Transcript The Other Arctic

The Other Arctic: Exploring
Knowledge and Creative Economies
in Arctic Cities
Andrey N. Petrov
Director, ARCTICenter
University of Northern Iowa, USA
NSF Award # 0909403
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introducing Arctic’s “other” economies
Case studies
Knowledge economy (Alaska patents)
Creative and cultural economy
Interlinks with ‘pillars’
Discussion
“Other” economies in the new Arctic
• Stylized representation of Arctic economy:
– Three ‘pillars’:
• Resource sector
• Public sector
• Traditional sector
• But how true is this representation?
– Globalization
– Urbanization
– Post-industrial economy
“Other” economies??
• ‘Other’ sectors = not resource, public or traditional, although they may be
connected to these through various linkages.
• mostly enabled (or limited) by the internal capacities of the Arctic regions
(or communities), and not as much by external actors
• heavily urban
• Arctic GDP ~ $450 billion
• non-pillar sectors ~ $120-125 billion
• “other” > mining in all regions, but AK and RU
100
90
80
70
60
50
"Other" sectors
40
30
20
10
0
USA
CA
FI
NO
RU
SE
DE
Why “other” economies are important?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Responses to global economic trends
Create employment for local residents
Diversify economy
Create competitive advantages
Less decoupled from local economy
Build human capital (retention and attraction)
Build other capacities
More compatible with the notion of sustainable
development
• Already emphasized in national development strategies
“In the second phase (until 2020) complete the transition to sustainable innovationdriven social-economic development of the Arctic Zone…” (RF Strategy, 2013)
“Patchwork study” objectives
• (1) introduce the multifaceted nature of ‘other
economies’;
• (2) describe the geography of key sectors
(knowledge and cultural economies) to the extent
possible;
• (3) identify core characteristics of ‘other
economies’ in the Arctic;
• (4) explore the relationships and dependencies
between ‘other economies’ and resource sectors
Methodology
• OE are eclectic and data are limited
• Mixed approach using “whatever is out there”
• Case studies (Circumpolar, regional)
Table 1. Core datasets used in the case studies
County
Alaska (U.S.A.)
Level of Analysis
Borough and Municipality
Data Sources
Alaska Bureau of Labor and Workforce
Development (2008)
Canada
Territories and Municipality
Statistics Canada: 2006 Canadian Census
Russia
Regions and Municipality
Statistics Russia: 2002 Russian Census
Finland
NUTS 3
Statistics Finland (2008) and ArcticStat
Sweden
NUTS 3 and Municipality
Statistics Sweden (2008)
Norway
NUTS 3 and Municipality
Statistics Norway (2010)
Iceland
Regions and Municipality
Statistics Iceland (2008)
Greenland
Municipality Region
Statistics Greenland (2008)
Case study 1. Knowledge economy (KE):
talent and knowledge workers in the Arctic
• “Output side” measures: patents, production
• “Supply side” measures: workers/human capital,
investments in R&D, etc.:
• “knowledge workers” – employed in KE
– KE occupations = Applied Science Index (Petrov, 2007)
– KE industries = Tech Pole Index (Florida, 2002)
• “educated professionals”
– Talent Index (Florida, 2002)
Talent Index
•
•
•
•
Generally low
High and low concentrations
Cities are clusters
Capitals and centers
‘Talent’ in Urban Arctic
Talent Index
• “Hot spots”:
– Regional capitals (Anadyr,
Nuuk, Tromso, Salekhard,
Magadan, Yellowknife, etc.)
– New industrial cities (N.
Urengoy, Nadym, etc.)
• Arctic “Rust belt”
– Old industrial cities (Norilsk,
Apatity, Olenegorsk, etc.)
• Remote cities (“Isolated
posts”)
– Iqaluit, Dudinka, etc.
Urban concentration of educated
prefessionals (Greenland)
Nuuk
Sisimiut
Ilulissat
health & welfare
Qaqortoq
education
Aasiaat
engeneering
Maniitsoq
Sic.sci & Journalism
Ammassalik
Uummannaq
business admin
Narsaq
Upernavik
arts & humanities
Nanortalik
natscience and math
Paamiut
services
Qasigiannguit
Kangaatsiaq
information technology
Qeqertarsuaq
agriculture, fishery
Illoqortoormiut
general
Qaanaaq
Other
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Ivittuut
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Urban/Rural Gap in post-secondary
education
• In Russia gap is 5-20%
• YNAO: 29.2% of urban vs. 14.3% of rural
residents have post-secondary degrees
• Chukotka: 28.4% of urban vs. 7.6% of rural
• Substantial gains, but widening gap
• Indigenous population are vastly
underrepresented
Knowledge workers: engineers, etc.
Knowledge sector in the Arctic
• Tech Pole Index:
Employment in
knowledge economy
sectors
• North America has
relatively more
developed knowledge
sector
• Corresponds well with
TI and ASI
Correlation between knowledge economy indices in the Arctic
TI
TI
Pearson Correlation
ASI
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
ASI
TPI
TPI
.306
-.034
.074
.831
1
.500**
Pearson Correlation
.306
Sig. (2-tailed)
.074
Pearson Correlation
-.034
.500**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.831
.004
.004
1
Knowledge workers in Yukon
Creative Spaces
in Nuuk
Tourist (museums, galleries, …)
Cultural (Arts, crafts, studios…)
Ethnic clusters
Media, TV, IT clusters
Public spaces (public art,
gatherings, festivals,…)
Case study 2. Geography of patents in
Alaska
• Patents is a good proxy of knowledge economy
production
• US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
• 1979-2015 (July)
• AK 1,959 patents registered to AK residents:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Anchorage 855: diverse
Fairbanks 191: diverse
Wasilla 117: diverse
Juneau 73
Homer 64: key role of individual inventors
Palmer 58: key role of individual inventors
Specialized inventions: Sitka and Kodiak
Low engagement among local innovators
Case study 3. Geography of Arctic’s
cultural economy
• No systematic data
• Traditional and non-traditional(western) cultural economies
• Surveys: 18% of Aboriginal residents of the Canadian Arctic
manufactured crafts for sale (SLiCA)
• 1/3 of all Aboriginal people reported receiving some income
from selling traditional art.
• 30% of Inuit living in Nunavut reported deriving a part-time
income from their sculpture, carving and print making.
• Baffin Island is the most creative rural area in Canada (Hill
Strategies, 2010).
• Adds $30 million to Nunavut GDP (Nordicity Group, 2014)
A circumpolar ‘scan’
• Bohemian index – LQ of
residents reporting
occupations in arts,
crafts, etc.
• Arctic has high BI (!)
• Even more so if include
‘secondary occupation’
artists
Case Study 4: Interconnectedness
• “Other” economies tend to be locally-based
and rely on knowledge, human capital etc.
• How much do they depend on resource
sector?
• Study based on input-output models of Yukon
economy
• Trace the impacts of mining crisis on other
sectors, including the “other” economies
Impacts of resource bust on nonresource sectors
Sectors:
1 crop and animal production
2 forestry and logging
3 fishing, hunting and trapping
4 support activities for agriculture and forestry
5 mining and oil and gas extraction
6 utilities
7 construction
8 manufacturing
9 wholesale trade
10 retail trade
11 transportation and warehousing
12 information and cultural industries
13 finance, insurance, real estate and renting and leasing
14 professional, scientific and technical services
15 administrative and other support services
16 education services
17 health care and social assistance
18 arts, entertainment and recreation
19 accommodation and food services
20 other services (except public administration)
21 operating, office, cafeteria, and laboratory supplies
22 travel & entertainment, advertising & promotion
23 transportation margins
24 non-profit institutions serving households
25 government sector.
Impacts of mining bust (early 2000s)
• Highest impacts: top-end professional and
financial services and wholesale trade
• losses were observed in arts, entertainment and
recreation as well as travel, advertising and
promotion sectors, i.e. in ‘other economies.’
• the largest decline in jobs was in high-tech
services: information, professional and technical
support, financing and insurance.
• Therefore, mine closures heavily affected ‘other’
sectors, including knowledge and cultural
economy.
• Loss of human capital due to outmigration.
Discussion
What are the common characteristics of “other”
economies?
• urban
• embedded and endogenous
• knowledge-driven
• community-based
• deviating from path-dependency
• human-capital intensive
• globally-connected
Arctic Innovation Systems (?)
• Small, but existing
• Distinct from the core:
– key role of individual inventor or single industry
– strong connectedness to external networks vis-a-vis
weak links within the Arctic
– obscured relationship between formal education and
knowledge production
– elevated role of informal skills
– remaining dependency on boom and bust cycles in
resource extraction, public sector, etc.
Conclusions
• Arctic’s “other” economies is the new pillar of
sustainable development
• More compatible with the ‘new’ model of
development
• Key in resolving the main imperative of
sustainable development in the Arctic:
reconciling the local modernity of the Arctic
and realities of modern capitalism
Some policy implications
• Strategy of development of the Russian Arctic
calls for “innovation-based” path of
development
“In the second phase (until 2020) complete the transition to sustainable
innovation-driven social-economic development of the Arctic Zone…”
“Growth of the relative weight of the regional knowledge products
(and services) in the total volume of sales”
• Arctic technopolis projects: Archangelsk,
“Central Arctic Technopolis” (Yamal)
Thank you!
?Questions?
http://www.idgconnect.com/