of knowledge and ideas (cf. Florida 2002: 250). If all agents were homogenous, a certain consensus would rule and there would be less of a reason for new ideas and start-ups (cf. Wedmeier 2009: 8). The regional economic growth is explained by the talented economic agents which are attracted by open and tolerant cities or regions where they can act liberally to apply their full potential. As already mentioned, Florida used census data from the US Bureau of the Census which also covers the share of gay households in a region. Obviously this data to measure diversity might not be available when the indices are applied to other countries and regions. Other studies, which adopted Florida’s concept to measure diversity and creativity for different regions in the world, had to implement different indices. Rutten and Gelissen 2008, for instance, collected own data for measuring tolerance in European NUTS-2 regions by asking interviewees if they would not like to have some of the following people as their neighbours: people with a criminal record, people with a different race, left-wing extremists, heavy drinkers, right-wing extremists, people with large families, emotionally unstable people, Muslims, immigrants/foreign workers, people who have AIDS, drug addicts, homosexuals, Jews, or Gypsies (cf. Rutten and Gelissen 2008: 990).
ning initiatives like “Creative TampaBay” or “Cincinnati Tomorrow”, which try to apply Florida’s ideas on their cities, have evolved since then. All over the place policy makers and civic leaders try to replicate the next San Francisco or Boston by converting old buildings into lofts, upmarket bars or art galleries; they propose public art installations, new city squares, bicycle paths, river walks, pedestrian friendly city centres, and other street level amenities. The tool kit that Florida suggests seems easy to implement, and most of the measures which focus on the “soft infrastructure” are not as costly to realise as some brick and mortar methods (cf. Peck 2005: 752 f.). According to Florida, especially those soft factors are crucial for attracting talented people in the knowledge economy whose work and leisure hours cannot be easily separated. Those creatives need coffee shops, art and live music spaces and other “typical features of gentrifying, mixed-use, inner-urban neighbourhoods” (cf. Peck 2005: 745) to spend time and fit these into their demanding work schedules.
One can imagine that the way creativity, diversity and tolerance are measured in all kinds of studies varies due to data limitations and that this point of applying Florida’s concept and ideas is the one that’s been criticised most by other scholars. The above mentioned study by Rutten and Gelissen (2008) is named here to underline the different approaches for empirical measurement, but there are many more in the literature.
Despite all the praise and acknowledgements there has also been a lot of criticism about the concept. Generally the conservative right wing as well as anti-immigrant and homophobic groups see the concept as an assault on family values by praising the lifestyle preferences of yuppies (cf. Peck 2005: 741). The left wing commonly doesn’t like the image of a “class”; neither does it appreciate the neoliberal approach and the idea that everybody can be a creative entrepreneur if the setting is just the right one. Other generic criticism points to the neglect of intra-urban disparities and of course to the question of causality: diversity and creativity might as well just be a consequence of economic growth rather than the cause of it (cf. Peck 2005: 755).
Impact and Review Florida’s concept of the creative class has had a huge impact on the scientific research as well as on regional politics, and his book became an international bestseller. Reasons for its success lie certainly in its simplicity and in being easy to understand. A lot of local plan-
Nonetheless Florida’s ideas have caused great effects on urban policy “which has hardly been cluttered with new and innovative ideas lately” (cf. Peck 2005: 740). He was creative by constructing the indices and using non-economic factors like diversity to explain economic growth.
The European Geographer - 6 - September 2010
References: FLORIDA, RICHARD (2002a): The Rise of the Creative Class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community, and everyday life. Basic Books, New York. FLORIDA, RICHARD (2002b): The Economic Geography of Talent. In: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92 (4): p. 743 – 755. PECK, JAMIE (2005): Struggling with the Creative Class. In: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29 (4): p. 740 – 770. RUTTEN, ROEL; GELISSEN, JOHN (2008): Technology, Talent, Diversity and the Wealth of European Regions. In: European Planning Studies, 16 (7): p. 985 – 1006. SAXENIAN, ANNALEE (2006): The New Argonauts: Regional Advantage in a Global Economy. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England: Harvard University Press. TöRNQVIST, GUNNAR (2004): Creativity in Time and Space. In: Geografiska Annaler, B 86 (4): p. 227 – 243. WEDMEIER, JAN (2009): Creative Cities and the Concept of Diversity. HWWI Research. Paper 1-20. Hamburg.