U.S. political context of limited government funding for university expansion necessitates a more creative economic development role for universities as anchor institutions. The findings of this study will be of interest to practitioners and scholars of economic development, public policy, urban planning and design, public-private partnerships, and higher education seeking to better understand the evolving role of research-intensive urban universities in building and shaping innovation districts.
The term ‘science park’ evokes a “you know it when you see it” consensus among policy experts. Although the function of science parks is broadly understood as collaborative applied research between universities, industry, and governments, the physical and institutional form of these ‘cooperative research centers’ shows significant variation. In this paper I present a typology of such centers in the current US context and discuss how they are changing. Using evidence from one high-tech industry, I underscore the agglomerated nature of basic and applied science—a key argument in the rethinking of decisions around public investments in scientific spaces. Finally, I conclude that US innovation policy is shifting to a more explicitly metropolitan orientation, recognizing the importance of proximity and agglomeration. Implicit in this shift is a reevaluation of the geography of public investment in technology infrastructure as it pertains to cities and regions.