Pokaż uproszczony rekord

New Geographies of Work: Re-Scaling Micro-Worlds

dc.contributor.authorBürkner, Hans-Joachim
dc.contributor.authorLange, Bastian
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-09T14:44:02Z
dc.date.available2021-08-09T14:44:02Z
dc.date.issued2020-06-30
dc.identifier.issn1231-1952
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/38504
dc.description.abstractThe recently emerging new types of collaborative work and unconventional workplaces indicate that shifting social and economic practices have odd spatial implications. The diversity of work, mostly based on hybrid social and economic logics, has brought forth a number of new contextualised spatial constructs in recent years: makerspaces, fab labs, open workshops, and co-working spaces now require detailed analytical reconstruction and conceptualisation. This article is a theoretical discussion of the nature of fluid and contingent spatialisation against the backdrop of binary explanatory categories (e.g. local-global; proximity-distance). Drawing upon modernised concepts of horizontal scaling, we propose a perspective on hybrid work which focuses on contingent multiple, multidirectional and temporal scalings created by a variety of users while developing their own micro-worlds of work.en
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEuropean Spatial Research and Policy;1en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
dc.subjectscaleen
dc.subjectflat ontologyen
dc.subjectnew worken
dc.subjectalternative workplacesen
dc.subjectcollaborationen
dc.subjectsocial innovationen
dc.titleNew Geographies of Work: Re-Scaling Micro-Worldsen
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number53-74
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationBürkner, Hans-Joachim - Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space, Flakenstr. 29–31, 15537 Erkner, Germanyen
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationLange, Bastian - University of Leipzig, Institute of Geography, Johannisallee 19a, 04103 Leipzig, Germanyen
dc.identifier.eissn1896-1525
dc.referencesAVDIKOS, V. and KALOGERESIS, A. (2016), ‘Socio-economic profile and working conditions of freelancers in co-working spaces and work collectives: evidence from the design sector in Greece’, Area, 49 (1), pp. 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12279en
dc.referencesBATHELT, H. and GLÜCKLER, J. (2003), ‘Toward a relational economic geography’, Journal of Economic Geography, 3 (2), pp. 117–144. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.2.117en
dc.referencesBRINKS, V. (2019), ‘«And Since I Knew About the Possibilities There …»: The Role of Open Creative Labs in User Innovation Processes’, Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 110 (4), pp. 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12353en
dc.referencesBUDGE, K. (2019), ‘The ecosystem of a makerspace: Human, material and place-based interrelationships’, Journal of Design, Business & Society, 5 (1), pp. 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs.5.1.77_1en
dc.referencesBÜRKNER, H.-J. and LANGE, B. (2016), Configurations of Value Creation in Open Workshops, [in:] WULFSBERG, J.P., REDLICH, T. and MORITZ, M. (eds.), 1. interdisziplinäre Konferenz zur Zukunft der Wertschöpfung, Hamburg: Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, pp. 307–316.en
dc.referencesCASTELLS, M. (2000), The Rise of the Network Society, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.en
dc.referencesCASTELLS, M. (2010), ‘Globalisation, Networking, Urbanisation: Reflections on the Spatial Dynamics of the Information Age’, Urban Studies, 47 (13), pp. 2737–2745. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010377365en
dc.referencesCHATTERTON, P. and PUSEY, A. (2019), ‘Beyond capitalist enclosure, commodification and alienation: Postcapitalist praxis as commons, social production and useful doing’, Progress in Human Geography, 44 (2). https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518821173en
dc.referencesDEMARIA, F., KALLIS, G. and BAKKER, K. (2019), ‘Geographies of degrowth: Nowtopias, resurgences and the decolonization of imaginaries and places, ENE: Nature and Space, 2 (3), pp. 431–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619869689en
dc.referencesDURANTE, G. and TURVANI, M. (2018), ‘Coworking, the Sharing Economy, and the City: Which Role for the ‘Coworking Entrepreneur’?’, Urban Science, 2 (3), pp. 1–21, https://www.mdpi.com/2413-8851/2/3/83 https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2030083en
dc.referencesFABBRI, J. and CHARUE-DUBOC, F. (2013), ‘The Role of Physical Space in Collaborative Workplaces Hosting Entrepreneurs’, [in:] VAUJANY, F.-X. and MITEV, N. (eds.), Materiality and Space: Organizations, Artefacts and Practices, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Springer, pp. 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137304094.0015en
dc.referencesFARIAS, I. (2010), ‘Introduction: decentring the object of urban studies’, [in:] FARIAS, I. and BENDER, T. (eds.), Urban assemblages: How actor-network theory changes urban studies, London, New York: Routledge, pp. 1–24.en
dc.referencesFAULCONBRIDGE, J.R. (2006), ‘Stretching tacit knowledge beyond a local fix? Global spaces of learning in advertising professional service firms’, Journal of Economic Geography, 6 (4), pp. 517–540. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbi023en
dc.referencesFLORIDA, R. (2005), Cities and the creative class, New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203997673en
dc.referencesGIBSON-GRAHAM, J.K. (2008), ‘Diverse economies: performative practices for ‘other worlds’’, Progress in Human Geography 32 (5), pp. 613–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508090821en
dc.referencesGIBSON-GRAHAM, J.K., CAMERON, J. and HEALY, S. (2013), Take Back the Economy: An Ethical Guide for Transforming Our Communities, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. https://doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816676064.001.0001en
dc.referencesGRABHER, G. and IBERT, O. (2018), ‘Schumpeterian Customers? How Active Users Co-create Innovations’, [in:] CLARK, G.L., FELDMAN, M.P., GERTLER, M.S. and WÓJCIK, D. (eds.), The New Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 286–304. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755609.013.36en
dc.referencesGRAHAM, M., HJORTH, I. and LEHDONVIRTA, V. (2017), ‘Digital labour and development: impacts of global digital labour platforms and the gig economy on worker livelihoods’, Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23 (2), pp. 135–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258916687250en
dc.referencesGRANOVETTER, M. (1985), ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), pp. 481–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/228311en
dc.referencesHARVEY, D. (1989), The Condition of Modernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change, Oxford: Blackwell.en
dc.referencesHEROD, A. and WRIGHT, M.W. (2002), ‘Placing Scale: An Introduction’, [in:] HEROD, A. and WRIGHT, M.W. (eds.), Geographies of Power: Placing Scale, Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470773406.chen
dc.referencesHIELSCHER, S. and SMITH, A. (2014), ‘Community-based digital fabrication workshops: A review of the research literature’, Falmer: University of Sussex, SPRU Working Paper Series SWPS 2014-08. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2742121en
dc.referencesHOLLOWAY, J. (2010), Crack Capitalism, London: Pluto Press.en
dc.referencesHUBER, F. (2012a), ‘On the Role and Interrelationship of Spatial, Social and Cognitive Proximity: Personal Knowledge Relationships of R&D Workers in the Cambridge Information Technology Cluster’, Regional Studies, 46 (9), pp. 1169–1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.569539en
dc.referencesHUBER, F. (2012b), ‘On the Role and Interrelationship of Spatial, Social and Cognitive Proximity: Personal Knowledge Relationships of R&D Workers in the Cambridge Information Technology Cluster’, Regional Studies, 46 (9), pp. 1169–1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.569539en
dc.referencesKLEIBRINK, A. and SCHMIDT, S. (2015), ‘Communities of Practice as New Actors: Innovation Labs Inside and Outside Government’, [in:] European Commission (ed.), Open Innovation 2.0 Yearbook 2015, Luxemburg: Luxembourg Publication Office of the European Union, pp. 64–73.en
dc.referencesKRUEGER, R., SCHULZ, C. and GIBBS, D. (2018), ‘Institutionalizing alternative economic spaces? An interpretivist perspective on diverse economies’, Progress in Human Geography, 42 (4), pp. 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517694530en
dc.referencesLANGE, B. (2011), ‘Accessing Markets in Creative Industries: Professionalisation and social-spatial strategies of Culturepreneurs in Berlin’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23 (3), pp. 259–279.en
dc.referencesLANGE, B. and BÜRKNER, H.-J. (2018), ‘Open workshops as sites of innovative socio-economic practices: approaching urban post-growth by assemblage theory’, Local Environment, 23 (7), pp. 680–696. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2017.1418305en
dc.referencesLEITNER, H. and MILLER, B. (2007), ‘Scale and the limitations of ontological debate: a commentary on Marston, Jones and Woodward’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 32, pp. 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00236.xen
dc.referencesLIEDTKE, C., BAEDEKER, C., HASSELKUß, M., ROHN, H. and GRINEWITSCHUS, V. (2015), ‘User-integrated innovation in Sustainable LivingLabs: an experimental infrastructure for researching and developing sustainable product service systems’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, pp. 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.070en
dc.referencesMACK, E. and MAYER, H. (2016), ‘The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems’, Urban Studies, 53 (10), pp. 2118–2133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015586547en
dc.referencesMACKINNON, D. (2011), ‘Reconstructing scale: Towards a new scalar politics’, Progress in Human Geography, 35 (1), pp. 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510367841en
dc.referencesMARSTON, S.A. (2000), ‘The social construction of scale’, Progress in Geography 24 (2), pp. 219–242. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200674086272en
dc.referencesMARSTON, S.A., JONES III, J.P. and WOODWARD, K. (2005), ‘Human geography without scale’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 30, pp. 416–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00180.xen
dc.referencesMARTIN, R., BERNDT, C., KLAGGE, B. and SUNLEY, P. (2005), ‘Spatial proximity effects and regional equity gaps in the venture capital market: Evidence from Germany and the United Kingdom’, Environment and Planning, 37 (7), pp. 1207–1231. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3714en
dc.referencesMcKEEVER, E., ANDERSON, A. and JACK, S. (2014), ‘Social embeddedness in entrepreneurship research: the importance of context and community’, [in:] CHELL, E. and KARATAŞ-ÖZKAN, M. (eds.), Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar, pp. 222–236. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849809245.00022en
dc.referencesMcROBBIE, A. (2015), Be Creative: Making a Living in the New Culture Industries, London: Polity Press.en
dc.referencesMOORE, A. (2008), ‘Rethinking scale as a geographical category: from analysis to practice’, Progress in Human Geography, 32 (2), pp. 203–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507087647en
dc.referencesMORISET, B. (2013), Building new places of the creative economy: The rise of coworking spaces, Utrecht: Utrecht University, https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00914075en
dc.referencesPORTER, M.E. (1998), ‘Clusters and the new economics of competition’, Harvard Business Review, 76 (6), pp. 77–90.en
dc.referencesPRATT, A.C. (2013), ‘Space and Place’, [in:] TOWSE, R. and HANDKE, C. (eds.), Handbook on the Digital Creative Economy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 37–44. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781004876.00013en
dc.referencesQUAN-HAASE, A. and MARTIN, K. (2013), ‘Digital curation and the networked audience of urban events: Expanding La Fiesta de Santo Toma ́s from the physical to the virtual environment’, International Communication Gazette, 75 (1), pp. 521–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048513491910en
dc.referencesRECKWITZ, A. (2006), Das hybride Subjekt: eine Theorie der Subjektkulturen von der bürgerlichen Moderne zur Postmoderne, Weilerswist: Velbrück.en
dc.referencesSCHMID, B. (2019a), ‘Degrowth and postcapitalism: Transformative geographies beyond accumulation and growth’, Geography Compass. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12470en
dc.referencesSCHMID, B. (2019b), ‘Repair’s diverse transformative geographies: lessons from a maker community in Stuttgart’, Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, 19 (2), pp. 229–251.en
dc.referencesSCHNEIDER, C. and LÖSCH, A. (2019), ‘Visions in assemblages: Future-making and governance in FabLabs’, Futures, 109, pp. 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.08.003en
dc.referencesSMITH, A. (2017), ‘Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces’, Falmer: University of Sussex’, SPRU Working Paper Series SWPS 2017-10. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986245en
dc.referencesSMITH, N. (2002), ‘Scale Bending and the Fate of the National’, [in:] SHEPPARD, E.S. and MCMASTER, R.B. (eds.), Scale and geographic inquiry: Nature, society, and method, Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 192–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470999141.ch10en
dc.referencesSOUKUP, C. (2006), ‘Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web’, New Media & Society, 8 (3), pp. 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953en
dc.contributor.authorEmailBürkner, Hans-Joachim - hans-joachim.buerkner@leibniz-irs.de
dc.contributor.authorEmailLange, Bastian - bastian.lange@uni-leipzig.de
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1231-1952.27.1.03
dc.relation.volume27


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail
Nazwa:
5650-Article_Text-20830-1-10-2 ...
Rozmiar:
442.8KB
Format:
PDF
Oglądaj/Otwórz

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Poza zaznaczonymi wyjątkami, licencja tej pozycji opisana jest jako https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0