IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxiiiy2020ispecial1p309-322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Method to Compare Cities to Effective Management of Innovative Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Dariusz Maslowski
  • Ewa Kulinska

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the article is to propose an innovative method of selecting cities, functioning on the basis of appropriately selected criteria shaping them. The article presents the possibility of matching the model city that was Opole with other 15 Polish cities, selected on the basis of the number of inhabitants approximating to the model city, in the context of the implementation of passenger transport within the city bus transport. The proposed methodology is aimed at selecting appropriate conditions and selecting an appropriate city, similar to the model city, in which an appropriate infrastructural or technical solution can be used. Approach/Methodology/Design: The following research methods were used to verify the objective: statistical analysis, which consisted of a detailed analysis of all surveyed cities, comparison of the analysed centres in order to create the most advantageous solution, and expert methods, which consisted of conducting a survey among 14 experts in management, transport, logistics and production engineering. Findings: The analysis has shown which cities are most likely to be able to introduce innovative solutions to improve the functioning of these centres and has identified various comparative aspects of urban development. Practical Implications: Carrying out such analyses will help city authorities in the development of their land, as well as show in which areas there are some shortcomings in relation to other centres. Originality/Value: There is a lack of unambiguous methods in the literature, consisting in searching for the best matches to the tested patterns, which are to be used to implement innovative solutions. A method has been developed which may serve to solve such problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Dariusz Maslowski & Ewa Kulinska, 2020. "The Method to Compare Cities to Effective Management of Innovative Solutions," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 309-322.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiii:y:2020:i:special1:p:309-322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ersj.eu/journal/1762/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fritsch, Michael & Wyrwich, Michael, 2021. "Is innovation (increasingly) concentrated in large cities? An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    2. Ingvardson, Jesper Bláfoss & Nielsen, Otto Anker, 2019. "The relationship between norms, satisfaction and public transport use: A comparison across six European cities using structural equation modelling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 37-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefan Christian Alexander Hudak & Tadej Brezina & Johannes Kehrer & Josef Michael Schopf, 2023. "Tracing rail transformation: the case of passenger services in Slovenia from 1975 to 2015," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 253-274, March.
    2. de Oña, Juan, 2020. "The role of involvement with public transport in the relationship between service quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 296-318.
    3. Doloreux, David & Shearmur, Richard, 2023. "Does location matter? STI and DUI innovation modes in different geographic settings," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Melissa Haller & David L. Rigby, 2020. "The geographic evolution of optics technologies in the United States, 1976–2010," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    5. Su, Duan & Wang, Yacan & Yang, Nan & Wang, Xianghong, 2020. "Promoting considerate parking behavior in dockless bike-sharing: An experimental study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 153-165.
    6. Ron Boschma & Ernest Miguelez & Rosina Moreno & Diego B. Ocampo-Corrales, 2021. "Technological breakthroughs in European regions: the role of related and unrelated combinations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2118, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    7. Carolina Castaldi, 2024. "The geography of urban innovation beyond patents only: New evidence on large and secondary cities in the United States," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(7), pages 1248-1272, May.
    8. Michael Fritsch & Michael Wyrwich, 2021. "Does Successful Innovation Require Large Urban Areas? Germany as a Counterexample," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 97(3), pages 284-308, May.
    9. Yen Tran & Naohisa Hashimoto & Takafumi Ando & Toshihisa Sato & Naoki Konishi & Yuji Takeda & Motoyuki Akamatsu, 2024. "The indirect effect of travel mode use on subjective well-being through out-of-home activities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2359-2391, December.
    10. Robert Huggins & Piers Thompson, 2024. "Understanding the contemporary history of urban economic change: The case of entrepreneurial innovation," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), March.
    11. Olegs Krasnopjorovs, 2022. "Ready for the next 820? Looking for the keys to paradise of Riga city," Discussion Papers 2022/02, Latvijas Banka.
    12. Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Stephen Kehinde Medase, 2024. "Extracting Innovation Value from Intellectual Property: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 8933-8967, June.
    13. Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose & Jamie Griffiths, 2021. "Developing intermediate cities," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 441-456, June.
    14. Jesper Bláfoss Ingvardson & Mikkel Thorhauge & Sigal Kaplan & Otto Anker Nielsen & Sebastián Raveau, 2022. "Incorporating psychological needs in commute mode choice modelling: a hybrid choice framework," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1861-1889, December.
    15. Rong, Rui & Liu, Lishan & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng, 2022. "Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger’s perception and satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 80-100.
    16. Tavassoli, Sam & Obschonka, Martin & Audretsch, David B., 2021. "Entrepreneurship in Cities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    17. Eva Coll‐Martínez & Elisenda Jové‐Llopis & Mercedes Teruel, 2022. "The city of start‐ups: Location determinants of start‐ups in emergent industries in Barcelona," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 972-1007, June.
    18. Josef Taalbi & Mikhail Martynovich, 2024. "On the urban bias of patents and the scaling of innovation," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2422, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2024.
    19. Vivek, Adheesh Kumar & Gupta, Somya & Khan, Tathagatha & Mohapatra, Smruti Sourava, 2024. "Strategies to mitigate safety and associated problems at gated rail road grade crossing: A structural equation modelling approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 19-30.
    20. Dong, Hongming & Ma, Shoufeng & Jia, Ning & Tian, Junfang, 2021. "Understanding public transport satisfaction in post COVID-19 pandemic," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 81-88.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Benchmarking; cities; city logistics; selection factors; method of city selection;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • P42 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Other Economic Systems - - - Productive Enterprises; Factor and Product Markets; Prices
    • P51 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems - - - Comparative Analysis of Economic Systems

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiii:y:2020:i:special1:p:309-322. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.