The University And The City John Goddard Paul

Vallance download

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-university-and-the-city-john-
goddard-paul-vallance-23401304

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Fulfilling The Promise Virginia Commonwealth University And The City

Of Richmond 19682009 Eugene P Trani John T Kneebone University Of
Virginia Press

https://ebookbell.com/product/fulfilling-the-promise-virginia-
commonwealth-university-and-the-city-of-richmond-19682009-eugene-p-
trani-john-t-kneebone-university-of-virginia-press-44466508

The Black Musician And The White City Race And Music In Chicago
19001967 Absher

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-black-musician-and-the-white-city-
race-and-music-in-chicago-19001967-absher-10979450

Localism And The Ancient Greek Citystate Hans Beck

https://ebookbell.com/product/localism-and-the-ancient-greek-
citystate-hans-beck-23277242

Pathways To Reform Credits And Conflict At The City University Of New

York Alexandra W Logue

https://ebookbell.com/product/pathways-to-reform-credits-and-conflict-
at-the-city-university-of-new-york-alexandra-w-logue-51952750
We Shall Overcome Essays On A Great American Song Victor V Bobetsky
Associate Professor And Director Of The Teacher Education Program In
Music At Hunter College Of The City University Of New York

https://ebookbell.com/product/we-shall-overcome-essays-on-a-great-
american-song-victor-v-bobetsky-associate-professor-and-director-of-
the-teacher-education-program-in-music-at-hunter-college-of-the-city-
university-of-new-york-5137114

The Stadium And The City John Bale Olf Moen

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-stadium-and-the-city-john-bale-olf-
moen-51973000

Free Culture And The City Hackers Commoners And Neighbors In Madrid
19972017 Alberto Corsn Jimnez

https://ebookbell.com/product/free-culture-and-the-city-hackers-
commoners-and-neighbors-in-madrid-19972017-alberto-corsn-
jimnez-49135360

Free Culture And The City Hackers Commoners And Neighbors In Madrid
19972017 Alberto Corsn Jimnez Adolfo Estalella

https://ebookbell.com/product/free-culture-and-the-city-hackers-
commoners-and-neighbors-in-madrid-19972017-alberto-corsn-jimnez-
adolfo-estalella-51443434

The City And The Sign An Introduction To Urban Semiotics M Gottdiener

Editor Alexandros Ph Lagopoulos Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-city-and-the-sign-an-introduction-
to-urban-semiotics-m-gottdiener-editor-alexandros-ph-lagopoulos-
editor-51837546
The University and the City

Universities are being seen as key urban institutions by researchers and policy
makers around the world. They are global players with significant local direct
and indirect impacts – on employment, the built environment, business innova-
tion and the wider society. The University and the City explores these impacts
and in the process seeks to expose the extent to which universities are just in the
city, or part of the city and actively contributing to its development.
The precise expression of the emerging relationship between universities and
cities is highly contingent on national and local circumstances. The book is there-
fore grounded in original research into the experience of the UK and selected
English provincial cities, with a focus on the role of universities in addressing
the challenges of environmental sustainability, health and cultural development.
These case studies are set in the context of reviews of the international evidence
on the links between universities and the urban economy, their role in ‘place
making’ and in the local community.
The book reveals the need to build a stronger bridge between policy and prac-
tice in the fields of urban development and higher education underpinned by
sound theory if the full potential of universities as urban institutions is to be
realised. Those working in the field of development therefore need to acquire a
better understanding of universities and those in higher education of urban
development. The insights from both sides contained in The University and the
City provide a platform on which to build well-founded university and city part-
nerships across the world.

John Goddard is Professor Emeritus of Regional Development Studies at

Newcastle University, UK.

Paul Vallance is Research Associate in the Centre for Urban and Regional
Development Studies at Newcastle University, UK.
Regions and Cities
Managing Editor:
Gillian Bristow, University of Cardiff, UK.
Editors:
Maryann Feldman, University of Georgia, USA,
Gernot Grabher, HafenCity University Hamburg, Germany,
Ron Martin, University of Cambridge, UK,
Martin Perry, Massey University, New Zealand.

In today’s globalised, knowledge-driven and networked world, regions and cities

have assumed heightened significance as the interconnected nodes of economic,
social and cultural production, and as sites of new modes of economic and terri-
torial governance and policy experimentation. This book series brings together
incisive and critically engaged international and interdisciplinary research on
this resurgence of regions and cities, and should be of interest to geographers,
economists, sociologists, political scientists and cultural scholars, as well as to
policy-makers involved in regional and urban development.

For more information on the Regional Studies Association visit www.

regionalstudies.org

There is a 30% discount available to RSA members on books in the Regions

and Cities series, and other subject related Taylor and Francis books and e-books
including Routledge titles. To order just e-mail [email protected], or
phone on + 44 (0) 20 7017 6924 and declare your RSA membership. You can
also visit www.routledge.com and use the discount code: RSA0901

1. Beyond Green Belts 3. Regional Development in the 1990s

Managing urban growth in the The British Isles in transition
21st century Edited by Ron Martin and
Edited by John Herington Peter Townroe

2. Retreat from the Regions 4. Spatial Policy in a Divided

Corporate change and the closure Nation
of factories Edited by Richard T. Harrison
Stephen Fothergill and Nigel Guy and Mark Hart
 5. An Enlarged Europe 13. Regional Policy in Europe
Regions in competition? S. S. Artobolevskiy
Edited by Louis Albrechts,
Sally Hardy, Mark Hart and 14. New Institutional Spaces
Anastasios Katos TECs and the remaking of
economic governance
6. The Regional Imperative Edited by Martin Jones and
Regional planning and Jamie Peck
governance in Britain, Europe
and the United States
Urlan A. Wannop 15. The Coherence of EU
Regional Policy
7. The Determinants of Small Contrasting perspectives on the
Firm Growth structural funds
An inter-regional study in the Edited by John Bachtler and
United Kingdom 1986–90 Ivan Turok
Richard Barkham, Graham
Gudgin, Mark Hart and 16. Multinationals and
Eric Hanvey European Integration
Trade, investment and regional
8. The Regional Dimension of development
Transformation in Central Europe Edited by Nicholas A. Phelps
Grzegorz Gorzelak
17. Unemployment and Social
9. Union Retreat and the Regions Exclusion
The shrinking landscape of Landscapes of labour inequality
organised labour and social exclusion
Ron Martin, Peter Sunley and Edited by Sally Hardy,
Jane Wills Paul Lawless and Ron Martin

10. Regional Development Strategies

A European perspective 18. Metropolitan Planning in
Edited by Jeremy Alden and Britain
Philip Boland A comparative study
Edited by Peter Roberts,
11. British Regionalism and Kevin Thomas and
Devolution Gwyndaf Williams
The challenges of state reform
and European integration 19. Social Exclusion in European
Edited by Jonathan Bradbury and Cities
John Mawson Processes, experiences and
responses
12. Innovation Networks and Edited by Judith Allen,
Learning Regions? Goran Cars and
James Simmie Ali Madanipour
20. Regional Development 28. Regions, Spatial Strategies and
Agencies in Europe Sustainable Development
Edited by Charlotte Damborg, David Counsell and
Mike Danson and Henrik Halkier Graham Haughton

21. Community Economic 29. Clusters and Regional

Development Development
Edited by Graham Haughton Critical reflections and
explorations
22. Foreign Direct Investment Edited by Bjørn Asheim,
and the Global Economy Philip Cooke and Ron Martin
Corporate and institutional
30. Regional Competitiveness
dynamics of global-localisation
Edited by Ron Martin, Michael
Edited by Jeremy Alden and
Kitson and Peter Tyler
Nicholas F. Phelps
31. Regional Development in the
23. Restructuring Industry and Knowledge Economy
Territory Edited by Philip Cooke and
The experience of Europe’s regions Andrea Piccaluga
Edited by Anna Giunta, Arnoud
Lagendijk and Andy Pike 32. The Rise of the English Regions?
Edited by Irene Hardill, Paul
24. Out of the Ashes? Benneworth, Mark Baker and
The social impact of industrial Leslie Budd
contraction and regeneration on
Britain’s mining communities 33. Geographies of the New
Chas Critcher, Bella Dicks, Economy
David Parry and Critical reflections
David Waddington Edited by Peter W. Daniels,
Andrew Leyshon, Michael J.
25. Regional Innovation Bradshaw and Jonathan
Strategies Beaverstock
The challenge for less-favoured
34. European Cohesion Policy
regions
Willem Molle
Edited by Kevin Morgan and
Claire Nauwelaers 35. Creative Regions
Technology, culture and
26. Geographies of Labour Market knowledge entrepreneurship
Inequality Edited by Philip Cooke and
Edited by Ron Martin and Dafna Schwartz
Philip S. Morrison
36. Devolution, Regionalism and
27. Sustainable Cities Regional Development
Graham Haughton and The UK experience
Colin Hunter Edited by Jonathan Bradbury
37. Intelligent Cities and 45. Migration in the 21st Century
Globalisation of Innovation Rights, outcomes, and policy
Networks Kim Korinek and Thomas Maloney
Nicos Komninos
46. Leadership and Place
38. Whither Regional Studies? Edited by Chris Collinge,
Edited by Andy Pike John Gibney and Chris Mabey

47. Beyond Territory

39. Business Networks in Clusters
Edited by Harald Bathelt,
and Industrial Districts
Maryann Feldman and
The governance of the global
Dieter F. Kogler
value chain
Edited by Fiorenza Belussi and 48. The Recession and Beyond
Alessia Sammarra Local and regional responses to
the downturn
40. China and Europe Edited by David Bailey and
The implications of the rise of Caroline Chapain
China as a global economic
power for Europe 49. Cultural Political Economy
Edited by Klaus Kunzmann, of Small Cities
Willy A. Schmid and Martina Edited by Anne Lorentzen and
Koll-Schretzenmayr Bas van Heur

41. Globalizing Regional 50. Just Growth

Development in East Asia Inclusion and prosperity in
Production networks, clusters, America’s metropolitan regions
and entrepreneurship Chris Benner and Manuel Pastor
Edited by Henry Wai-chung Yeung
51. Industrial Policy Beyond the
Crisis
42. Manufacturing in the New
Regional, national and
Urban Economy
international perspectives
Willem van Winden, Leo van den
Edited by David Bailey,
Berg, Luis de Carvalho and
Helena Lenihan and Josep-Maria
Erwin van Tuijl
Arauzo-Carod
43. The Impacts of Automotive 52. Promoting Silicon Valleys in
Plant Closures Latin America
A tale of two cities Luciano Ciravegna
Edited by Andrew Beer and
Holli Evans 53. Regional Development in
Northern Europe
44. The Futures of the City Peripherality, marginality and
Region border issues
Edited by Michael Neuman and Edited by Mike Danson and
Angela Hull Peter De Souza
54. Creating Knowledge Locations 59. Regional Development
in Cities Agencies: The Next
Innovation and integration Generation?
challenges Networking, knowledge and
Willem van Winden, Luis de regional policies
Carvalho, Erwin van Tujil, Edited by Nicola Bellini, Mike
Jeroen van Haaren and Danson and Henrik Halkier
Leo van den Berg
60. Leadership and Change in
55. Complex Adaptive Innovation Sustainable Regional
Systems Development
Relatedness and transversality Edited by Markku Sotarauta,
in the evolving region Ina Horlings and
Philip Cooke Joyce Liddle

56. Innovation Governance in an 61. Networking Regionalised

Open Economy Innovative Labour
Shaping regional nodes in a Markets
globalized world Edited by Ulrich Hilpert and
Edited by Annika Rickne, Staffan Helen Lawton Smith
Laestadius and Henry Etzkowitz
62. Re-framing Regional
57. Creative Industries and Development
Innovation in Europe Evolution, innovation and
Concepts, measures and transition
comparative case studies Edited by Philip Cooke
Edited by Luciana Lazzeretti
63. The University and the City
58. Community-based John Goddard and Paul Vallance
Entrepreneurship and Rural
Development
Creating favourable conditions for
small businesses in Central Europe
Matthias Fink, Stephan Loidl and
Richard Lang
The University and the City

John Goddard and Paul Vallance

First published 2013
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa
business
Ó 2013 John Goddard and Paul Vallance
The right of John Goddard and Paul Vallance to be identified as authors of
this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Goddard, J. B.
The university and the city / by John Goddard and Paul Vallance.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Universities and colleges—Economic aspects—Great Britain.
2. Education, Higher—Economic aspects—Great Britain 3. Urban
economics. 4. Community development, Urban—Great Britain. 5. City
planning—Great Britain. I. Vallance, Paul. II. Title.
LC67.68.G7G63 2013
338.4#73780941—dc23
2012030801

ISBN: 978-0-415-58992-5 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-203-06836-6 (ebk)

Typeset in Times New Roman

by Book Now Ltd, London
Contents

List of illustrations xi
Acknowledgements xv

1 Introduction 1

PART I
Review: international dimensions 7

2 The university in the city I: place and community 9

3 The university in the city II: economic impacts 22
4 Universities, innovation and economic development 35
5 City social and economic development: drivers and
barriers to university engagement in three
European cities 50

PART II
Research: the UK context 65

6 Higher education and cities in the UK 67

7 Universities, sustainability and urban development 89
8 Universities and health: institutional relationships in
the city 110
9 Universities and the cultural sector of cities 127
10 The embeddedness of universities in the city and
the city in the university 147
x Contents
Appendix A: Interviews 157
Appendix B: Findings from a survey of individual
academics’ research impacts 159
Notes 181
References 184
Index 205
Illustrations

Figures
3.1 Graduate labour recruitment regional ‘gain rate’ for 2001/2002 30
3.2 Graduate labour recruitment conversion rates for ‘locals’ and
‘stayers’ pathways for 2001/2002 31
6.1 UK higher education student numbers from the UK and
overseas, 1995/1996–2010/2011 71
6.2 Residents of working age with NVQ4 level qualification or
above (2005 and 2010) for city regions 87
B.1 ‘In which of the following areas do you think your research is
having either a primary or secondary impact?’: Overall 162
B.2 ‘Which of the following types of group or organisation do you
think are either primary or secondary beneficiaries of your
research?’: Overall 163
B.3 ‘Which of the following mechanisms do you use to deliver either
the primary or secondary impacts of your research?’: Overall 164
B.4 ‘In which of the following areas do you think your research is
having either a primary or secondary impact?’: Overall Pre
and Post 1992 universities 168
B.5 ‘Which of the following types of group or organisation do you
think are either primary or secondary beneficiaries of your
research?’: Overall Pre and Post 1992 universities 169
B.6 ‘Which of the following mechanisms do you use to deliver either
the primary or secondary impacts of your research?’: Overall
Pre and Post 1992 universities 170

Maps
7.1 Key sustainability and health sites in Newcastle 94
7.2 Key sites on Manchester Oxford Road corridor 104
9.1 Key cultural sites in Newcastle 131
9.2 Key cultural sites in Bristol 138
xii Illustrations
Tables
6.1 UK higher education student numbers, 1995/1996–2010/2011 71
6.2 Research funding by institution and region: top 15 institutions
in England 80
6.3 HEI HEFCE recurrent grant funding, 2010/2011: institutions
from case study cities and others selected from surrounding
region 83
6.4 Student numbers, 1995/1996–2010/2011 for universities in
Bristol, Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield 85
6.5 Number of residents and percentage of overall population of
working age with NVQ4 level qualification or above: 2005
and 2010 for Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle and Sheffield
(with corresponding city regions and regions) 86
7.1 Selected energy, environment and sustainability related
university research units in Newcastle 92
7.2 Selected energy, environment and sustainability related
university research units in Greater Manchester 100
B.1 Number of participants by university and disciplinary areas 160
B.2 Number of participants by academic position 161
B.3 Disciplinary area ranking for ‘Contribution to scientific/
academic knowledge or method’ 165
B.4 Results for ‘Teaching’: Overall and Lecturers only 166
B.5 Disciplinary area ranking (top 8) for ‘Technological
development or innovation’ 167
B.6 Disciplinary area ranking (top 8) for ‘Helping socially excluded
or disadvantaged groups’ 167
B.7 Disciplinary area ranking for ‘Contribution to the economy’ 168
B.8 Number of participants by disciplinary area from Pre and
Post 1992 universities 171
B.9 Differences in primary impact between Pre and Post 1992
universities for selected areas of research impact 171
B.10 Differences in primary impact between Pre and Post 1992
universities for selected beneficiaries of research impact 172
B.11 Differences in primary impact between Pre and Post 1992
universities for selected mechanisms of research impact 173
B.12 Disciplinary area ranking (top 8) for ‘Sustainable development
or environmental protection’ 174
B.13 Cross-tabulations of ‘Sustainable development or environmental
protection’ (top 6 disciplinary areas) 175
B.14 Disciplinary area ranking (top 8) for ‘Healthcare or public health
and wellbeing’ 177
B.15 Cross-tabulations of ‘Healthcare or public health and wellbeing’
(top 6 disciplinary areas) 178
 Illustrations xiii
B.16 Disciplinary area ranking (top 8) for ‘Public exhibition or
performance of work’ and ‘Other creative output’ combined 179
B.17 Cross-tabulations of combined ‘Public exhibition or
performance of work’ and ‘Other creative outputs’ (top 4
disciplinary areas) 180
Acknowledgements

This book would not have been possible without the support of a Leverhulme
Trust Emeritus Fellowship awarded to Professor John Goddard on his retirement.
We also gratefully acknowledge the support of Newcastle University’s Strategic
Development Fund for our wider activities as part of the Civic University Study
Programme.
Chapter 5 in this book is an updated version of Goddard, J., Vallance, P. and
Puukka, J. (2011) ‘Experience of engagement between universities and cities:
drivers and barriers in three European Cities’, Built Environment, 37: 299–316.
We are grateful to the publisher Alexandrine Press for granting permission to
reproduce this material here.
We would like to thank Chris Young for his assistance in producing the maps
that appear in this book. We would also like to thank a number of colleagues in
the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies (CURDS) for their sup-
port during the time we have been working on this book, in particular Louise
Kempton, John Tomaney, Andy Pike, Susan Robson, Lottie Hann and Emma
Wilson.
Finally we would like to thank everyone in Newcastle, Bristol, Manchester,
and Sheffield who contributed to this book by giving up their time and thoughts
for research interviews.
1 Introduction

Aims and scope

The subject of this book is relationships between universities and cities and how
they shape wider processes of urban or regional development. This situates the
book in a well-established field of research on the contribution that universities
make to sub-national territorial development (see Lawton Smith 2007; Perry and
Harloe 2007; Goddard and Vallance 2011). The focus on cities, however, suggests
a departure from the previously dominant concern in this field on universities as
agents of knowledge-based development in the economic and political spaces of
regions. Although the boundaries demarcating cities within larger regions are
almost always blurred – and indeed at points in this book we move between these
and other intermediate scalar units such as city-regions – we would suggest that
this shift in focus of study has a twofold significance.
On a simple empirical level, it reflects the specific location of most univer-
sities in cities of some description. The resultant spatial relationship, whether
the university campus is based in the urban centre or an outlying suburb,
necessarily carries social and economic impacts for the city or city-region of
which it is part. For the university, this urban location – even if it is not inte-
gral to the institution’s identity – forces a relationship with other institutional
actors and communities that are also inhabitant in the city. It also raises chal-
lenging normative questions about the need for academic practice to be of
direct relevance and value to the local contexts or, more generally, the type of
social environment in which most of its practitioners live and work (see
Bender 1998; Nature 2010; May and Perry 2011a).
On a conceptual level, the city as an object of study encourages exploration of
a more broadly-conceived territorial development process than just that focused
on economic growth and competitiveness. The relationship between the univer-
sity and the city is a multi-faceted one of distinct but interrelating physical,
social, economic and cultural dimensions. While interpretations of sub-national
territorial planning and development more generally may accommodate multiple
factors along these lines, a focus on the city – where the concentration of human
life means these dimensions come into closer and more frequent contact –
strengthens this plural viewpoint. This is also supported by recent theoretical
2 Introduction
imaginings of the city as a source of heterogeneous social, economic and mate-
rial relations or development assets, rather than the product of a single dominant
process (e.g. circulation of capital) or quality of the urban environment (e.g.
agglomeration) (see Amin and Graham 1997; Storper 1997; Healey 2002).
Relational views of the city as constituted through diverse (and fragmented) sets
of local and non-local network linkages have also challenged understandings of
its spatiality as a clearly bounded and coherent geographical or institutional
entity (e.g. see Amin and Thrift 2002). A concern with the interplay of territorial
and relational geographies (McCann and Ward 2010) seems germane to under-
standing the university as, on the one hand, a place-embedded institution with
connections into the different social and institutional spheres of its locality, and
on the other hand, a generative node in national and international flows of
knowledge and people (especially highly-mobile students).
Elements of this relationship between universities and cities have been studied
from historical, sociological and geographical perspectives in previous edited col-
lections, journal special issues,1 and individual papers (e.g. Bender 1988a; van
der Wusten 1998; Perry and Wiewel 2005; Russo et al. 2007; Wiewel and Perry
2008). With this full-length monograph, our goal is to make a distinctive contri-
bution to this literature through enabling a more comprehensive single-focused
treatment of this diverse subject. In particular, across the different review and
empirical parts of the book we aim to encompass and bring more fully into dialo-
gue differing standpoints on this problem along three lines:

1 Between local economic or social impacts that follow from a university just
being present within a city (e.g. related to campus developments, attraction
of students to live in the city, employment of large numbers of staff and other
knock-on economic effects) and those that arise from more active ‘engage-
ment’ by the institution or its academic community in the development of its
city.
2 Between the economic focus of most previous work on universities and
regional development and a more holistic view of the varied societal interac-
tions universities can have within their cities (relating to, for instance, com-
munity engagement, social inclusiveness or equality, urban and regional
governance, environmental sustainability, health and wellbeing, cultural and
civic life).
3 Between the ‘external’ regional and urban development role of universities
and the ‘internal’ processes – whether in the organisational domain of insti-
tutional structures and culture or in the governance domain of state higher
education policy – that enable and shape these external relationships.

These three spectrums represent the primary themes of the book that the chapters
outlined below aim to address. Over the course of the book, a number of strong
secondary themes emerge, several of which will be discussed together in the
concluding chapter. These include:
 Introduction 3
• the differences between the university as an institution, a set of academic
sub-groupings, and a population of students resident in the city;
• the role of physical sites and regeneration projects in facilitating and con-
necting university economic and community engagement in the city;
• the importance of inter-institutional relationships between the multiple uni-
versities (or other types of higher education institution) likely to be present
in large cities;
• the interdisciplinarity of many societal ‘challenges’ within cities (e.g. sus-
tainable development, public health, etc.) and the institutional tension this
creates with existing disciplinary-based academic structures;
• the role of intermediary organisations or organisational units in engagement
between the university and the city;
• the use of the city and its various communities as an ‘urban laboratory’ for
academic research, engagement and knowledge transfer.

Structure of the book

The main body of this book is divided into two parts. Part I (chapters 2–5) is
based on review of existing academic literature and other secondary material
relating to universities and city/regional development in an international perspec-
tive. Part II (chapters 6–10) is based on original research around specific thematic
areas in a selection of English cities (Bristol, Newcastle upon Tyne, Manchester
and Sheffield). This sole focus on the UK in the empirical component of the
book, as well as for practical research reasons, reflects our belief that university
and city relations are contingent on the particular configuration of higher educa-
tion and territorial governance systems, and therefore their in-depth investigation
should be based in a specific detailed context (see Chapter 6). The concluding
chapter summarises the unifying themes from this empirical work and discusses
how they can contribute to furthering understanding of university and city devel-
opment relationships more generally.
The next two chapters examine institutional-level social and economic impacts
of the urban university’s presence ‘in the city’ drawing on international examples
from the academic literature. Chapter 2 focuses on how universities shape the
built environment and urban social geography of cities. Chapter 3 focuses on the
more ‘passive’ economic impacts that universities have on cities (in contrast to
their ‘engaged’ role in innovation covered in Chapter 4). The types of social and
economic impacts covered across these two chapters are institutional (e.g.
through property development, employment and expenditure in the local econ-
omy) and student-based (e.g. ‘studentification’ of residential neighbourhoods in
the city, labour market effects through migration and entry into local labour
markets).
Chapter 4 turns to the more active ‘engaged’ role of universities in supporting
innovation in urban and regional economies. The first half of the chapter reviews
4 Introduction
the economic geography literature on universities and regional or metropolitan
innovation systems. This review supports a more broadly-conceived ‘develop-
mental’ rather than ‘generative’ perspective on the role of universities
(Gunasekara 2006) that emphasises their contribution to collective institutional
capacity for local innovation as much as their direct commercialisation of knowl-
edge. Related to this, in the evolutionary framework adopted for the chapter as a
whole, we suggest that the diversity of knowledge, practices and organisational
resources supported within universities (and not the private sector) means their
place in regional innovation systems should be understood as a source of ‘slack’
that can add to the long-term adaptability of the economy. The second half of this
chapter continues the focus on the university as a heterogeneous and decentra-
lised set of academic sub-units by discussing the adaptation of ‘loosely-coupled’
internal university structures as a form of organisational innovation within the
wider territorial innovation system. This involves examination of three different
views of the ‘entrepreneurial university’ from the literature, all of which empha-
sise the development of specialist interdisciplinary research centres and other
intermediary structures that facilitate engagement in the economy. The chapter
concludes by pointing to the limits of this university adaptation approach in
terms of the conceptualisation of the ‘external environment’ to which the univer-
sity responds as an (implicitly national) higher education funding environment.
Chapter 5 begins to address this limitation by examining how the wider city
and regional governance context for ‘civic universities’ may be elucidated. The
focus shifts from the economic to the wider societal role of the university, and
this is positioned in a framework of more holistic conceptual understandings of
city and regional development. The main concern of the chapter is to introduce a
distinction between the facilitating and constraining policy and governance con-
ditions (here phrased in terms of drivers and barriers) that relate to university
engagement in economic development and those that relate to engagement in
local societal development. This argument is developed through reference to sec-
ondary material from a series of OECD reviews of higher education in city and
regional development. Three European cities/city-regions are taken as our cases:
Berlin, Rotterdam and Jyväskylä (in central Finland). The material reviewed
points to the policy and governance drivers for extensive, sustained and strategic
university involvement in local economic innovation activity being stronger than
they are for engagement in activities to combat social exclusion in these cities.
The chapter concludes by identifying three thematic areas that combine societal
and economic development concerns and form the basis of chapters in the sec-
ond half of the book: sustainable urban development, public health and medi-
cine, and links with the cultural sector.
Chapter 6 introduces the second half of the book and outlines the UK higher
education and sub-national territorial governance systems as a background to
the subsequent empirical chapters. The chapter begins by outlining the origi-
nal research carried out for the book and notes the importance of the rapidly-
changing political and economic circumstances against which it has taken
place. This also introduces material from an online survey on the research
 Introduction 5
‘impacts’ of individual academics that is included in this book as Appendix B
and informs the thematic content of the three following chapters. The core of
this chapter is three sub-sections covering: the development of the UK higher
education system since the abolition of the binary university–polytechnic
divide in 1992; changes in the UK (and more specifically English) territorial
governance system over roughly the same twenty year period, with a particu-
lar focus on the implications for cities; and the intersections between these
two distinct governance domains. This third sub-section shows that, while
higher education policy in the UK is predominately spatially neutral, the
incorporation of universities into regional and city-level science and innova-
tion governance that developed under the post 1997 Labour government
helped introduce some local development dimension into the mission of uni-
versities. However, the top-down and centralist form this regional architecture
took meant that this dimension was limited and seemingly has not survived a
recent change of government. A final section provides a brief general profile
of the multi-university higher education sectors in the four cities covered in
the following three chapters.
Chapters 7 to 9 explore the relationships between these universities and their
cities around the three thematic areas identified above. The empirical investiga-
tion is based on a pair of cities for each chapter; matching our home city of
Newcastle with Manchester for sustainable urban development (Chapter 7), with
Sheffield for public health and medicine (Chapter 8), and with Bristol for links
with the cultural sector (Chapter 9). The purpose is not a comparison of the two
cities (although parallels and contrasts between them are employed as an analyti-
cal device), but using the empirical material from both cases to highlight key
relationships and processes in relation to the particular thematic area in question.
In Chapter 7, these central elements include the relationship between the institu-
tional and academic roles of universities in sustainable urban development, and
how these are mobilised by intermediary economic development or regeneration
vehicles and the use of ‘urban laboratory’ concepts in the two cities. In Chapter
8 the main focus is how university health and medical faculty engagement with
the city is shaped by their main institutional relationships (principally with the
National Health Service). The two cases covered in this chapter have slightly dif-
ferent foci: in Sheffield our research concentrated on health research and teach-
ing in the two universities and related engagement with the City Council as well
as local NHS trusts; in Newcastle it included discussion of relationships with
various regional and city agencies seeking to draw on university medical science
strengths for the purposes of economic development or regeneration. In Chapter
9 the key concern is how cultural engagement by universities (whether primarily
social, economic, or purely artistic in objective) takes place through specific sites
or venues within the city, and how this varies between those sites that are located
on or off the university campus. The first half of the chapter provides an over-
view of the link between key university cultural activities and spaces in the two
cities. The second half of the chapter comprises more detailed examples from
both cities in the area of creative media and digital technology practice;
6 Introduction
Newcastle University’s Culture Lab and the Watershed’s Pervasive Media
Studio in which the two universities in Bristol are now partners.
At various points throughout the book we refer to one of a number of ideal
models of universities – e.g. the ‘urban university’, the ‘entrepreneurial univer-
sity’, the ‘civic university’ – that imply varying relationships with the city. In par-
ticular, we are interested in further exploring (specifically in a city setting) the
idea of the civic university, which is more centrally ‘engaged’ in its locality than
universities that effectively just happen to be located in an urban area, and driven
more by the public benefits it generates for society (see Calhoun 2006) than the
business-focused entrepreneurial university. The term civic university has a spe-
cific historical meaning in relation to public universities founded in the nine-
teenth century (Delanty 2002), particularly in industrial cities in England (see
Barnes 1996; Walsh 2009). However, more recently one of us has argued (in a
UK context) in favour of the ‘reinvention’ of the civic university for the current
day, based around principles of a constitutive relationship with the society of
which it is part, the promotion of institution-wide ‘holistic’ engagement, and col-
laborative relationships with other higher education institutions (see Goddard
2009). This concern is taken up more explicitly in the concluding chapter and
related to some of the connecting themes throughout the empirical chapters and
book as a whole regarding the societal, economic and physical dimensions of
relationships between universities and cities.
Part I
Review: international
dimensions
2 The university in the city I:
place and community

Introduction to the university in the city

A key subtext to this book’s focus on the relationship between universities and
cities is the aim of further exploring the notion of a renewed civic university, that
is engaged through research, teaching and public service with the city and region
of which it is part, and draws on this connection to form its identity within the glo-
bal academic community (Goddard 2009). However, regardless of the degree to
which an urban-located university is linked to its surroundings through these activ-
ities, it is safe to assume its presence alone within a city ensures substantial physi-
cal, social, economic and cultural impacts on the urban environment. Therefore,
before proceeding to examine the more active or intentional role of institutions and
academics in the economic and social development of cities or regions, the next
two chapters will review existing literature on these types of institutional impacts
and their relationship to urban development; focusing first on the physical and
community dimensions, and second on the economic dimensions. These chapters
also introduce a range of issues that are found in the empirical cases in the second
part of the book.
Across these two chapters the main level of analysis is the university as an
institution, instead of the smaller academic sub-units on which much of the rest
of the book will concentrate. Although the impacts discussed here are seen to
arise largely from the location of universities in cities, this does not necessarily
denote a disengaged role on the part of the institution. In this first chapter in par-
ticular, the types of impacts covered create tensions and opportunities that the
university leadership has to manage through their institutional relations with
local governments, communities and businesses. Both chapters also highlight the
aggregate social, economic and cultural impacts – either positive or negative – of
higher education students as a group living in the city, which have become the
subject of an expanding literature in human geography. As Russo et al. write:

analysis of the relationship between universities and host communities

should not be limited to the institutional sphere. In spite of their diverse
social backgrounds, higher education students (both undergraduate and post-
graduate) and, to some extent, the rest of the academic community may be
10 Review: international dimensions
described as an urban population that establishes important economic, social,
and cultural relations with other groups, modifying urban landscapes in
specific ways, and ultimately determining the viability and extent of the
knowledge spillover [from the university].
(Russo et al. 2007: 201)

The chapters are international in scope, allowing different territorial contexts for
university–city relations to be reflected. Much of the research referred to is UK-
based due to the geographical focus of the current literature in some of these
areas, but it also draws on material related to North America, continental Europe
and Australia.

Place and community

This first chapter examines perhaps the most fundamental way in which urban-
located universities shape cities; as part of their built environment and urban
social geography. The spatial relationship between university and city is con-
stantly changing due to the active role of higher education institutions (HEIs) in
shaping the urban landscape as property developers. In urban sociology, univer-
sities have been defined alongside institutions such as museums and theatres as
‘auxiliary players’ in city growth processes; secondary to business and politi-
cians in the local coalitions that form around land and property development as
an economic development strategy (Logan and Molotch 1987: 75–6). In some
contexts, however, where a city has a weak property market that does not attract
private investment, universities may have the financial resources to themselves
be major developers. The state-directed expansion of higher education systems
in advanced economies during the twentieth century created an important dynamic
in urban development by enabling university campuses to expand substantially
through the building of new facilities for teaching, research, administration and
student housing (Wiewel and Perry 2008). For older universities (particularly in
Europe) with a historical location close to the centre of their city, this growth has
often led to spatial fragmentation, as pressure on space forces new rounds of prop-
erty expansion or redevelopment to be located in less costly suburban areas with a
disconnect from the city core (van der Wusten 1998; Larkham 2000; Russo and
Tatjer 2007; Wiewel and Perry 2008).
The physical arrangement of an urban university’s estate can also affect the
institution’s relationship to the city. Different models of planning vary according
to the degree to which a university’s buildings are centred on one or more cam-
puses, or are more dispersed and integrated into the rest of the city (Edwards
2000; Larkham 2000; van Heur 2010). The campus tradition, that originated in
England but has become most prominent in the USA (Turner 1984), is associated
by Bender (1988a: 3) with ‘antiurbanism’, although it has become a feature of
some universities in larger cities as well as smaller ‘college towns’ (Perry and
Wiewel 2005; Gumprecht 2007). A campus not only allows for functional con-
centration of higher education buildings, but also creates a ‘semi-cloistered’
 Place and community 11
(Bender 1988b) space in the midst of larger cities, dedicated to meeting the work
and leisure requirements of student and academic communities. This space has
its own distinctive character in relation to its surrounding districts and leaves a
clearer imprint on the topography of cities than more integrated models of uni-
versity planning. Hence, the ‘campus’ can be taken to signify the enduring desire
for universities to form their own self-contained reflective ‘place’, not just for
the consumption of higher education services but also for ‘attendance and partic-
ipation in a certain sort of cultural and social life’ by its young students (Kumar
1997: 29). For universities in cities, however, the separation from society that
the campus model potentially engenders can be a source of tensions with their
civic mission to engage with surrounding communities that have little direct con-
nection to higher education, but may be directly affected by their geographic
expansion.
An increasing amount of attention is beginning to be paid in geography and
planning to these questions about the physical development of the university,
although this work has yet to form into a coherent literature (van Heur 2010).
The topic has been explored most fully in two recent collections edited by David
Perry and Wim Wiewel, which use property development by universities as a
lens through which to view wider social and economic elements of their relations
with cities. The first of these collections, The University as an Urban Developer,
consists of case studies solely from North America, while the second, Global
Universities and Urban Development, has an international comparative scope. In
the introduction to the first of these books, Perry and Wiewel (2005) conceptually
frame university real estate development practice as a matter of having to recon-
cile the often competing dynamics of, on the one hand, meeting the constantly-
growing requirements for space and facilities of their internal constituencies (e.g.
students, academics) related to the core activities of teaching and research, and
on the other hand, ensuring they act in a responsible way towards their external
constituencies. They outline this ‘external logic’ along the following lines:

Because universities are among the largest landowners and employers in cit-
ies, as well as major consumers of private goods and public services, they
have a host of external constituents. Both indirectly, in light of the institu-
tion’s education mission, but quite directly and dramatically, in terms of the
university’s physical location, economic relations, and political demands,
these constituencies often assert every bit the same level of claims on the
university as they do on the firm, the church, or public agencies in the city.
Therefore the role of the urban university is an important and complex one –
mixing the institutional demands of both academy and city.
(Perry and Wiewel 2005: 5–6)

In the rest of this chapter we will adopt this distinction between the university’s
internal and external ‘logics’ or ‘constituencies’ to inform our review of the
emerging literature in this area. We divide this into three sections that correspond
to distinct areas in this emerging literature: a mainly North American-focused
12 Review: international dimensions
literature on university and community relations around campus development;
the social impacts of large numbers of students living off-campus in certain city
districts; and university participation in physical economic development or regen-
eration projects within cities.

Community and campus development

The ethos that universities have responsibilities to their ‘external’ urban constitu-
encies is particularly strong in North America, where it is reflected in character-
istically American notions such as service learning (Zlotkowski 2007) or ‘the
scholarship of engagement’ (Boyer 1996), but also in the prominence of commu-
nity development concerns in the campus development practices of some HEIs.
These community relation concerns are shared by urban universities located in
other social and political contexts, such as the divided cities of Belfast (see Boal
and Logan 1998; Gaffikin 2008) and Jerusalem (see Shachar 1998; Yacobi
2008), but relevant case studies from North America are more common in the
current literature and more rooted in a rhetoric of community or civic engage-
ment. Bromley puts this discourse in a wider context:

The ‘local stakeholder’ concept is drawn from contemporary US community

development parlance. It groups colleges and universities together with other
local institutions and interest groups which are not footloose and must rely
on the local market. This grouping links them with the municipality, the
chamber of commerce, the local school district, local houses of worship and
community centres, neighbourhood associations and community develop-
ment corporations, and any locally-based corporations like savings banks or
utilities. Recognition of stakeholder status thus serves as a rallying call, both
to commit resources and to form strategic alliances with other organisations.
(Bromley 2006: 11)

This concern with community relations is undoubtedly based on a degree of

‘enlightened self-interest’ on the part of the university, in which working to
improve the local off-campus environment, particularly when the university is
located amongst relatively deprived urban neighbourhoods, brings benefits in
terms of the university’s ability to attract students or academic staff, and
increases the chances that campus expansion projects will gain consent from sur-
rounding communities (Weber et al. 2005; Bromley 2006). There are, however,
several additional explanations possible for the strength of the community orien-
tation in North American HEI land and property development practice. For
instance, it could represent the institutional mission of the different types of pub-
lic university or college that comprise part of the mixed US higher education sys-
tem (Cohen 1998). This tradition originated with the Land-Grant Institutions that
were founded in each state following the First Morrill Act of 1862, predomi-
nately to meet the needs of agriculture and rural development, and now survive
as large, socially-conscious state universities typically located outside major
 Place and community 13
cities (see Kellogg Commission 1999). The US higher education system has
grown to encompass many other public universities and institutions like commu-
nity colleges that are located in larger cities, and whose public mission is
reflected in their concern for urban development. For example, Bromley and
Kent (2006) study the considerable recent involvement in neighbourhood revitali-
sation of four institutions in Ohio’s public university system that are located in
some of the state’s different metropolitan areas – the University of Cincinnati
(Cincinnati-Hamilton), the University of Akron (Cleveland-Akron), Youngstown
State University (Youngstown-Warren), and Ohio State University, the original
Land Grant Institution (which can now also be classified as an urban university
due to the growth of Columbus, its host city and state capital, across the twentieth
century). In contrast to the geographical neutrality of higher education policy in
other countries, the metropolitan identity of some universities was formally
recognised in the USA through proposals during the 1960s and 1970s to desig-
nate a system of publicly-engaged ‘urban grant’ universities as a counterpart to
the rural-focused land grant institutions (Bromley 2006: 15). Although this plan
was never realised on a national level, Bromley and Kent (2006: 50) explain how
the same concern with declining industrial cities led to Ohio’s state legislature
creating an Urban University Programme (UUP) in 1980. They write of this
programme that its:

significance . . . is not based on the volume of the funding . . . but on the iden-
tification of eight public universities as ‘urban’ and having a special respon-
sibility for urban revitalisation. Conceptually the UUP was a master-stroke
in an extended period of deindustrialisation – drawing the attention of politi-
cians, campus leaders, educational administrators and scholars.
(Bromley and Kent 2006: 74)

Similarly, Bunnell and Lawson (2006: 41) describe how Portland State
University has been able to redevelop its campus and an adjacent part of the city,
despite not having large sources of finance at its disposal, by using its status as a
locally-embedded institution to enrol other large public agencies in this project
and having the ‘institutional stamina’ to ‘sustain the planning process over a
period of many years’. Barlow (1998) also describes how Concordia University
in Canada adopted an explicit urban university mission to differentiate itself
from other HEIs in the city of Montreal. Not all public urban universities, how-
ever, are equally committed to taking on this wider role in revitalising their city
(Bromley and Kent 2006), and conversely the literature shows that some large
private institutions (that may typically have more discretionary funding to spend
in this area) also invest heavily in connections with local communities (Bunnell
and Lawson 2006). The practical challenges of surrounding inner city decline
compel a response from private universities located in cities as much as it does
from public universities (Nijman 1998; Rodin 2005).
Another possible factor behind the commitment to this agenda in some US
institutions is the influence of institutional leadership (Austrian and Norton
14 Review: international dimensions
2005; Wiewel and Perry 2005). Wiewel and Perry (2008) note that one of the
major differences between the case studies in their two books was the relative
importance attributed to individual university leaders (normally the institution’s
president) in the North American cases, compared to those from the rest of the
world (covering locations across Europe, Asia and South or Central America) in
which ‘institutional priorities and actions appear to reflect broad, ongoing plan-
ning processes more than individual agendas’ (ibid.: 316). This is particularly the
case in European countries where the state either owns the land on which public
universities are built or regulates its use (Groenendijk 1998; Haila 2008; Peel
2008). Bromley and Kent (2006: 75) observe that the four Ohioan universities
they examine in the study mentioned above are all ‘associated with strong, stable
institutional leadership which makes community outreach and the revitalisation
of neighbourhoods around the campus major long-term institutional priorities’
that do not ‘get lost among the many, many different objectives and priorities of
a large complex institution’. The importance of individual university leaders in
North America also suggests that the strength of key inter-personal relations, for
instance with local politicians or community leaders, is of greater influence in
gaining support for development projects and negotiating any barriers that may
arise in the planning process (see Wiewel and Perry 2005; Bromley and Kent
2006). However, the individual preferences and personal networks of university
leaders will only be of consequence for as long as they are in these executive
positions. As Wiewel and Perry (2005: 304) conclude ‘the highest achievement . . .
[of leadership] may be to inculcate the vision, objectives, and approach in an
organization so it can be implemented consistently and steadily’. An example of
this in the literature is Judith Rodin’s (2005) account of the transformation of the
private University of Pennsylvania under her leadership as president between
1994 and 2004. This describes a project – the West Philadelphia Initiative – to
revitalise this deprived part of the city surrounding its campus, which aimed to
involve the whole institution. The project included various university-supported
programmes to improve local neighbourhoods, housing, retail and cultural ame-
nities, public schools, and business and employment opportunities (by directing
contracts and purchasing), but also sought to ‘make the link from practice to the-
ory’ (ibid.: 247) by extending this engagement back into academic programmes,
most notably by developing interdisciplinary expertise in applied urban research
as part of the institution’s identity.
Notwithstanding these positive stories of ‘enlightened self-interest’, public insti-
tutional missions and committed leadership, tensions with communities around
university building projects are still commonplace. Several of the case studies fea-
tured in The University as Urban Developer highlight this by explaining the devel-
opment of projects as the result of a longer term process that involved periods of
tension and conflict with the community leading to the adoption of a more conci-
liatory stance on the part of the university (e.g. Deitrick and Soska 2005; Webber
2005). Marcuse and Potter’s (2005) account of Columbia University’s attempts
during the 1980s and 1990s to convert a derelict building (the Audubon Ballroom)
in the Washington Heights district of Manhattan into a biomedical science and
 Place and community 15
technology facility also falls into this category (also see Zukin 1995). This project
encountered opposition from African American groups because of the historical
significance of this building (as the site of Malcolm X’s assassination), and also
required the university to ensure the development did not have negative impacts
on the local Dominican population that had become the largest resident group in
this area. In this case the project went ahead with the business incubator opening
in 1995, thus meeting the university’s requirement for more space in which scien-
tific and commercialisation activities can be carried out in the city. Marcuse and
Potter (2005) also conclude that the project has for the most part been a success
from a community perspective: the new facility helped revitalise the local neigh-
bourhood, it created retail space that served local residents, and steps to memoria-
lise Malcolm X in the site have been taken, although they also note that some
related plans (for a community centre and museum) had been delayed.
In summary, this section has examined the importance of community relations
in processes of university campus development and expansion, using the case of
public and private universities in North American cities. As well as discussing
factors such as the strength of community stakeholdership and institutional or
political leadership in this particular context, it has also highlighted the more
explicit ‘urban’ identity of city-based universities in North America. The concern
with ‘external’ groups that this status denotes may often be based on wanting to
improve the immediate environment in which the university is located or to avoid
conflict with local communities, but nevertheless indicates the potential of uni-
versities as urban development actors. The third section in this chapter returns to
this theme when considering the involvement of universities in knowledge-based
economic development and regeneration building projects.

Students and city communities

This second section focuses on the community impacts, not of the university per
se, but its associated student population living ‘off-campus’ as residents in the
city. This connects to the overall theme of the chapter in its concern with the way
that an ‘internal’ expansionary logic within higher education – in this case a trend
towards greater student numbers – has an ‘external’ effect on the use of the urban
environment which is manifested in the issue of student housing.
The effects of temporary student residents on the social fabric of large cities
does not generally appear to be a prominent issue in the literature on North
American community and university relations discussed above. Bromley (2006:
13) suggests that many US urban universities take either the form of ‘enclave’
institutions ‘with a high proportion of students residing on campus’ and ‘consid-
erable self-sufficiency of campus services’, or ‘commuter’ institutions with ‘most
students and faculty living out in the suburbs, so contact with surrounding neigh-
bourhoods is mainly ‘‘drive-through’’’. Instead, the closest equivalent to the
student-dominated areas of many European cities can perhaps be found in the
long-established American phenomenon of the college town; normally a smaller
city with a large HEI where, in the broad definition offered by Gumprecht (2003:
16 Review: international dimensions
51) ‘a college or university and the cultures it creates exert a dominant influence
over the character of the community’. Although the high proportion of students
in the population can cause some tensions with permanent residents, the central-
ity of higher education to the economic as well as cultural life of these cities and
towns – along with the widespread use of the ‘campus [and its facilities] as a
public space’ by the whole community – indicates that town and gown are less
likely to be polarised here than in other settings (Gumprecht 2003, 2007).
In other national contexts, by contrast, tensions between universities and local
communities are often most heightened around the large numbers of students liv-
ing in residential areas. This is particularly true of the UK where it is customary
for middle-class domestic higher education students to attend university away from
their hometown (Holdsworth 2009) and, following an initial year in university-
provided accommodation, live in rented multi-occupancy properties that are typi-
cally concentrated in areas near to the university (Allinson 2006; Duke-Williams
2009; Munro et al. 2009). The government-promoted expansion of higher educa-
tion student numbers over the previous twenty years (see Chapter 6), combined
with a lack of any accompanying national planning policy on student housing to
manage the impacts of this growth on local communities (Smith 2008), has led to
certain parts of cities, including Leeds, Birmingham, Nottingham and Newcastle,
and even smaller towns with a university, such as Loughborough, becoming inhab-
ited by increasingly large numbers of temporary student residents (Hubbard 2008;
Munro et al. 2009). The high demand for multi-occupancy rental accommodation
in these areas creates the conditions for large parts of the available housing stock
to be purchased by individual landlords or agencies with the purpose of letting to
short-term student tenants, which can reinforce the position of the neighbourhood
as a student area by pricing homeowners out of the market and reducing the attrac-
tiveness of the area to families and other groups (Allinson 2006; Hubbard 2008).
A mainly UK-centred strand of research in urban social geography has
emerged (thus far largely separate from the literature on the university’s campus
development reviewed above) that examines these economic and social impacts
by adapting concepts from the established field of gentrification studies. Hence,
the neologism ‘studentification’ has been coined to describe the process through
which urban neighbourhoods are transformed by a growing student population
(Smith and Holt 2007; Hubbard 2008, 2009; Smith 2008, 2009). The distinctive
consumption practices of middle and upper class students, particularly around
night-time leisure activities, can form ‘exclusive geographies’ within their host
cities based on the provision of a ‘popular culture infrastructure’ of bars and
nightclubs specifically dedicated to this market (Chatterton 1999). It has been
proposed that young students from relatively affluent backgrounds become
‘apprentice gentrifiers’, developing cultural capital during their first experiences
of living away from home that they carry over into their future behaviour within
urban housing markets (Smith and Holt 2007). Framing this discussion in the
terms of gentrification has meant that much of the work on this subject has
emphasised the negative social impacts associated with an influx of transient and
seasonal student residents on community cohesion (i.e. inflated property prices,
 Place and community 17
physical neglect of houses, anti-social behaviour, attraction of crime, withdrawal
from the area during holidays, local shops and services becoming orientated
towards student lifestyles, etc.) (e.g. Kenyon 1997). However, others have
argued for a more nuanced position that acknowledges the opportunity for eco-
nomic and cultural revitalisation of depressed neighbourhoods that student resi-
dents potentially offer (Macintyre 2003; Allinson 2006; Hubbard 2008) (also
Chapter 3). Other commentators have questioned whether studentification should
be understood as a form of gentrification at all. For instance, Bromley (2006: 6)
notes that studentification does not generally lead to a physical improvement of
the neighbourhood. Hubbard (2008: 324) also argues that segments of what is a
heterogeneous student population (also Christie 2007) could equally be consid-
ered as relatively socially and economically marginalised in the cities where they
live. A large share of higher education students have to take part-time jobs to
support themselves, typically in retail or leisure sectors with relatively poor pay
and working conditions (Munro et al. 2009).
A salient issue here is the institutional role of the university itself in the for-
mation of these student geographies. For Smith (2009: 1796), a fundamental
cause of studentification processes in the UK has been that ‘the growth in stu-
dent recruitment has not been matched by the strategic development of univer-
sity halls of residence or provision of student services’ leaving the surplus to be
absorbed by local communities with largely unplanned social effects. The shift
to most UK universities only being able to directly supply accommodation to a
minority of their students can also be linked to a decline in them taking a wide-
ranging pastoral responsibility for their students’ wellbeing, which maybe now
just associated with more traditional collegiate university models such as Oxford
and Cambridge. In a paper on student communities in two continental European
cities (Barcelona and Lille), Russo and Tatjer (2007) argue that there is an obser-
vable trend towards the ‘decoupling’ of students’ educational spaces (i.e. univer-
sity campuses) from their main residential and leisure spaces. Depending on the
institutional circumstances, this can take different forms: for instance, universi-
ties located in a city centre where students can no longer afford to live, or con-
versely the case of suburban-located universities whose students prefer to live
closer to the city centre for lifestyle reasons. However, in contrast to this picture
of a growing disconnect from involvement in student residencies, universities
continue to have to meet housing requirements for a possibly growing number of
both domestic and international students, and the attractiveness of this accommo-
dation may be important to the competitiveness of institutions in being able to
recruit prospective students. With declining state funding for higher education
placing restrictions on the number of large-scale capital projects that universities
can self-finance, there is a growing trend in the UK and internationally for them
to partner with private investors to enable new student housing developments
(Macintyre 2003; Fincher and Shaw 2009; Hubbard 2009). According to
Macintyre (2003: 115–116) these arrangements can follow different models,
including the university guaranteeing a supply of future student tenants (and
therefore a relatively low-risk fixed return for the investor), or more speculative
18 Review: international dimensions
developments by private companies aimed at the wider student rental market in
which the university may not be directly involved. It is the second of these options
that Hubbard (2009) is concerned with in a paper focused on the introduction of
new purpose-built housing facilities catering to well-off post first year undergrad-
uate students in the English university town of Loughborough. This type of off-
campus development has become common in recent years across cities in the UK
(also Chatterton 2010), and has been welcomed by universities and local authori-
ties as part of their strategies to address the over-concentration of students living
in the existing rental sector of some neighbourhoods (Hubbard 2009: 1909). It
may also be a mechanism of regeneration, particularly if private sector investment
can be leveraged into areas of cities that otherwise would not offer attractive prop-
erty market opportunities (Macintyre 2003). However, Hubbard (2009: 1920)
finds that in Loughborough these student-only developments – in some ways akin
to ‘gated communities’ – seem to be deepening the social segregation of students
from local communities that is associated with already existing patterns of
student-based gentrification. Similarly, Fincher and Shaw (2009) show that the
University of Melbourne’s reliance on this type of private development to house
increasing numbers of new international students in a mainly non-residential area
close to the University has the inadvertent effect of separating them from full inte-
gration into the city, and also reinforces their cultural distance from Australian
students.
This section has reviewed a growing literature on the social effects of students
living off-campus as one of the main impacts of the expansion of higher educa-
tion on cities in the UK and rest of Europe. This problem seems to have arisen in
part because of the relative neglect of student housing by universities and govern-
ments. More recently, efforts to address the problem have involved private com-
panies in the building of large student accommodation developments, but the
wider issue of social segregation between students and local residents remain. We
return to the theme of student geographies in the next chapter, where their largely
more positive impacts on the economic and cultural life of the city are discussed.

Universities and knowledge-based urban development

This third and final section will cover the impacts of universities’ involvement
in physical campus development and wider off-campus urban regeneration proj-
ects that relate to their new role in supporting the transition to post-industrial
local economies based on science, technology and creativity. Hence it follows
Madanipour (2011) in emphasising the often overlooked materiality of the
knowledge economy and its spatial expression within cities.
The contemporary expansion of university campuses is often related to the
internal logic of their growing aspirations in the field of commercialisation and
business development, which may require additional scientific and administrative
units (for instance, with Marcuse and Potter’s (2005) Columbia University study
cited above). Van Heur (2010) argues that the design of hybrid higher education
buildings, such as business or creative industry incubators, can help facilitate
 Place and community 19
interactions between academics and entrepreneurs or firm employees, and make
the campus more permeable to members of the public. This form of expansion
may, however, also contribute to the ‘spatial fragmentation’ of urban universities
discussed earlier, as the larger-scale scientific and engineering facilities needed
for industry-related research often cannot be accommodated easily in central city
locations (van der Wusten 1998: 10). At the same time, universities have also
become more heavily involved in local economic development partnerships,
where they can act as ‘planning animateurs’ by mobilising other actors (local
governments and planning authorities, private developers, etc.) around specific
urban development projects (Benneworth and Hospers 2007a).
The most-established and globally-widespread form of university participation
in these types of projects is through off-campus science and technology park
developments (Castells and Hall 1994; van Winden et al. 2012). Although science
parks have a clear economic rationale, in providing space where tenant firms
(often including university spin-outs) in high technology intensive sectors can
co-locate in geographical proximity to academic or other research institutes, the
empirical evidence for their effectiveness in encouraging links between industry
and universities or stimulating employment growth in high-technology sectors is
inconsistent (e.g. Massey et al. 1992; Vedovello 1997; Shearmur and Doloreux
2000; Siegel et al. 2003; cf. Phillimore 1999; Löfsten and Lindelöf 2002; Yang
et al. 2009). Castells and Hall (1994) also conclude that planned ‘technopoles’ (a
concept encompassing technology parks and larger ‘science cities’) have gener-
ally – in varying historical economic and political contexts – been unsuccessful in
driving new economic development through technological innovation, whilst many
large metropolitan regions have continued to flourish as centres of innovation.
Instead, the main significance of science parks is perhaps more often as opportuni-
ties for commercial property developments involving universities, but typically led
and managed by public sector partners with the goal of attracting private sector
investment (Massey et al. 1992; Castells and Hall 1994; Shearmur and Doloreux
2000). In the past, science parks have typically been built towards the fringes of the
city or town of which the related university is part. More recently, however, van
Winden et al. (2012) have proposed that the type of ‘knowledge spaces’ formerly
exemplified by large out-of-city science and technology parks are undergoing an
‘urban turn’ towards sites that are more mixed in function and integrated into the
fabric of the city. In their definition, these urban knowledge spaces include science
and technology locations often based around universities, but also sites for creative
industries activity, such as ‘cultural quarters’ or ‘media hubs’ in which higher edu-
cation participation may be more peripheral and supportive in function (also see
Charles 2011). These will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 9. Through the
development of these urban sites, universities can contribute more widely to the
physical and symbolic regeneration of cities, particularly when this regeneration is
seen as part of a move towards a post-industrial knowledge-based economy and
society (Yigitcanlar and Velibeyoglu 2008; Johnston 2010).
Physical development projects also offer an arena in which universities can
build stronger relationships with both community and business interests in the
20 Review: international dimensions
development of their cities (Russo et al. 2007). However, Benneworth et al.
(2010) show that, while on the surface knowledge-based urban development
projects would appear to offer mutual benefits for university and city, in practice
their interests often do not perfectly align. The optimal strategy for the expansion
of a campus from the university’s standpoint may not, in terms of location or
function, coincide with projects that have an urban development or regeneration
impact targeted to the needs of the city. Equally, the city authorities may have
‘unrealistic ambitions’ about the impact that university involvement in these
projects can have, particularly when these are based on common policy dis-
courses around the growth potential of new industries such as biotechnology
(ibid.: 1617). A further problem identified in the literature refers to the longer-
term economic development benefits for the city that are related to a university’s
role as a land developer. In the conclusion to their book of North American case
studies, Wiewel and Perry note that:

In the knowledge economy, universities are more important than ever, but
in most of these cases neither the city nor the university appears to have
wrestled with what this means for the role of the university and the physical
and real estate consequences thereof. Rather projects proceed in a piecemeal
fashion, and cities treat the university like any other organization that needs
building permits and other municipal services. In most cases contracts are
project- and task-orientated and episodic, rather than continuous, compre-
hensive, and strategic.
(Wiewel and Perry 2005: 310–311)

Similarly, Benneworth and Hospers (2007a) argue that, while universities can
take a leading (‘animateur’) role in development projects to overcome weak or
fragmented institutional systems in economically less successful cities or regions,
this more often results in the development of ad hoc networks or partnerships
related only to that specific project, rather than encouraging a more enduring ben-
eficial transformation of governance arrangements.
This brief review of the emerging literature in this area highlights a number of
issues that will be developed further in our empirical work and the concluding
chapter in the second half of this book. All the cases we feature – whether relat-
ing to urban sustainability, public health, or links with the creative sector –
include a physical dimension to the relationship between university and city.

Conclusion
This chapter has examined the role of universities (and associated groups such as
higher education students) in shaping the built environment and urban social
geography of cities. Although this chapter has been framed underneath the rubric
of social and economic impacts that inevitably follow from the presence of HEIs
in cities (in this case driven by their need to expand and meet extra demands
placed upon them in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries), the
 Place and community 21
university has to actively manage these impacts through institutional relations
with various other organisations and groups. In particular, the chapter has high-
lighted the social tensions that can form between universities and local commu-
nities around issues of campus expansion and student residents. Hence the
community engagement of universities covered here can to a large degree be
interpreted as ‘enlightened self-interest’. Chapter 5 will return to this theme
when it considers the drivers and barriers to academics and institutions becoming
more actively engaged in the social development of cities. More specific issues
covered in this chapter (e.g. campus development, the link between university
building projects and local economic development) will be picked up in different
parts of the second half of the book. However, before this, the related economic
impacts of the location of universities in cities will be covered in the next
chapter.
3 The university in the city II:
economic impacts

Introduction
As a large-scale consumer of inputs (labour, goods, services) and generator
of outputs (skills, know-how, local attractiveness) the university cannot fail
to be a major factor in metropolitan economic development. Even without a
proactive, explicit role in promoting local economic activity, the results of
its policies and decisions are likely to impact heavily on the metropolitan
economy.
(Felsenstein 1996: 1566)

This second chapter on the impacts of universities located in cities concentrates

on the more ‘passive’ economic benefits that cities and regions gain from the
presence of higher education institutions (HEIs). As the quote above highlights,
higher education can be an important component of an urban economy even
before universities’ more active role in supporting innovation (which will be dis-
cussed in the next chapter) is considered. This effect has become more wide-
spread with the expansion of national higher education systems and the
establishment of universities in places previously unrepresented in the sector.
The chapter covers three types of economic impact: those related to university
employment and expenditure in local economies; the positive effect of student
and academic populations on the city environment as a ‘creative’ place to live and
work; and the human capital effects linked to universities helping to attract and
retain graduate workers in regional labour markets.

Economic impact multipliers

As this book will go on to discuss in detail, the teaching and research carried out
within universities are vital to the functioning of modern economies in myriad
ways. However, the most direct tangible economic benefits that universities have
on their surrounding locality are perhaps those that relate to employment and
expenditure effects they generate, rather than their main outputs of education ser-
vices or knowledge produced through research. There are three particular features
of universities which ensure that through these employment and expenditure
 Economic impacts 23
effects alone they will be an integral part of an urban economy. First, they are typi-
cally large and labour-intensive organisations (Armstrong et al. 1997) which
means that they are often one of the biggest single employers within a city or
region, alongside local governments, healthcare providers and large private com-
panies (Glasson 2003). The range of jobs they create (including those that relate to
management and human resources, administration, technical support, estates and
maintenance, on-campus retail and leisure, as well as academic functions) cover
different occupations and pay-scales, but include a high proportion of skilled and
professional classes. Second, universities will also purchase varied goods and ser-
vices from local and non-local businesses, ranging in scale from regular expendi-
ture on small items (catering, office supplies, etc.) to larger spends on, for
instance, construction projects (Armstrong et al. 1997). As the previous chapter
showed, universities are institutions in receipt of public and other funding, but
typically with the autonomy to spend on large-scale building and land develop-
ment projects within their city. Third, most universities attract large numbers of
domestic, and now increasingly also international, students from outside their
region to live within the locality. Students bring money to the university directly
through fees and government grants for tuition (the income from which is recycled
through university salaries and expenditure), but as discussed in the previous
chapter they also create distinctive housing and consumption requirements within
a city. The university will only partly meet these needs itself through, for example,
on-campus services or providing accommodation to some students, with the
remainder producing demand for the local private sector. Universities can also
attract large numbers of visitors to their city or region for events such as confer-
ences or graduation ceremonies.
These sorts of ‘passive’ effects on local economies are represented in the
regional development literature on universities through a genre of research known
as impact multiplier studies. This methodological approach uses available data on
what is referred to as ‘direct’ economic effects (i.e. the number of people actually
employed by the university, its levels of expenditure) and through different mod-
elling techniques reach an estimate of the ‘indirect’ and ‘induced’ monetary
effects on the local economy at a given geographical scale, for instance, the
second-round expenditure of university wages being spent in the surrounding
region, or the extra local jobs that are dependent on income from the university as
a client. From this modelling (that needs to take into account local contingencies
such as the numbers of employers that live in the designated study area and their
wage levels), a ‘multiplier’ value is derived to express the ratio of extra income or
employment created from the direct input. The level of multiplier varies consider-
ably between studies, depending not only on the case in question, but also the pre-
cise methodology used.
Huggins and Cooke’s (1997) study of Cardiff University’s impact on its city
and regional economy for the year 1994–1995 gives a good illustration of the
kind of more credible results that studies of this type can produce. For employ-
ment, they estimate that on top of to the 2,747 people directly employed by the
University at the time, an additional 604 jobs were supported in the Cardiff area
24 Review: international dimensions
(3,351 in total) and a further 55 in the slightly larger South East Wales region
(3,406 total). This means that the multiplier values derived from their modelling
are 1.22 for the city and 1.24 for the wider region. For expenditure, they estimate
that the University’s direct output in Cardiff of around £64.3 million and in South
East Wales of £67.1 million, translated into ‘gross local output’ (not including
deductions for taxes and pension contributions) of £97.2 million and £102.1 mil-
lion respectively. This gives multipliers of 1.51 for Cardiff and 1.52 for South
East Wales. Variations on the Keynesian multiplier model employed by Huggins
and Cooke (1997) have been used in a number of other peer-reviewed studies of
UK institutions with comparable results (see Bleaney et al. 1992; Armstrong
et al. 1997; Glasson 2003). From a survey of university impact studies in the
USA, Siegfried et al. (2007: 553) find that the median values for employment and
expenditure multipliers are higher at 1.8 and 1.7 respectively.
However, the findings of impact multiplier studies in general should be treated
with caution. The majority of these studies are commissioned and published by
universities for essentially promotional purposes (i.e. to justify public expenditure
on higher education) and are, therefore, prone to exaggeration in terms of the mag-
nitude of multiplier on actual income or employment and the ways in which con-
clusions are inferred and presented from the results (Beck et al. 1995; Siegfried
et al. 2007). There are also considerable methodological challenges associated
with accurately modelling what is in reality an extremely complex system of
income flows and interrelationships within local economies. These are discussed
by Siegfried et al. (2007), who particularly emphasise the problems of specifying
an adequate counterfactual; i.e. the true loss to the local economy if the university
went out of business or re-located, assuming that, for instance, in this hypothetical
situation, some students would move to other institutions in the same city or
region (also Beck et al. 1995; Blackwell et al. 2002). A further set of methodolo-
gical challenges relate to student expenditure within the local economy because,
unlike university expenditure and staff numbers, no official data will be available.
Some studies, therefore, carry out supplementary surveys of student spending pat-
terns in the local economy, which include estimation of how many students live in
the study area that would not do otherwise if they did not attend the university
(e.g. Beck et al. 1995; Huggins and Cooke 1997; Steinacker 2005).
The figures for income and employment generated by these impact studies are
particular to the time (financial year) and place (university and its local economic
context) of the case to which they refer. Hence, as Armstrong et al. (1997: 343)
argue, the way that economic impacts are conceptualised in these models, in
terms of the pathways through which different sources of revenue feed into the
local economy, are likely to be of greater general academic interest than the
actual results. Impact multiplier studies can also shed light on the geography of
these patterns. A fundamental step in the methodology of a study is to define the
geographical unit for which the university’s impact will be estimated, which may
depend either on the scale at which the required data is available and/or the pre-
ference of the commissioning party (e.g. the university client). As a general rule,
the figure for total income and employment generated will be higher the larger
 Economic impacts 25
the study area. However, because more of a university’s expenditure is likely to
remain in its home city or region than move to other individual cities or regions
in the same country, this figure will increase at a diminishing rate as the study
area expands (Beck et al. 1995). Steinacker (2005) demonstrates that employ-
ment and expenditure multiplier effects may also be concentrated at the smaller
scale of particular neighbourhoods or individual cities within larger metropolitan
conurbations. The size and type of place in which the university is located will
also make a difference to the patterns of economic impact. Although no systemic
research seems to have been done to verify the widespread applicability of this
comparison, the various case studies and commentaries within the university eco-
nomic impact literature do propose several differences between universities in
large cities or metropolitan areas and those located in smaller cities or towns. For
instance, more of a university’s indirect economic impacts are likely to be cap-
tured within large cities (i.e. higher multiplier value), because the larger and more
diverse local economy will be able to provide a bigger share of the university’s
required goods and services (Felsenstein 1996). In many cases, a higher propor-
tion of students and staff will also live within a large city. However, the impact
related to the presence of a university is likely to represent a bigger share of local
economic activity and employment in smaller cities or towns, even if the overall
effect is smaller (also Goldstein and Drucker 2006). The paradigmatic case of this
may be the American ‘college town’ mentioned in the previous chapter, where
much local economic activity and employment as well as cultural life is related
to a large HEI and the students it attracts (Gumprecht 2003). The difference can
also frame interpretation of results for UK universities, such as Lancaster or
Oxford, away from major metropolitan areas (see Armstrong et al. 1997; Glasson
2003). However, larger cities are more likely to have multiple higher education
institutions. The implications of this are not often addressed in impact multiplier
studies that typically focus on single institutions. As Beck et al. (1995: 251) show
the economic impacts of an urban or regional ‘system’ of universities will not
simply be equal to the sum of the impacts of its constituent institutions or cam-
puses, because of the interrelationships that exist between them, and chance that
in the counterfactual situation of a university disappearing, the remaining institu-
tions would likely absorb some of its students and staff. Finally, several papers
suggest that, while the short-term economic impacts of universities related to
expenditure and employment may be relatively more important in smaller cities,
this is balanced against the likelihood that the ‘long-run’ economic benefits of
universities in terms of contributing to the local labour supply will be higher in
large cities because of the greater job opportunities that may encourage students
to stay in that region following graduation (Beck et al. 1995; Felsenstein 1996;
Steinacker 2005). These ‘human capital’ impacts, which are not normally incor-
porated within impact multiplier studies (although see Blackwell et al. 2002),
will be discussed below.
In summary, impact multiplier studies bring notice to the considerable size of
employment and expenditure related to universities and their student populations
within local economies, and also indicate how this can follow different geographical
26 Review: international dimensions
patterns depending on the location of the university in question. These impacts are
of particular importance, because universities are ‘anchor’ institutions in the local
economy; extremely unlikely to move to another city or region, and less prone than
most other organisational actors in the economy (e.g. private firms) to stop operat-
ing or experience a severe contraction in size caused by an economic downturn, at
least in the short term. Hence, universities can increase the ‘resilience’ of a city or
region by providing relatively steady employment and expenditure that buffers
against the worst effects of recessions. However, we would advise against placing
too much significance on the findings of impact multiplier studies, not only due to
the methodological uncertainty that may surround them, but also because of the
implication they can carry that the existence of universities can be justified just by
the direct and indirect economic effects that are attributable to their size, labour-
intensiveness and ability to attract students into the area. In some respects, these
studies treat higher education as if it is any other industry, and focus only on those
monetary income and employment effects that are quantifiable within an economic
model (Kelly et al. 2011). By contrast, other outputs to the economy, such as knowl-
edge and skills that are less easily measured, are not typically included in these
models.

Academic communities and creative places

The preceding section touched on the economic impact of students and university
staff living in a city through the income and employment effects related to their
consumption of various goods and services. This section explores arguments
about the less tangible economic benefits that these groups may bring through
their positive effect on the social and cultural environment of cities. This section
does not cover interaction between academics or students with the cultural sector
that takes place through university research, teaching and engagement (covered
in Chapter 9), but only the more ‘passive’ effects they have (predominately off-
campus) as local populations.
The cultural amenities of a city have taken on an added significance in recent
theories of local economic development that emphasise the importance of the
wider social attributes of a place in attracting and retaining highly-skilled work-
ers. These arguments are most closely identified with Richard Florida’s (2002)
influential Creative Class thesis. This posits that the competitiveness of cities in
the contemporary economy is related to their stock of ‘talented’ workers in certain
‘creative’ occupations, who choose to live in a place as much for lifestyle consid-
erations – particularly an open and tolerant social environment – as for the avail-
ability of employment opportunities. Florida’s (2002) work has drawn numerous
statistical correlations between US metropolitan region economic performance
(particularly related to high-technology industry), levels of human capital (talent),
and proxy values for social tolerance and diversity. Universities fit into this narra-
tive not only through their role in generating human capital (discussed below), but
also through the perception that their presence can help foster an appealing cos-
mopolitan, liberal and creative milieu (Florida 2002; Gertler and Vinodrai 2005;
 Economic impacts 27
Florida et al. 2006). Academics and those in associated occupations, such as
scientists and engineers, artists, designers and architects, are also classified as
‘core members’ of the Creative Class (Florida 2002: 69). Indeed, one criticism
made of Florida is that his definition of creative occupations overlaps too much
with groups characterised by higher education attainment (Markusen 2006).
Florida has himself directly addressed this issue with colleagues in the mono-
graph The University and the Creative Economy. Here they argue that the previ-
ous focus on universities in regional development studies, as agents of technology
transfer (whilst still important) has been overemphasised in comparison to ‘the
university’s even more powerful roles in... generating, attracting and mobilizing
talent and in establishing a tolerant and diverse social climate’ (Florida et al.
2006: 20). This claim is supported by empirical work testing the relationships
between indicators for higher education and three elements of the Creative Class
theory – technology, talent and tolerance – at the level of US metropolitan
regions. Relating to ‘tolerance’, they find a positive correlation between the num-
ber of students, and to a lesser extent academic faculty, in a metropolitan region
and its score on their ‘Tolerance Index’ (including measurements for racial inte-
gration, foreign born population, artistic and bohemian communities, and gay and
lesbian population) (ibid.: 16–17). They also find this relationship is stronger for
smaller metropolitan regions with relatively large higher education populations,
such as with the ‘college towns’ mentioned above, where the culture of the place
may be ‘dominated’ by the university (Gumprecht 2003: 51). This leads them to
argue that ‘[b]y creating social environments of openness, self-expression and
meritocratic norms, universities help to establish the regional milieu required to
attract and retain talent and spur growth in the Creative Economy’ (Florida et al.
2006: 17). However, it is important to emphasise that the empirical finding cited
here only definitely shows that the presence of communities related to higher edu-
cation in a place has an effect on its social mix. The causal link to economic
growth in the region relies on acceptance of Florida’s (2002) underlying Creative
Class thesis, which has been subject to extensive conceptual, empirical and nor-
mative critiques in the economic geography literature (Glaeser 2005a; Peck 2005;
Markusen 2006; Storper and Scott 2009; Comunian et al. 2010).
Notwithstanding these reservations with Florida’s arguments, a wider literature
has started to reflect the underlying point that the cultural practices of higher edu-
cation students can have a favourable effect on the social and economic climate
of a city. In contrast to the mainly negative implications of ‘studentification’ dis-
cussed in the previous chapter, students also contribute considerably as both con-
sumers and producers to a varied non-mainstream cultural life within cities,
largely (but not entirely) separated from the university. Chatterton (1999, 2000)
links this development in the UK to the growth and diversification of higher edu-
cation participation during the 1990s, with ‘nontraditional’ students helping to
support alternatives in cultural provision to the dominant popular night-time lei-
sure culture associated with young, middle-class students living away from home
for the first time. Similarly, Russo and Sans (2009) describe how cultural spaces
formed by the student population in Venice are now being used to attract different
28 Review: international dimensions
types of visitors to the city, as a response to the damaging effects of the local tour-
ism industry being overly concentrated on the city’s traditional heritage sites.
More generally, the potential role of domestic or overseas higher education stu-
dents in building ‘Creative Cities’ has begun to be recognised internationally by
local policymakers and critically reflected on within the academic literature (see
Russo et al. 2007; Atkinson and Easthope 2008; Collins 2010; Shaw and Fincher
2010).
In addition to this cultural contribution, students are also clearly valued by cit-
ies and regions as future skilled workers, particularly in less favoured regions
where they may represent opportunities for the upgrading of ‘human capital path-
ways’ (Arbo and Benneworth 2006). The next section explores the process
through which higher education students are attracted to a region and retained in
the labour force post-graduation. Although the lifestyle features of a city dis-
cussed in this section may have a bearing on the graduate’s locational decision,
the following section concentrates on the interplay of factors relating to higher
education and the strength of the regional economy.

Graduate migration and human capital

Perhaps the biggest contribution that HEIs make to national economies is in sup-
plying skilled and knowledgeable graduates for professional labour markets. This
is included in a chapter on ‘passive impacts’ because, notwithstanding teaching
programmes by many universities that are targeted at specific local employment
needs, at the aggregate level with which the statistical analysis reviewed here is
concerned, the funding arrangements in place that determine numbers and alloca-
tion of higher education places on different courses (whether primarily by gov-
ernment grant or market for fees) are not generally tied directly to regional
labour market demands. Labour markets for graduates operate on a national (if
not international) scale, so the link between the presence of a university and cor-
responding benefits to its local economy in terms of human capital gains is far
from guaranteed. Graduates are characteristically highly mobile as a group, so
their place of study is only one possible influence on their subsequent place of
work, and this is arguably secondary to demand-side factors relating to the
strength of different regional labour markets. Because of the difficulties of mea-
suring the quantitative human capital impact of graduate labour on a local econ-
omy, the academic literature in this area mainly concentrates on understanding
the migration patterns of students and graduates within a country and how this is
linked to economic outcomes in different regions.1 It was proposed in the section
before last that the long-term human capital contribution to local economies was
greater for universities located in metropolitan areas with labour markets big
enough to absorb a large number of graduates. Correspondingly, studies have
shown that the long-run success of urban economies is strongly related to their
concentration of highly-skilled workers (Glaeser and Saiz 2004; Glaeser 2005b).
However, most of the literature that we review below examines geographical
units equivalent to larger regions and not just their cities.
 Economic impacts 29
Some of the best-developed empirical material in this literature on student and
graduate mobility comes from the UK, because of the easy availability of fairly
comprehensive data. Each year since 1995, the Higher Education Statistics
Agency (HESA) has carried out a survey of destinations of HEI leavers, which
aims to cover all graduates from UK HEIs. These large datasets have been uti-
lised by academics in a number of recent papers (Faggian and McCann 2006,
2009a, 2009b; Comunian et al. 2010; Hoare and Corver 2010). The HESA data-
sets record information on the respondents ‘domicile’ region (where they lived
upon applying for higher education), the university they attended, and their status
and location of employment around six months after leaving higher education.
This has allowed researchers to track movement of graduate classes between
these three points, and hence combine analysis of the two ‘legs’ of home to uni-
versity migration and university to first employment migration, which had
hitherto mainly been addressed separately in both the UK and international liter-
ature (Hoare and Corver 2010: 481). This is particularly significant in the UK
context, because the well-established cultural convention of young people from
middle-class backgrounds moving away from home to attend university means
that levels of temporary migration associated with higher education students are
typically higher than in other countries (Belfield and Morris 1999; Christie
2007; Duke-Williams 2009). This is also linked to high levels of personal geo-
graphical mobility in the labour market subsequent to higher education, whether
this involves graduates returning to their domicile region or moving to work in a
third region (Faggian and McCann 2009a).
The overriding pattern in the UK graduate labour market is the long-observed
dominance of the South East and particularly London as a magnet for graduate
employment (Johnston 1989; Fielding 1992; Duke-Williams 2009). This ‘brain
drain’ effect through which other regions lose a high proportion of their highly-
qualified young workers is amongst the key structural reasons for persistent
regional disparities between North and South. Hoare and Corver (2010: 484) show
that, for the four graduate cohorts between 1998/1999 and 2001/2002 in the
HESA survey, London gains either just over or just under twice as many higher
education leavers within its workforce as people from the capital go to university.
This is balanced against almost every other English region and Wales and
Northern Ireland (but not Scotland) in most years being a net loser of their pre-
university resident graduates to provide this surplus for London. Figure 3.1 dis-
plays this pattern using Hoare and Corver’s (2010) ‘gain rate’ figures for the grad-
uate cohort 2001/2002, where a score of 100 indicates a perfect balance between
undergraduate students nationally from that domicile region and university leavers
working in the region shortly after graduation.
Although London does have a large and diverse higher education sector, this
pattern is more a reflection of the concentration of the UK’s graduate labour
opportunities in London. Analysis of the HESA data shows that London is the
only UK region that is able to attract large numbers of graduates that neither
lived there before university or went to university there (Faggian and McCann
2009a; Hoare and Corver 2010). Taking the UK as a whole, however, it is clear
30 Review: international dimensions

200 194.3

110.3 105.6
100 88.6 90.7 87.3 94.2 90.2 88.7
86.5
73.8 77.7

0
on

st

st

nd

es

nd
es

es
be
nd

nd
an
Ea

Ea

al
nd

la

la
W

W
um
la

la
gl

W
ot

Ire
Lo

th
id

id
En
h

th

Sc
ut

H
ut

or
M

tM

n
or
So

er
So

of

N
st

N
an
as

th
Ea
st

or
ire
Ea

N
sh
rk
Yo

2001/2002 Gain Rate (100 = balance of inflows and outflows)

Figure 3.1 Graduate labour recruitment regional ‘gain rate’ for 2001/2002.
Source: Adapted from figures given by Hoare and Corver (2010: 484).

that university location does have an effect on the subsequent geographical desti-
nation of some graduates. Faggian and McCann (2009a: 216) calculate the per-
centage of graduates (following their first degree) who find employment in the
same region they attended university for the four cohorts between 1996/1997
and 1999/2000. This is unsurprisingly highest for London at upwards of 70 per
cent for all four years. It is also high for the North East of England, Scotland and
Wales (Northern Ireland is not included here) at over 50 per cent for all four
years. Even for the other English regions, however, this is still always just under
or just over 40 per cent. This is also higher for graduates from certain types of
university. The literature shows that the group of ‘newer’ (former polytechnic)
universities in the UK, that we call Post 1992 universities in this book (Chapter
6), recruit a higher proportion of students locally, who are also more likely to
remain in the region after graduation (Belfield and Morris 1999; Faggian and
McCann 2009a). These universities, therefore, make one of the biggest contribu-
tions to upgrading regional labour supplies by creating access opportunities for
local young people who would otherwise be unable or disinclined to participate
in higher education by moving to other regions.
The HESA data allows researchers to distinguish between different migration
‘pathways’ into regional employment, which vary according to their domicile
region and their place of study (Faggian and McCann 2009a; Hoare and Corver
 Economic impacts 31

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

es

nd
on

st

st

nd
es

es
be
nd

nd
an
Ea

Ea

al
nd

la

la
W

W
um
la

la
gl

W
ot

Ire
Lo

th
id

id
En
h

th

Sc
ut

H
ut

or
M

tM

n
or
So

er
So

of

N
st

N
an
as

th
Ea
st

or
ire
Ea

N
sh
rk
Yo

2001/2002 ‘Locals’ conversion rate (out of 100)

2001/2002 ‘Stayers’ conversion rate (out of 100)

Figure 3.2 Graduate labour recruitment conversion rates for ‘locals’ and ‘stayers’
pathways for 2001/2002.
Source: Adapted from figures given by Hoare and Corver (2010: 486).

2010). In Hoare and Corver’s (2010) scheme, those who find employment in
their region of study are classified as either ‘locals’ or ‘stayers’, depending on
whether this respectively was or was not also their home region prior to univer-
sity. The other two pathway categories are ‘returners’ who move back to their
domicile region following university and ‘outsiders’ who move to a third region
for employment. Hoare and Corver (2010: 486) express the results for these four
different pathways in terms of their ‘conversion rate’ of potential students in each
category (out of 100) who actually remain or move to that region post-gradua-
tion. Figure 3.2 displays these conversion rates for the ‘locals’ and ‘stayers’ cate-
gories for the graduate cohort of 2001/2002. The ‘stayers’ category is lower than
the ‘locals’ for all regions (because those who migrate to attend university in a
different region are more mobile subsequently), but is significant here because it
indicates the proportion of young people attracted to a region by a university
who are subsequently retained within the labour market. With the exception of
Northern Ireland, the region with the highest conversion rate for ‘stayers’ is
London (52.3), and this drops off dramatically for the other English regions to
levels between 17 and 27. This suggests that the size and characteristics of the
local labour market is a more important variable than any related to the supply of
32 Review: international dimensions
labour by regional universities (also see Chapter 6). In terms of absolute numbers
(and not relative conversion rates), ‘stayers’ are not the largest of the four groups
of graduate employees in any region (for 2001/2002). This is ‘outsiders’ for
London, ‘returners’ for the other regions in the English South or Midlands, and
‘locals’ for Northern English regions and the three non-English nations (Hoare
and Corver 2010: 487).
Outside the UK, various European studies have examined student and graduate
mobility on national and international scales (e.g. see European Journal of
Education 2000 special issue, Volume 35, issue 2). However, the fullest available
comparison to the UK in terms of intra-national migration comes from the USA.
The USA does not have a nationwide annual survey of higher education leavers
equivalent to that carried out by HESA. However, the migration patterns of col-
lege graduates have been effectively studied using other data sources, such as
national longitudinal surveys that regularly track a sample of young people on an
ongoing basis. For instance, Kodrzycki (2001) uses the National Longitudinal
Survey of Youth that has data for 6,000 people between the start point of 1979
(when they were between 14 and 22 years old) and 1996. Unlike the UK HESA
data, this survey covers a cross-section of the whole population, and therefore
allows comparison between those who attended higher education and those who
did not. This allows Kodrzycki to show that the college-educated are significantly
more mobile after graduation than those who finished education after high school.
Her analysis reveals that the proportion living in a different US state in 1996 from
1979 were ‘19.2 percent for those completing only high school, but 36.6 percent
for those completing four years of college and 45.0 for those with even higher
levels of education’ (ibid.: 15). Unsurprisingly, this disparity is established early
through people leaving their home state for higher education, but is maintained
and widened as a life-time pattern by the higher frequency of inter-state moves
by college attendees in the ten years following graduation, due to their higher
geographical mobility within the national labour market (ibid.: 16).
The level of college graduates in this sample who attended an HEI in a differ-
ent state from where they went to high school, at 26.8 per cent (Kodrzycki 2001:
15), actually seems low compared to the proportion of young people who move
away from home for university in the UK. As well as the obvious differences
in geographical scale between these two national cases, this also seems likely to
be a product of the different higher education system in the federal USA that
includes incentives for young people to enrol in colleges within their home state
(Groen and White 2004; Alm and Winters 2009). Groen (2004: 126) evaluates
the rationale of these public subsidies by using two longitudinal data sources to
assess the effect of ‘attending college in a state on the probability of working in
the state’. His findings for the whole of the USA are that, 15 years after college
graduation ‘[f]or students who were initially residents of the state, 54 percent of
those who attended college in the state ended up working there, compared to 35
percent of those who attended college in another state’, where for ‘students who
were initially non-residents of the state, the corresponding figures are 11 percent
and 2 percent’ (ibid.: 134–5). This analysis echoes the same four ‘pathways’ used
 Economic impacts 33
by Hoare and Corver (2010), although direct comparison of figures is not possi-
ble because of the different timeframes post-graduation they refer to (15 years
and 6 months respectively). The differences that still occur in Groen’s (2004:
134) findings do, however, lead him to conclude that (even in this longer-term)
‘college effects are substantial’.
The nationwide geography of graduate migration in the USA has also been
covered within this literature. Kodrzycki (2001) observes that the overall pattern
for graduate migration in the timeframe covered by her study (1979–1996) has
been towards the West and South West of the USA that enjoyed stronger labour
markets and more attractive living conditions during this period. In their work
on universities mentioned above, Florida et al. (2006) also analyse the relative
concentration of graduates in different US regions to test the human capital com-
ponent of their Creative Class theory. They use US census data to construct a
‘Brain Drain/Gain index’ of net attraction or loss of graduate labour for US met-
ropolitan regions by dividing ‘the percent of the population age 25 and over with
a bachelor’s degree or above’ by the ‘percent of the population ages 18–34 cur-
rently in college or university’ (ibid.: 13). This is in some ways equivalent to the
‘gain rate’ measurement used by Hoare and Corver (2010) for the UK, although
it observes students who currently attend college in the region and not those ini-
tially from that domicile region. The results also broadly compare with the UK
situation where just one region (London) is a big winner at the expense of most
other regions. Florida et al. (2006: 13) find that only 10 per cent of all 331 US
metropolitan regions are ‘net attractors of talent’, and only ten in total score 1.25
or above on this index. They also find that a high score on this index is strongly
correlated to indicators for employment growth, high-technology industry and
regional innovation (Florida et al. 2006: 14; also see Abel and Dietz 2012). The
larger cities that rank in the top 20 on this index include the high-technology
centres San Francisco, Seattle, San Jose, Atlanta, Washington DC and Houston
(Florida et al. 2006: 31).
The relationship between the concentration of graduate labour and levels of
innovation within a regional economy has also been examined in the UK context
by Faggian and McCann (2006, 2009b) drawing on the HESA data. They find that
innovation has a much stronger two-way relationship with the net inflow of gradu-
ate labour into a region (measured as the number of students who moved to the
region to attend university and stayed there to enter work) than to regional univer-
sity research performance. This leads them to conclude that there is more evi-
dence in support of the importance of inter-regional graduate flows than there is
for the intra-regional knowledge ‘spillover’ thesis that has received most attention
in the literature on university–industry links. Indeed, when the effect of graduate
labour is controlled for, they find there is little support left for local academic
research and innovation capability independently having a bearing on regional
innovation performance; they therefore suggest that its main positive impact is
that it indirectly ‘augments the existing stock of human capital’ (Faggian and
McCann 2006: 496). However, because of the imbalance in graduate labour flows
within the country, this finding only applies for England and Wales (with
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
 "Rogerus Calkeyn de Gothurste salutem in Domino
Sempiternam. Noveritis me remisisse et quietum clamasse pro
me et heredibus meis Johanni de Yaneworth heredibus suis et
assignatis, totum jus et clameū quod habui vel aliquo modo
habere potui, in tenemento de Gothurste in dominio de
Cheddeworth. Ita quod nec ego nec heredes mei nec aliquis
nomine nostro, aliquid juris vel clamei in prædicto tenemento
habere vendicare poterimus imperpetuum. In cujus rei
testimonium huic presenti scripto sigillum meum apposui. Hiis
testibus, Magistro Waltero de Istelep tunc Barone domini Regis
de Scaccario Dublin', Thoma de Yaneworth, Rogero de Glen,
Roberto de Bristoll, Roberto scriptore, et aliis."—Rot. Mem. 1
Edw. II. m. 30.
James F. Ferguson.
Dublin.

DERIVATION OF CURIOUS BOTANIC NAMES,

AND ANCIENT ITALIAN KALYDOR.
The generic name of the fern Ceterach officinarum is generally said
to be derived from the Arabic Chetherak. I find however, among a
list of ancient British names of plants, published in 1633 at the end
of Johnson's edition of Gerard, the expression cedor y wrach, which
means the joined or double rake, and is exactly significant of the
form of the Ceterach. The Fernrakes are joined as it were back to
back; but the single prongs of the one alternate botanically with
those of the other. Master Robert Dauyes, of Guissaney in Flintshire,
the correspondent of Johnson, gives the name of another of the
Filices (Equisetum) as the English equivalent of the ancient British
term. But the form of this plant does not at all correspond to that
signified by the Celtic words. It is not improbable, therefore, that he
was wrong as respects the correct English name of the plant.
The Turkish shetr or chetr, to cut, and warak, a leaf, seem to point
out the meaning of the Arabic term quoted in Hooker's Flora and
elsewhere. Probably some of your Oriental readers will have the
kindness to supply the exact English for chetherak.

It appears to me, however, that the transition from cedorwrach to

ceterach is more easy, and is a more probable derivation.

Hooker and Loudon say that another generic name, Veronica, is of

doubtful origin. In the Arabic language I find virunika as the name of
a plant. This word is evidently composed of nikoo, beautiful, and
viroo, remembrance; viroonika. therefore means beautiful
remembrance, and is but an Oriental name for a Forget-me-not, for
which flower the Veronica chamædrys has often been mistaken.
Possibly the name may have come to us from the Spanish-Arabian
vocabulary. The Spaniards call the same plant veronica. They use
this word to signify the representation of our Saviour's face on a
handkerchief. When Christ was bearing his cross, a young woman,
the legend says, wiped his face with her handkerchief, which
thenceforth retained the divine likeness.[1]

The feminine name Veronica is of course the Latin form of

Φερονίκη, victory-bearer (of which Berenice is the Macedonian and
Latin construction), and is plainly, thus derived, inappropriate as the
designation of a little azure wild flower which, like loving eyes,
greets us everywhere.

In looking over Martin Mathée's notes on Dioscorides, published

1553, I find that Italian women of his time used to make a cosmetic
of the root of the Arum, commonly called "Lords and Ladies." The
mixture, he says, makes the skin wondrously white and shining, and
is called gersa. ("Ils font des racines d'Aron de l'eaue et de lexive,"
&c., tom. v. p. 98.)
Hughes Fraser Halle, LL.D.
South Lambeth.
Footnote 1:(return)

[See "N. & Q.," Vol. vi., pp. 199. 252. 304.]
 Minor Notes.
Forensic Jocularities.—The epigram on "Four Lawyers," given in Vol.
ix., p. 103. of "N. & Q.," has recalled to my recollection one intended
to characterise four worthies of the past generation, which I heard
some thirty years since, and which I send for preservation among
other flies in your amber. It is supposed to record the history of a
case:

"Mr. Leech
Made a speech,
Neat, concise, and strong;
Mr. Hart,
On the other part,
Was wordy, dull, and wrong.
Mr. Parker
Made it darker;
'Twas dark enough without.
Mr. Cooke,
Cited his book;
And the Chancellor said—I doubt."

—a picture of Chancery practice in the days "when George III. was

king," which some future Macaulay of the twenty-first or twenty-
second century, when seeking to reproduce in his vivid pages the
form and pressure of the time, may cite from "N. & Q." without risk
of leading his readers to any very inaccurate conclusions.
T. A. T.
Florence.

Ridley's University.—The author of The Bible in many Tongues (a

little work on the history of the Bible and its translations, lately
published by the Religious Tract Society, and calculated to be useful),
informs us that Ridley "tells us incidentally," in his farewell letter, that
he learned nearly the whole of St. Paul's Epistles "in the course of
his solitary walks at Oxford." What Ridley tells us directly in his
"Farewell" to Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, is as follows:

"In my orchard (the walls, butts, and trees, if they could speak,
would bear me witness) I learned without book almost all Paul's
Epistles; yea, and I ween all the canonical epistles, save only
the Apocalypse."
Abhba.

Marvellous, if true.—

"This same Duc de Lauragnois had a wife to whom he was

tenderly attached. She died of consumption. Her remains were
not interred; but were, by some chemical process, reduced to a
sort of small stone, which was set in a ring which the Duke
always wore on his finger. After this, who will say that the
eighteenth century was not a romantic age?"—Memoirs of the
Empress Josephine, vol. ii. p. 162.: London, 1829.
E. H. A.

Progress of the War.—One is reminded at the present time of the

satirical verses with reference to the slow progress of business in the
National Assembly at the first French Revolution, which were as
follows:

"Une heure, deux heures, trois heures, quatre heures,

Cinq heures, six heures, sept heures, midi;
Allons-nous diner, mes amis!
Allons-nous," &c.

"Une heure, deux heures, trois heures, quatre heures,

Cinq heures, six heures, sept heures, minuit;
Allons-nous coucher, c'est mon avis!
Allons-nous coucher," &c.
Which may be thus imitated in our language:

"One o'clock, two o'clock, three o'clock, four,

Five o'clock, six o'clock, seven o'clock, eight,
Nine o'clock, ten o'clock, eleven o'clock, noon;
Let's go to dinner, 'tis none too soon!
Let's go to dinner," &c.

"One o'clock, two o'clock, three o'clock, four,

Five o'clock, six o'clock, seven o'clock, eight,
Nine o'clock, ten o'clock, eleven, midnight;
Let's go to bed, 'tis all very right!
Let's go to bed," &c.
F. C. H.

Hatherleigh Moor, Devonshire.—I copy the following from an old

Devonshire newspaper, and should be obliged if any of your
correspondents can authenticate the circumstances commemorated:

"When John O'Gaunt laid the foundation stone

Of the church he built by the river;
Then Hatherleigh was poor as Hatherleigh Moor,
And so it had been for ever and ever.
When John O'Gaunt saw the people were poor,
He taught them this chaunt by the river;
The people are poor as Hatherleigh Moor,
And so they have been for ever and ever.
When John O'Gaunt he made his last will,
Which he penn'd by the side of the river,
Then Hatherleigh Moor he gave to the poor,
And so it shall be for ever and ever."

The above lines are stated to have been found "written in an ancient
hand."
Balliolensis.
Cromwellian Gloves.—The Cambridge Chronicle of May 6, says that
there is in the possession of Mr. Chas. Martin, of Fordham, a pair of
gloves, reputed to have been worn by Oliver Cromwell. They are
made of strong beaver, richly fringed with heavy drab silk fringe, and
reach half way between the wrist and the elbow. They were for a
long time in the possession of a family at Huntingdon. There is an
inscription on the inside, bearing the name of Cromwell; but the
date is nearly obliterated.
P. J. F. Gantillon.

Restall.—In the curious old church book of the Abbey Parish,

Shrewsbury, the word restall occurs as connected with burials in the
interior of the church. I cannot find this word in any dictionary to
which I have access. Can the readers of "N. & Q." explain its
meaning and origin, and supply instances and illustrations of its use
elsewhere? I subjoin the following notes of entries in which the word
occurs:

"1566. Received for restall and knyll.

1577. Received for buryalls in the church, viz.

Itm. for a restall of Jane Powell for her grad mother, vijs. viijd."

1593. The word is now altered to "lastiall," and so continues to be

written till April 29, 1621, when it is written "restiall," which
continues to be its orthography until 1645, when it ceases to be
used altogether, and "burials in the church" are alone spoken of.
Prior Robert of Salop.
 Queries.
SEPULCHRAL MONUMENTS.
(Continued from p. 514.)

In a previous communication, fighting under the shield of a great

authority, I attempted to prove that the effigies of the mediæval
tombs presented the semblance of death—death in grandeur,
mortality as the populace were accustomed to behold it, paraded in
sad procession through the streets, and dignified in their temples.
The character of the costume bears additional testimony to their
supposed origin, and strongly warrants this conclusion. It is highly
improbable that the statuaries of that age would clothe the expiring
ecclesiastic in his sacerdotal robes, case the dying warrior in
complete steel, and deck out other languishing mortals in their
richest apparel, placing a lion or a dog, and such like crests or
emblems, beneath their feet. They were far too matter-of-fact to
treat a death-bed scene so poetically. The corpse however, when laid
in state, was arrayed in the official or the worthiest dress, and these
heraldic appurtenances did occupy that situation. Thus in 1852 were
the veritable remains of Prince Paul of Wurtemburg, in full
regimentals and decorated with honours, publicly exhibited in the
Chapelle Ardente at Paris (Illustrated London News, vol. xx. p. 316.).
Unimaginative critics exclaim loudly against the anomaly of a lifeless
body, or a dying Christian, being thus dressed in finery, or covered
with cumbrous armour; and such would have been the case in
former days had not the people been so familiarised with this solemn
spectacle. In an illumination in Froissart we have the funeral of
Richard II., where the body is placed upon a simple car attired in
regal robes, a crown being on the head, and the arms crossed. We
are informed that "the body of the effigies of Oliver Cromwell lay
upon a bed of state covered with a large pall of black velvet, and
that at the feet of the effigies stood his crest, according to the
custom of ancient monuments." The chronicler might, perhaps, have
said with more propriety "in accordance with tradition;" cause and
effect, original and copy, being here reversed.

"In a magnificent manner (he proceeds) the effigies was carried

to the east end of Westminster Abbey, and placed in a noble
structure, which was raised on purpose to receive it. It
remained some time exposed to public view, the corpse having
been some days before interred in Henry VII.'s Chapel."

In the account of the funeral obsequies of General Monk, Duke of

Albemarle, in 1670, the writer says:

"Wren has acquitted himself so well, that the hearse, now that
the effigy has been placed upon it, and surrounded by the
banners and bannerols, is a striking and conspicuous object in
the old abbey. It is supported by four great pillars, and rises in
the centre in the shape of a dome."

It is here also worthy of note, that Horncastle Church affords a

curious example of the principle of a double representation—one in
life, and the other in death; before alluded to in the Italian
monuments, and in that of Aylmer de Valence. On a mural brass
(1519), Sir Lionel Dymock kneels in the act of prayer; and on
another plate covering the grave below, the body is delineated wrapt
in a shroud—beyond all controversy dead.

Mr. Markland, in his useful work, mentions "the steel-clad sires, and
mothers mild reposing on their marble tombs;" and borrows from
another archæologist an admirable description of the chapel of
Edward the Confessor, who declares that "a more august spectacle
can hardly be conceived, so many renowned sovereigns sleeping
round the shrine of an older sovereign, the holiest of his line." It can
only be the sleep of death, and this the sentiment conveyed: "These
all died in faith." The subjects of this disquisition are not lounging in
disrespectful supplication, nor wrapt in sleep enjoying pious dreams,
nor stretched on a bed of mortal sickness: but the soul, having
winged its way from sin and suffering, has left its tenement with the
beams of hope yet lingering on the face, and the holy hands still
refusing to relax their final effort. Impossible as this may seem to
calculating minds, it is nevertheless one of the commonest of the
authorised and customary modes designed to signify the faith,
penitence, and peace attendant on a happy end.
C. T.

"ES TU SCOLARIS."
Allow me through your pages to ask some of your correspondents
for information respecting an old and very curious book, which I
picked up the other day. It is a thin unpaged octavo of twelve
leaves, in black-letter type, without printer's name or date; but a
pencil-note at the bottom of a quaint woodcut, representing a
teacher and scholars, gives a date 1470! And in style of type,
abbreviations, &c., it seems evidently of about the same age with
another book which I bought at the same time, and which bears
date as printed at "Padua, 1484."

The book about which I inquire bears the title Es tu Scolaris, and is a
Latin-German or Dutch grammar, of a most curious and primitive
character, proving very manifestly that when William Lilly gave to the
world the old Powle's Grammar, it was not before such a work was
needed. A few extracts from my book will give some idea of the
erudition and etymological profundity of the "learned Theban" who
compiled this guide to the Temple of Learning, which, if they do not
instruct, will certainly amuse your readers. I should premise that the
contractions and abbreviations in the printing of the book are so
numerous and arbitrary, that it is extremely difficult to read, and that
this style of printing condenses the subject-matter so much, that the
twelve leaves would, in modern typography, extend to twenty or
thirty. The book commences in the interrogatory style, in the words
of its title, Es tu Scolaris?—"Sum." It then proceeds to ring the
changes on this word "sum," what part of speech, what kind of verb,
&c.; and setting it down as verbum anormalium, goes on to
enumerate the anormalous verbs in this verse,—

"Sum, volo, fero, atque edo,

Tot et anormala credo."

Now begins the curious lore of the volume:

"Q. Unde derivatur sum?

A. Derivatur a greca dictione, hemi (εμι); mutando h in s et e in

u, et deponendo i, sic habes sum!"

I dare say this process of derivation will be new to your classical

readers, but as we proceed, they will say, "Foregad this is more
exquisite fooling still."

"Q. Unde derivatur volo?

A. Derivatur a beniamin (sic pro βουλομαὶ) grece; mutando ben

in vo et iamin in lo, sic habes volo. Versus

Est volo formatum

A beniamin, bene vocatum.

Q. Unde derivatur fero?

A. Dicitur a phoos! grece; mutando pho in fe et os in ro, sic

habes fero!

Q. Unde derivatur edo?

 A. A phagin, grece; mutando pha in e et gin in do, sic habes
edo!"

Here be news for etymologists, and proofs, moreover, that when

some of the zealous antagonists of Martin Luther in the next century
denounced "Heathen Greek" as a diabolical invention of his, there
was little in the grammar knowledge of the day to contradict the
accusation.

But we have not yet exhausted the wonders and virtues of the word
sum; the grammar lesson goes on to ask,—

"Q. Quare sum non desinit in o nec in or?

A. Ad habendum, drnam[2] [I cannot expand this contraction,

though from the context it means a mark or token], dignitatis
sue respectu aliorum verborum.

Q. Declara hoc, et quomodo?

A. Quia per sum intelligitur Trinitas, cum tres habeat litteras, scl.
s. u. et m. Etiam illud verbum sum, quamvis de omnibus dici
valeat, tamen de Deo et Trinitate proprie dicitur.

Q. Quare sum potius terminatur in m quam in n?

A. Quia proprie m rursus intelligitur Trinitas, cum illa littera m,

tria habet puncta."

I shall feel much obliged for any particulars about this literary
curiosity which you or any of your correspondents can give.
A. B. R.
Belmont.

Footnote 2:(return)

[Drnam stands for differentiam.]

 ON A DIGEST OF CRITICAL READINGS IN
SHAKSPEARE.
With reference to this subject, which has been so frequently
discussed in your columns, daily experience convincing me still
farther in the opinion that the complete performance of the task is
impracticable, would you kindly allow me to ask what can be done in
the now acknowledged case of frequent occurrence, where different
copies of the folios and quartos vary in passages in the very same
impression? What copies are to be taken as the groundworks of
reference; and whose copy of the first folio is to be the standard
one? Mr. Knight may give one reading as that of the edition of 1623,
and Mr. Singer may offer another from the same work, while the
author of the "critical digest" may give a third, and all of them
correct in the mere fact that such readings are really those of the
first edition. Thus, in respect to a passage in Measure for Measure,—

"For thy own bowels, which do call thee sire,"—

it has been stated in your columns that one copy of the second folio
has this correct reading, whereas every copy I have met with reads
fire; and so likewise the first and third folios. Then, again, in
reference to this same line, Mr. Collier, in his Shakspeare, vol. ii. p.
48., says that the folio edition of 1685 also reads fire for sire; but in
my copy of the fourth folio it is distinctly printed sire, and the
comma before the word very properly omitted. It would be curious
to ascertain whether any other copies of this folio read fire.
J. O. Halliwell.
 Minor Queries.
"Original Poems."—There is a volume of poetry by a lady, published
under the following title, Original Poems, on several occasions, by C.
R., 4to., 1769. Can you inform me whether these poems are likely to
have been written by Miss Clara Reeve, authoress of The Old English
Baron, and other novels? I have seen at least one specimen of this
lady's poetry in one of the volumes of Mr. Pratt's Gleaner.
Sigma.

A Bristol Compliment.—A present made of an article that you do not

care about keeping yourself is called "A Bristol Compliment." What is
the origin of the phrase?
Haughmond St. Clair.

French or Flemish Arms.—What family (probably French or Flemish)

bears Azure, in chief three mullets argent; in point a ducal coronet
or; in base a sheep proper crowned with a ducal coronet or.
Penn.

Precedence.—Will any of your correspondents assign the order of

precedence of officers in army or navy (having no decoration,
knighthood, or companionship of any order of knighthood), not as
respects each other, but as respects civilians? I apprehend that every
commission is addressed to the bearer, embodying a civil title, as
e.g., "John Smith, Esquire," or as we see ensigns gazetted, "A. B.,
Gent." My impression therefore is, that in a mixed company of
civilians, &c., no officer is entitled to take rank higher than the civil
title incorporated in his commission would imply, apart from his
grade in the service to which he belongs. On this point I should be
obliged by any notices which your correspondents may supply; as
also by a classification in order of precedence of the ranks which I
here set down alphabetically: barristers, doctors (in divinity, law,
medicine), esquires, queen's counsel, serjeants-at-law.

It may be objected that esquire, ecuyer, armiger, is originally a

military title, but by usage it has been appropriated to civilians.
Suum Cuique.

"Σφιδή."—The meaning of this word is wanted. It is not in Stephens'

Thesaurus. It occurs in Eichhoff's Vergleichung der Sprachen Europa
und Indien, p. 234.:

"Sanscrit bhid, schneiden, brechen; Gr. φάζω; Lat. fido, findo,

fodio; Fr. fends; Lithuan., fouis; Deut. beisse; Eng. bite" [to
which Kaltschmidt adds, beissen, speisen, fasten, Futter, Butter,
Mund, bitter, mästen, feist, Weide, Wiese, Matte]; "Sans. bhidâ,
bhid, Spaltung, Faser; Gr. σ φ ι δ ή , Lat. fidis; Sans. bhittis,
graben; Lat. fossa; Sans. bhaittar, zerschneider; Lat. fossor."
T. J. Buckton.
Lichfield.

Print of the Dublin Volunteers.—Can any of your correspondents

inform me when, and where, and by whom, the well-known print of
"The Volunteers of the City and County of Dublin, as they met on
College Green, the 4th day of Nov., 1779," was republished? An
original copy is not easily procured.
Abhba.

John Ogden.—Can any reader of "N. & Q." furnish an account of the
services rendered by John Ogden, Esq., to King Charles I. of
England? The following is in the possession of the inquirer:

"Ogden's Arms, granted to John Ogden, Esq., by King Charles

II., for his faithful services to his unfortunate father, Charles I.

"Shield, Girony of eight pieces, argent and gules; in dexter chief

an oak branch, fructed ppr.
 "Crest, Oak tree ppr. Lion rampant against the tree.

"Motto, Et si ostendo, non jacto."

Oakden.

Columbarium in a Church Tower.—At Collingbourne Ducis, near

Marlborough, I have been told that the interior of the church tower
was constructed originally to serve as a columbarium. Can this really
be the object of the peculiar masonry, what is the date of the tower,
and can a similar instance be adduced? It is said that the niches are
not formed merely by the omission of stones, but that they have
been carefully widened from the opening. Are there any ledges for
birds to alight on, or any peculiar openings by which they might
enter the tower?
J. W. Hewett.

George Herbert.—Will any one of your correspondents, skilled in

solving enigmas, kindly give me an exposition of this short poem of
George Herbert's? It is entitled—

"Hope.

"I gave to Hope a watch of mine; but he

An anchor gave to me.
Then an old prayer-book I did present,
And he an optic sent.
With that, I gave a phial full of tears;
But he a few green ears.
Ah, loiterer! I'll no more, no more I'll bring;
I did expect a ring."
G. D.

Apparition which preceded the Fire of London.—An account of the

apparition which predicted the Great Fire of London two months
before it took place, or a reference to the book in which it may be
found, will oblige
Ignipetus.
Holy Thursday Rain-water.—In the parish of Marston St. Lawrence,
Northamptonshire, there is a notion very prevalent, that rain-water
collected on Holy Thursday is of powerful efficacy in all diseases of
the eye. Ascension-day of the present year was very favourable in
this respect to these village oculists, and numbers of the cottagers
might be seen in all directions collecting the precious drops as they
fell. Is it known whether this curious custom prevails elsewhere? and
what is supposed to be the origin of it?
Anon.

Freemasonry.—A (Hamburg) paper, Der Freischütz, brings in its No.

27. the following:

"The great English Lodge of this town will initiate in a few days
two deaf and dumb persons; a very rare occurrence."

And says farther in No. 31.:

"With reference to our notice in No. 27., we farther learned that

on the 4th of March, two brethren, one of them deaf and dumb,
have been initiated in the great English Lodge; the knowledge
of the language, without its pronunciation, has been cultivated
by them to a remarkable degree, so that with noting the motion
of the lips they do not miss a single word. The ceremony of
initiation was the most affecting for all present."

Query 1. Would deaf and dumb persons in England be eligible as

members of the order? 2. Have similar cases to the above ever
occurred in this country?
J. W. S. D. 874.
 Minor Queries with Answers.
Lewis's "Memoirs of the Duke of Gloucester."—Can you inform me
who was the editor of

"Memoirs of Prince William Henry, Duke of Gloucester, from his

birth, July the 24th, 1689, to October 1697: from an original
Tract written by Jenkin Lewis. Printed for the Editor, and sold by
Messrs. Payne, &c., London: and Messrs. Prince & Cooke, and J.
Fletcher, Oxford, 1789."

In a rare copy of this volume now before me, it is attributed by a

pencil-note to the editorship of Dr. Philip Hayes, who was organist of
Magdalen College Chapel, Oxford, from 1777 to 1797. I should be
glad to learn on what authority this could be stated. I am anxious
also to know the names of any authors who have published books
respecting the life, reign, or times of King William III.?
J. R. B.
Oxford.

[Some of our readers will probably be able to authenticate the

editorship of Jenkin Lewis' Memoirs of the Duke of Gloucester.
The following works on the reign of William III. may be consulted
among others: Walter Harris's History of the Reign of William III.,
fol., 1749; The History of the Prince of Orange and the Ancient
History of Nassau, 8vo., 1688; An Historical Account of the
Memorable Actions of the Prince of Orange, 12mo., 1689; History
of William III., 3 vols. 8vo., 1702; Life of William III., 18mo.,
1702; another, 8vo., 1703; The History of the Life and Reign of
William III., Dublin, 4 vols. 12mo., 1747; Vernon's Letters of the
Reign of William III., edited by G. P. R. James, 3 vols. 8vo., 1841;
Paul Grimbolt's Letters of William III. and Louis XIV. Consult also
Watt and Lowndes' Bibliographical Dictionaries, art. William III.;
and Catalogue of the London Institution, vol. i. p. 292.]
Apocryphal Works.—Can you inform me where I can procure an
English version of the Book of Enoch, so often quoted by Mackay in
his admirable work The Progress of the Human Intellect? Also the
Epistle of Barnabas, and the Spurious Gospels?
W. S.
Cleveland Bridge, Bath.

[The Book of Enoch, edited by Archbishop Laurence, and printed

at Oxford, has passed through several editions.—The Catholic
Epistle of St. Barnabas is included among Archbishop Wake's
Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers.—"The Spurious
Gospels" will probably be found in The Apocryphal New
Testament; being all the Gospels, Epistles, and other Pieces now
extant, attributed in the first four Centuries to Jesus Christ, his
Apostles, and their Companions, and not included in the New
Testament by its compilers: London, 8vo., 1820; 2nd edition,
1821. Anonymous, but edited by William Hone.]

Mirabeau, Talleyrand, and Fouché.—Can any of your correspondents

tell me which are the best Lives of three of the most remarkable
men who figured in the age of the French Revolution, viz. Mirabeau,
Talleyrand, and Fouché? If there are English translations of these
works? and also if there is any collection of the fierce philippics of
Mirabeau?
Kennedy McNab.

[Mirabeau left a natural son, Lucas Montigny, who published

Memoirs of Mirabeau, Biographical, Literary, and Political, by
Himself, his Uncle, and his adopted Child, 4 vols. 8vo., Lond.,
1835.—Memoirs of C. M. Talleyrand, 2 vols. 12mo., Lond., 1805.
Also his Life, 4 vols. 8vo., Lond., 1834.—Memoirs of Joseph
Fouché, translated from the French, 2 vols. 8vo., Lond., 1825.]

"The Turks in Europe," and "Austria as It Is."—I possess an 8vo.

volume consisting of two anonymous publications, which appeared
in London in 1828, one entitled The Establishment of the Turks in
Europe, an Historical Discourse, and the other Austria as It Is, or
Sketches of Continental Courts, by an Eye-witness. Can you give me
the names of the authors?
Abhba.

[The Turks in Europe is by Lord John Russell: but the author of

Austria as It Is, we cannot discover; he was a native of the
Austrian Empire.]

"Forgive, blest Shade."—Where were the lines, commencing

"Forgive, blest shade," first published? I believe it was upon a mural
tablet on the chancel wall of a small village church in Dorsetshire
(Wyke Regis); but I have seen it quoted as from a monument in
some church in the Isle of Wight.

The tablet at Wyke, in Dorset, was erected anonymously, in the

night-time, upon the east end of the chancel outer wall; but whether
they were original, or copied from some prior monumental
inscription, I do not know, and should feel much obliged could any
of your readers inform me.
S. S. M.

[Snow, in his Sepulchral Gleanings, p. 44., notices these lines on

the tomb of Robert Scott, who died in March, 1806, in Bethnal
Green Churchyard. Prefixed to them is the following line: "The
grief of a fond mother, and the disappointed hope of an indulgent
father." Our correspondent should have given the date of the
Wyke tablet.]

"Off with his head," &c.—Who was the author of the often-quoted
line—

"Off with his head! so much for Buckingham!"

which is not in Shakspeare's Richard III.?

Uneda.
Philadelphia.
 [Colley Cibber is the author of this line. It occurs in The Tragical
History of Richard III., altered from Shakspeare, Act IV., near the
end.]

"Peter Wilkins."—Who wrote this book? and when was it published?

Uneda.
Philadelphia.

[This work first appeared in 1750, and in its brief title is

comprised all that is known—all that the curiosity of an inquisitive
age can discover—of the history of the work, and name and
lineage of the author. It is entitled The Life and Adventures of
Peter Wilkins, a Cornish Man. Taken from his own Mouth, in his
Passage to England, from off Cape Horn in America, in the ship
Hector. By R. S., a passenger in the Hector; Lond. 1750, 2 vols.
The dedication is signed R. P. "To suppose the unknown author,"
remarks a writer in the Retrospective Review, vol. vii. p. 121., "to
have been insensible to, or careless about, the fair fame to which
a work, original in its conception, and almost unique in purity, did
justly entitle him, is to suppose him to have been exempt from
the influence of that universal feeling, which is ever deepest in
the noblest bosoms; the ardent desire of being long remembered
after death—of shining bright in the eyes of their cotemporaries,
and, when their sun is set, of leaving behind a train of glory in the
heavens, for posterity to contemplate with love and veneration."]

The Barmecides' Feast.—Can you tell me where the story of the

Barmecides and their famed banquets is to be found?
J. D.

[In The Thousand and One Nights, commonly called The Arabian
Nights' Entertainments, Lane's edition, chap. v. vol. i. p. 410.
Consult also The Barmecides, 1778, by John Francis de la Harpe;
and Moreri, Dictionnaire Historique, art. Barmécides.]

Captain.—I shall feel greatly obliged by your informing me the

proper and customary manner of rendering in a Latin epitaph the
words "Captain of the 29th Regiment." Ainsworth does not give any
word which appears to answer to "Captain." Ordinum ductor is
cumbrous and inelegant.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com