Factors Explaining the Spatial Agglomeration of the Creative Class: Empirical Evidence for German Artists

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. , Tom Broekel, Rolf Sternberg Terms of use: Documents in Abstract:The paper contributes to the on-going debate about the relative importance of economic and ameni-ty-related location factors for attracting talents or members of the creative class. While Florida high-lights the role of amenities, openness, and tolerance, others instead emphasize the role of regional productions systems, local labour markets and externalities.The paper sheds light on this issue by analysing changes in the spatial distribution of four groups of artists over time: visual artists, performing artists, musicians, and writers. Little evidence is found for amenity-related factors influencing the growth rates of regional artist populations. Moreover, artists are shown to be a heterogeneous group inasmuch as the relative importance of regional factors sig-nificantly differs between artist branches.

Demographic characteristics of creative workers: under-activated development potentials in Slovenia?

“…This confirms the hypotheses of other authors that creative workers are not only heterogeneous with regards to the occupation structure, but that they also differ according to age, gender, education, status, nationality, and other (Fritsch and Stützer 2007;Alfken, Broekel and Sternberg 2015).…”

“…The first question the theoretical basis and the political recommendations, the other the insufficient soundness of the empirical data. With regard to the theoretical background, one of the more resounding doubts relates to the lack of conceptual clarity in the understanding of creativity, which is said to be caused by the insufficient delineation of heterogeneous occupational groups (Krätke 2010;Alfken, Broekel and Sternberg 2015). Some authors have proposed more precise definitions of creative occupations (e.g.…”

“…Cooke 2014;Eisler, Donnelly and Montuori 2016). Creative workers are not heterogeneous only from the aspect of the occupational structure, but they also differ according to age, gender, education, status, nationality, and others (Fritsch and Stützer 2007;Alfken, Broekel and Sternberg 2015). In addition to the occupational capabilities and experience, demographical characteristics also have an important influence on the representation of different knowledge in a certain regional or local context (Gülümser, Baycan-Levent and Nijkamp 2010).…”

Creative class vs. individual creativity: a multi-level approach to the geography of creativity

“…Möller and Tubadji, 2004). Alfken et al (2013) focus on regional growth rates of freelance artists in Germany to capture the dynamics of agglomeration and provide evidence for regional factors shaping the process of concentration of creative occupations. They show that especially urbanity and the concentration of artists affect regional growth rates of artists' population.…”

“…Bohemians in regions with a high share of bohemians are less often engaged in the cultural sector. This could hint to rivalry among artist in dense places as shown by Hracs et al (2011) and Alfken et al (2013). Another explanation could be good job opportunities outside the cultural sector in urban regions, like higher education or public service.…”