adding lasting value - MIT

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003

ADDING LASTING VALUE: SUSTAINABILITY AND TECHNOPOLE DEVELOPMENT Todd Lieberman master of city planning candidate, 2004 department of urban studies and planning city design and development group massachusetts institute of technology (mit) 77 massachusetts avenue, room 10-485 cambridge, massachusetts 02139, USA [email protected]

Susanne Seitinger master of city planning candidate, 2004 department of urban studies and planning city design and development group massachusetts institute of technology (mit.) 77 massachusetts avenue, room 10-485 cambridge, massachusetts 02139, USA [email protected] ABSTRACT Over the last thirty years, masterplanned science parks – sometimes known as technopoles – have proliferated as certain economic sectors have shifted towards postindustrial production. These technopoles, ranging in size from 20 ha to more than 400 ha1, aim to attract industry and research institutions that facilitate technological innovation and economic growth. In many cases, clusters have developed into vibrant economic zones as evidenced by their continued growth and new creation. In fact, science parks have become a significant strategy for private and public (re-)development and within cities and on the outskirts of cities in many countries. Nevertheless, these projects have not necessarily improved the built environment or maximized their potential as innovative milieus.2 Separate from science park development, green building design and issues of sustainability have come to the forefront of planning thinking and development practice. Sustainable principles have been applied to buildings and small sites as well as regional planning initiatives. However, while some development projects (50-500 acres or 20-200 ha) have incorporated aspects of sustainability (“green” design, renewable energy to name a few) into their site planning and development projects, few projects have integrated comprehensive strategies. Sustainability – defined more precisely in the paper – adds value in tangible ways by lowering operating expenses, reducing the impact on adjacent communities, saving energy, and creating synergies between formerly disconnected uses. However, few technopoles have capitalized on these potential benefits. While some technopoles have followed sustainable practices and market themselves as green developments, we believe that an unexplored potential for cross-pollination exists between high-tech clusters and sustainability in site design and project development. Preliminary research leads us to question current practice and suggest how technopoles can become places for innovation in form as well as in content, enhancing the city fabric and becoming a model for future urban development where emerging technologies will play an increasingly important role. 1

International Association of Science Parks (IASP) groups science parks into four categories ranging from the smallest up to 20 ha, mid-small 20-60 ha, mid-big 60-100 ha, large greater than 100ha, http://www.iaspworld.org/ 2 Manuel Castells and Peter Hall. Technopoles of the World: The Making of Twenty-First-Century Industrial Complexes. (London; New York: Routledge, 1994): p. 8-9.

Page 1 of 9


The glass and gun-metal office blocks were set well apart from each other, separated by artificial lakes and forested traffic islands where a latter-day Crusoe could have found comfortable refuge. (J.G. Ballard, Super-Cannes, London: Flamingo, 2000: p. 7.)

British author J.G. Ballard sets his novel Super Cannes in the science park Eden-Olympia on the French Riviera. The enclave boasts large, self-contained office buildings in metal and glass surrounded by zones of single-family residential units. Uses are connected by wide roadways that offer glimpses of ocean from rolling hills. In this environment, clean technology drives financial gain with little respect for evolving living and working patterns. In the novel, social pathology and aberration arise at Eden-Olympia, which resembles many existing technopoles and science clusters. INTRODUCTION Without suggesting architectural determinism, we question how science parks are developed today and propose that these projects sometimes represent missed opportunities where technological innovation and sustainability could be seen as mutually reinforcing goals. In this way, technopoles could become successful incubators of urban life rather than isolated islands where only the fittest survive. WORKING DEFINITIONS The terms “sustainability” and “technopole” refer to an array of projects, strategies and principles for economic development and environmental3 design. In developing an argument for convergence between the two, it is necessary to lay out the working definitions used in this research. In this paper, sustainability refers to an overarching goal as well as precise measures that can be carried out on the ground in developing new technopoles. In 1995, the United Nations set forth a vague definition that sustainable development should meet “the needs of the people today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”4 The definition does not suggest how or by whom this vision will be implemented. One emerging framework is “civic environmentalism” where all members of society contribute in a small way to foster a whole that exceeds the sum of its parts: Increasingly communities are transforming their environmental problems into an opportunity to address underlying social and economic problems, and they are using the lever of environmental protection strategies to push for systematic changes in the way people relate to each other and to their environment. (William A. Shutkin, The Land That Could Be, 2000: p. 238)

On a practical level, developers and public officials can implement sustainable planning and site design strategies as they construct technopoles. Some measures of sustainability could enhance site-level performance leading to better, value-added projects5: 1.

2.

Promote Conservation – Protect existing ecosystems; conserve natural resources; attempt to minimize the adverse impact of development on an ecosystem. Because technopoles are often sited on “greenfields,” minimizing the impact of development as it encroaches on the natural landscape is of critical importance. Encourage Restoration – Enhance the biodiversity and ecology of the site by restoring the ecosystem from environmental degradation or neglect. Technopoles that are built on “brownfields” or other environmentally scarred areas can significantly repair the built environment.

3

By environmental, we mean specifically ecological design priorities and general sensitivity for built and natural surroundings. United Nations Report, 1995. 5 Overarching all specific sustainability criteria is incorporating community and stakeholder participation. Equitable development outcomes can only be achieved through a thorough community planning process. 4

Page 2 of 9

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003 3. 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Minimize Impervious Surfaces – Consolidate building footprint and area of construction disturbance. This maximizes the conservation of the natural systems, while minimizing runoff. Minimize Distances between Uses (intra-site compatibility) – Make circulation as efficient as possible; reduce the need for auto circulation between uses on site; reduce energy and pollution. This reduces the distances between uses, necessitating reduced infrastructure investment, decreasing the loss of time with shortduration automobile trips. This increases the feasibility for mass efficient transit and improves worker quality of life. Fit with surrounding environment (regional compatibility) - Connect site to the larger surrounding urban context and built environment fabric, circulation, infrastructure, and community. This creates strong connections with existing areas, circulation and land use patterns. In addition, regional compatibility ensures that the technopole does not exist as an isolated island within its region. Mix Uses – Layer uses (combining functions in the built form) where possible, encouraging multi-use clustering. This is a logical conclusion if the previous five sustainable criteria are followed. Synergies improve performance of the project’s component uses, setting the table for innovation through informal information spillover through well- utilized retail and public spaces. Retain and Recycle Storm Water – Use ecologically sensitive storm water management features to retain and treat storm water on site. This reduces adverse impacts to regional and local storm water systems. High technology centers should be able to use innovative technology to improve the performance of these systems. Construct, Site and Plan “Green” Buildings - Integrate green building systems and infrastructure in the development through building placement, siting, design and technology. High technology systems can increase the performance of buildings and provide built-in “testing” centers for innovative systems and products.

While this list is not exhaustive, it highlights several salient aspects of sustainability relevant for technopole projects. These implementation guidelines are rooted in a redefinition of economic growth and progress.6 In other words, sustainable technopoles go beyond identifying a niche market and begin to address what economic viability and technological innovation will mean in the future. The technopole phenomenon has been observed by researchers in the last thirty years leading up to the most farreaching survey performed by Castells and Hall in 1994. They define the technopole in relation to a 21st century mode of production: “The information they [high-technology products] embody has been created in technopoles, and invariably the embodiment of the information into the products also occurs in technopoles, which thus constitute the mines and foundries of the information age.”7 These factories of information produce a distinct urban spatial configuration. The French academic, Georges Benko, writes that these centers are “spatial catalyst[s] promoting the formation of a flexible system of accumulation.”8 In other words, technopoles are centers of high value-added economic activities that locate near one another and close to services.9 Some of these dense clusters have developed spontaneously such as in Silicon Valley or Route 128 in Boston, Massachusetts. Others have been the result of strategic government intervention in land-use patterns. Sophia Antipolis on the Côte d’Azur in France developed from a very specific government-driven program to diversify the economy on the Riviera.10

6

Shutkin, p.239. Manuel Castells and Peter Hall. Technopoles of the World: The Making of Twenty-First-Century Industrial Complexes. (London; New York: Routledge, 1994): p. 2. 8 Georges Benko, “Technopoles, High-Tech Industries and Regional Development: A Critical Review,” GeoJournal, vol. 51 (July 2000), pp. 157-167. 9 Thierry Bruhat, leading French technopole consultant. 10 Georges Benko. 7

Page 3 of 9

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003 ADDING LASTING VALUE Over the last thirty years, masterplanned science parks or technopoles have proliferated in the wake of postindustrial production methods. Technopoles have developed a vibrant economic life as evidenced by their continued growth and proliferation. In fact, the science park has become a mode of urban (re-)development within cities and on the outskirts of cities in most countries. Nevertheless, these developments have not necessarily improved the built environment or maximized their potential as innovative milieus.11 Separate from science park development, green building design and issues of sustainability have come to the forefront of planning thinking and development practice. Sustainable principles have been applied to buildings and small sites as well as regional planning initiatives. Fewer development projects (50-500 acres or 20-200 ha) have incorporated sustainability into their site planning and development strategies. As defined above, sustainability adds value in tangible ways by lowering operating expenses, reducing negative impacts on adjacent communities, saving energy, and in other social and economic ways. However, only a small number of technopoles have capitalized on these potential benefits. While some technopoles have followed sustainable practices and market themselves as green developments, we believe that an unexplored potential for cross-pollination exists between high-tech clusters and sustainability in site design and project development. Preliminary research leads us to question current practice and suggest how technopoles can become places for innovation in form as well as in content, thereby enhancing the city fabric. The following examples and recommendations are intended as a springboard for future research and discussion. We acknowledge the breadth of sustainable and high-tech development across all countries and do not suggest that our categories and criteria are exhaustive. The current findings are an initial attempt to identify examples that imply strong links between sustainability and high-tech development. Developers usually site new science park projects on the urban periphery or in entirely new development zones. Often government programs and incentives designate zones for these projects. Technopoles differ from one another in significant ways. They range in size from the smallest 20 ha, mid-small 20-60 ha, mid-big 60-100 ha, large greater than 100 ha.12 Some of the most well-known areas like Silicon Valley, USA Cambridge, United Kingdom or Sophia Antipolis, France cover very large areas (much greater than 100 ha). Varying degrees of government intervention have led to these developments. LOCATION In a small city (under 500,000 inhabitants) In a mid city (500,000 - 1,000,000 million inhabitants) In a big city (over 1,000,000 inhabitants Near a big city Near a mid city Near a small city Non-urban area source: IASP

11 12

44% 7% 24% 15% 4% 5% 1% 100%

Castells and Hall, (1994), pp.8-9. International Association of Science Parks (IASP).

Page 4 of 9


SCIENCE PARK AREA Less than 50 acres 50-150 acres 150-250 acres Greater than 250 acres N/A source: IASP

51% 21% 5% 20% 3% 100%

Scale and goals vary from site to site but technopoles have evolved from distinctly urban and economic development projects into multi-faceted systems for drawing creativity and innovation to a city or region. Experience makes the strongest case for coupling research-based institutions with high-technology firms to promote change. The model relates back to the historical development of Silicon Valley, which benefited significantly from the presence of Stanford University. DISTANCE TO UNIVERSITY In University campus or adjacent to it Nearest University within 5 KM Nearest University within 5-20 KM Nearest University more than 20 KM N/A source: IASP

48% 28% 11% 4% 9% 100%

The evolution of technopoles can be traced in the history of Sophia-Antipolis, the “Silicon Valley of Europe.” A greenfield development between Cannes and Nice, Sophia-Antipolis was conceived to diversify the region’s touristbased economy and become a model living and working environment. Under the guidance of a rigorous real-estate development strategy, well-known firms and respected educational institutions have clustered in the area. And SophiaAntipolis continues to successfully attract newcomers but has been struggling to support those small firms so often associated with high-technology. The limitations of sprawling development (2,300 ha) have also decreased the quality of life within the park even though strict land conservation has been successfully enforced (only one third of the land is built-up). RATIO OF GREEN AREA / TOTAL SURFACE Less than 15% 15-30% 31-50% Greater than 50% N/A source: IASP

23% 35% 15% 22% 5% 100%

WHEN WERE SCIENCE PARKS CREATED? 1960-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000+ source: IASP

4% 30% 48% 18% 100%

Page 5 of 9


As in Sophia-Antipolis, technopole urban design and masterplan strategies rarely reflect the intensity of interaction necessary for sustaining and promoting the type of information spillover integral to triggering new ideas. Many technopoles are not connected to their surrounding urban fabric as they are constructed on distant greenfield sites. Land assembly in urbanized areas requires significant political and financial support both of which played an essential role in Sophia’s emergence. AVERAGE DISTANCE FROM SCIENCE PARKS TO… Facility University Facilities City Centre International Airport source: IASP

Miles 12 6 19

CASE STUDIES Preliminary research sampled from the technopole universe to analyze science parks that have sustainable elements. The study was designed to apply a set of sustainable criteria (outlined previously and recapped in the next paragraph) to each designated parks’ master plan and evaluate the sustainable components. In the process we identified several technopoles to explore further. However, if there are any technopoles that you believe would be appropriate for future research, please contact the authors of this article. GUIDELINES & OUTCOMES OF SYNERGIES IN SUSTAINABLE TECHNOPOLES 1. Promote Conservation 2. Encourage Restoration 3. Minimize Impervious Surfaces 4. Minimize Distances between Uses (intra-site compatability) 5. Fit surrounding environment (regional compatibility) 6. Mix Uses 7. Retain and Recycle Stormwater 8. Construct, Site and Plan “Green” Buildings

While some technopoles had elements of sustainability none were fully sustainable. The following case studies reflect a summary of some initial conclusions about a few projects. • Parques das Nações, in Lisbon, Portugal, home of Expo ’98, satisfied many of these categories. Built on a brownfield, Parques das Nações impressed us with the attention it has paid to remediating a site and mixinguses. In addition, Parques das Nações uses high technology to monitor sustainable elements. It is probably the most well rounded sustainable park we have surveyed. • The Cape Charles Technology Park, in Northampton County, Virginia, USA was the smallest of the parks we studied and less of an “apples to apples” comparison. Cape Charles Sustainable Technology Park describes itself as the most environmentally friendly eco-industrial park in America. It has conserved indigenous flora and fauna, remediated a former trash dump, incorporated storm water management, recycling, green building and siting, and its development was the consequence of a collaborative public process. However, the park still consumes a substantial amount of impervious surfaces in the form of parking lots. The absence of a university and weak demand for this type of space has contributed to a weaker than expected performance since its opening in 2000. This project reveals that without a “university anchor” and an ample labor pool, an ecoindustrial park cannot stand alone. • The Limerick Technology Park, in Limerick, Ireland, used mixed-use and village vernacular architecture to minimize impervious surfaces and conserve the existing ecosystem. However, it has not fully realized the integration between high technology and environmental design.

Page 6 of 9

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003 •

The Oxford Science Park, in Oxford, England, engaged in the restoration of a dried out wetlands area and restored the indigenous flora and fauna in their open space. However, the project’s urban design has not integrated mixed-uses as much as possible, opting instead for single-use development pads in recent phases.

These cases highlight the degree to which some technopoles have focused on sustainability. While many of these projects have incorporated some elements of sustainability, our initial findings show that many other projects are not recognizing the potential synergies between high-tech and sustainability, which we will go into in further depth later in the paper. MISSED OPPORTUNITIES Technopoles – innovation centers of economic significance – have not seemed to embrace innovation in site planning even though these goals would directly benefit park developers, firms and employees as well as neighboring communities. The symbiotic potential for sustainable principles, technology and high-tech innovation is linked in value-added ways to the specific needs of high tech firms. Researchers have identified a series of economic factors that attract high-tech firms to specific agglomeration zones (spontaneous and planned): well-educated, flexible labor pools; space for expansion; information spillover; anchor institutions; accessible services; and the capacity for reinvention and adaptation. These characteristics can be enhanced when sustainable development practices are applied to science park design. Silicon Valley, arguably the most well-known innovation center, resulted from historical trends that led to the agglomeration of firms and institutions within close proximity. As Castells and Hall point out, an innovation-focused culture lies at the root of Silicon Valley’s success. As a result, many firms have remained competitive over time. However, today the urban configuration is challenging the ongoing sustainability of the region. Sprawling development patterns resulted from existing zoning laws that were not designed to concentrate innovative, high-tech businesses. So far, evidence suggests little or no effect of urban form on the potential for Silicon Valley to reinvent itself but existing conditions suggest that we have reached a threshold. Therefore, we may have reached the appropriate moment for exploring the synergies between sustainable development strategies and businesses that rely on information spillover and innovation. Certainly, sprawling development patterns do not intrinsically impede innovation, but neither do they necessarily support high-tech innovation. We believe that the sustainable principles laid out in this paper make a strong case for inherent advantages in a new “sustainable technopole development paradigm.” Sustainability calls for a more integrated approach to site design where all systems such as building HVAC systems, site drainage, interior and exterior circulation, production spaces and social interaction are linked. Designing a development as an integrated system belies the commuting and living patterns encouraged by the majority of sprawling technology park developments. Even though the materials and outcomes of production are “clean,” science parks foster environmental decay by adding to our stock of polluting buildings and increasing car-reliability in many current examples. By unpacking the commonalities between emerging production patterns in the high-tech industries and the goals of sustainable urban development, future technopoles could attain some of the goals set forth at the beginning of this paper. The final test of an economic system is not the tons of iron, the tanks of oil, or the miles of textiles it produces: The final test lies in its ultimate products – the sort of men and women it nurtures and the order and beauty and sanity of their communities.” (Lewis Mumford, Faith for Living in Shutkin, 2000: p. 237.)

Few developers and city planners openly engage Mumford’s challenge even though high-tech centers could lead the curve for innovation in all aspects of (sub-)urban life. 13 These zones should test emerging technologies whose capacity to enhance sustainable urban development may be very great. Our notion of high-tech and cutting edge no longer implies “in-your-face” electronics but more flexible, subtle, and imperceptible devices and networks. The austere 13

For example Lyme Properties has developed sustainable projects for biotech firms in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Page 7 of 9

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003 modernist future of buildings as machines or repositories for machines has been replaced by embedded technologies that free urban citizens to engage their environment more freely. As a result, notions of green-building, open space preservation, incorporation of natural site planning features and high-tech elements could converge on a more holistic, innovative and value-added approach to development.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank Professors Dennis Frenchman, Carlo Ratti and Bill Shutkin of the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at MIT for their valuable input.

REFERENCES Benko, Georges. “Technopoles, High-Tech Industries and Regional Development: A Critical Review,” GeoJournal, vol. 51 (July 2000), pp. 157-167. Bruhat, Thierry. Vingt technopoles, un premier bilan. Paris: La Documentation Française, 1990. Cabral, Regis. “The Cabral-Dahab Science Park Management Paradigm: An Introduction,” International Journal of Technology Management. vol. 16, no. 8 (1998). Castells, Manuel and Peter Hall. Technopoles of the World: The Making of Twenty-First-Century Industrial Complexes. London; New York: Routledge, 1994. Hack, Gary. “Managing the Spatial Pattern of Fast Growing Cities,” University of Pennsylvania, SPURS Lecture at MIT, November 17, 2003. Ibarrondo, Marian and Oscar Salas, and Leire Barruetabeña. “Innovative Management: Expanding its Scope by Developing Science and Technology Ecoparks,” XX IASP World Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, June 2003. Massey, Doreen and P. Quintas, David Wield. High-Tech Fantasies: Science Parks in Society, Science and Space. London, New York: Routledge, 1992. Pattinson, Marc. “How to Create a Favorable Environment for Technology and Innovation Parks in Urban Areas,” IASP World Conference on Science and Technology Parks, June 1-4 2003, Lisbon, Portugal. Rogers, Richard G. Cities for a Small Planet. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1998. Saxenian, AnnaLee. “Lessons from Silicon Valley,” Technology Review. vol. 95, no. 5 (July 1994), pp.42-51. Saxenian, AnnaLee. “Silicon Valley versus Route 128,” Inc. vol. 16, no.2 (February 1994), pp.25-26. Saxenian, AnnaLee. “The Cheshire Cat’s Grin: Innovation and Regional Development,” Technology Review. vol. 91, no. 2 (February March 1988), pp.66-75. Shutkin, William A. The Land That Could Be: Environmentalism and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.

Page 8 of 9

Sustainable Development Conference World Student Community -- Conference Paper Draft 01/12/2003 Websites Eco-Industrial Development Program (EIDP), Center for the Environment, Cornell University, http://environment.cornell.edu/ Harvard Business School, Cluster Mapping Project, www.isc.hbs.edu International Association of Science Parks, http://www.iaspworld.org/ International Society for Industrial Ecology, Yale University, http://www.is4ie.org// Sophia-Antipolis, http://www.sophia-antipolis.org/index1.htm United States Department of Energy, Smart Communities Network, http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/business/parkintro.shtml

Page 9 of 9