cognitive city 2011

8/8/2019 Cognitive City 2011

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cognitive-city-2011 1/45

COGNITIVE CITY

© 2000, 2011 by Robinson Antonio Vieira Borba

www.robinsonborba.com.br

[email protected]

São Paulo, Brazil

What would the “Cognitive City” be?

The Cognitive City presents a new way of formulating localdevelopment processes institutionalized by governmentaland/or non-governmental organizations. By structuringstrategic plans and actions, it stimulates the connectionsbetween the urban and regional economy with that of theworld.

In the Cognitive City, economic models will be based on

the original social, environmental and economiccharacteristics. They will be conceived and structuredthrough the individuals’ perception. Skilled citizens, withcreativity, will build an innovative strategic framework,triggering the collective cognitive process necessary for the endogenous planning actions to attain sustainableimplementation.

The Cognitive City emergence derives from theobservation of the global scenario, in which twofundamental trends are detached:

The technical-scientific-informational environment, whichwill show to have increasingly more complexity in thefuture, directs and permeates all human activities, in a



successive chain of social and economic transformationsthat materialize in the communities territorial space;

The knowledge and intellectual capital of that environmentwill validate the use and operation of the regional space asa locus of global productivity, guaranteeing thecombination between the latent possibilities and theopportunities created by the New Economy for themunicipalities and regions, especially in the creativesectors, which minimizes the perverse effects globalization

may cause to local development.

The Cognitive City will comprise:

> Local economic development process, founded ontheoretical concepts as well as on international andBrazilian experiences. It is applied by means of regionallyarticulated local actions, the aim of which is to potentializethe community creative and productive capacity;

> Observatory of decentralized industrialization trends, or global des-industrialization. The outcomes of this historicalprocess induced by institutions created by communities or by governments. The aim is to connect the localeconomies with the emergent global economy, byqualifying the pre-existing industrial base and by attractingnew enterprises identified as being of strategic interest;

> Monitoring the impact of the transformations resultingfrom globalization in both regional and local spaces. Thecomplexity imposed by the economic-social phenomenonis a result of the conditions provided by the open circuit of the new world economy.



The Cognitive City facilitates the understanding of thesecollective activities and will make possible building a

model for local and regional governance, which allows:

> Building the local economy capacity in a proactive,cooperative and competitive way, so that it can be insertedin the global scenario, in evolution today, with permanentadequacy and as fast as the information flows that crossthe continents permeating regions;

>Incorporating the technological civilization achievements,pulling down barriers in the communication betweendeveloped and developing societies, and thus preventingthe exclusion that may occur with the communities unableto understand the complexity of the international affairsunder constant mutation;

> Overcoming the knowledge gap, beating the greatestchallenge to localities and regions sustainable economic

structuring;

> Identifying opportunities in the creative destructionimposed by the new globalized economy, by means of apermanent cognitive process;

> Learning for not dying is the new paradigm establishedby globalization in localities in the knowledge era.

> Acquiring knowledge means stimulating creativity andflowing into innovation, which is a vitality and survivalfactor in the new economy organizations and in thedynamic communities of the globalized world.

> A radical change in the collective mentality is urgent, justas the one that determined the importance of technologyin the Industrial Revolution during the process of



transforming the agrarian society into an industrial one.Now, with the metamorphosis of this digital society, the

relevance is cognition.

These verifications demonstrated that:

First, the need of establishing a policy model for localeconomic development within an endogenous strategyconstructed from a perception of the regional reality;

Second, that technology turned into an inducer of

economic activities. However, so that it provides them withsustainability, it should not be seen as an end, but as ameans to provide the integration of the local developmentsystem to the global economy with thecomprehensiveness and complexity required by thecontemporary society.

And considering that:

By materializing in the regions, where possibilities andopportunities are combined, the so-called “New Economy”,in which science, technology and information are thetechnical base of social life, makes knowledge anessential resource to validate the use of the regionalspace as the locus of global productivity;

The intense information complexity, permeating all the

human activities under the impact of the successive chainof transformations, materializes in the territorial space of local communities, which have to build capacities toconduct a model coherent with their tradition and culture,as they are the foundation for creativity and innovation,dominant elements in the knowledge era;



Assessing the natural, cultural and technological regionalasset is a requirement for inserting regional productive

chains into the new productive mode and should beevaluated in a framework that preserves the localproduction spaces.

It can be concluded that:

Understanding the entwining of the locality microcosm withthe world dimension is vital for a development model;

The sustainability of this model can only be achievedthrough the society capacity of planning and conducting itsown local experience.

And the proposition of the Cognitive City is finallypresented:

This capacity building, normally a function of theinstitutional development deriving from a historical

process, should start from a collective cognitive processmaking it possible for knowledge, in which there areelements that allow for understanding the complex andabstract relations, as are those of the “New Economy”,establish the forms of organization and assessment of theideas and concepts necessary for building an assimilableoriginal model by the region where they will be applied,

enhancing the population cultural characteristics,contributing to sustainable global development withcreativity and innovation.

With this, it is expected that:

Civility processes are established in the Braziliancommunities, building their capacities for the countlesscollective tasks posed by the knowledge era challenges,



with complexity, thus meeting the institution need for aninnovative collective mentality. Thus, the hundreds of

years of history of civic practice that were necessary for developing nations and localities by their collaborativesocieties are not hence indispensable to trigger - incountries without this tradition, such as Brazil - processesthat result in original economic development models, asthese would be elaborated with creativity and innovationby the ones that could then be called cognitive cities.



Governance, Productive Chains and CollaborativeModel

The industrial conglomerates, when reformulating their investment policies for new operational modes, in whichflexibility prevails, both in the productive mode and in thelogistical aspects, provide new perspectives in regionsperipheral to the industrial development process.

The reformulation of these entrepreneurial policiesprovides the localities with a strategic status in the nationseconomies, thanks to the reformulation of the productiveindustrial mode and the relocation of the productiveinfrastructures determined by the decentralization of theflexible industrial plants.

The place is seen as a territorial configuration and now asan organization with regulation regimes. The region is nolonger the result of an organic solidarity, but of a regulated

and organizational solidarity.

Organized from the inside to the outside of the localities,endogenous development provides mobilization tooptimize capital, work and institutional resources as wellas physical infrastructures and causes a rupture with theglobal structuralism and space theories in which stages of economic development would come in a succession of

stages classified as pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial.

The hierarchy of central places, of the homogeneousspace presupposition, is broken, as the non-homogeneityof regions is the condition for the success of a flexibleeconomy, dependent on regional dynamics.



Invisible community attributes are determinants in thelocation of enterprises - of high technology, for example -

for which innovation is a vitality and survival factor.

The territory, with all its intrinsic, material and immaterialcharacteristics, serving as the economic space of productive activities, ceases to be a mere space supportand turns into an active development agent.

New forms of regulation emerge from the urban economicand regional space in which norms established more bythe civil society than by the market or by the Statepredominate.

The return of the local policy dimension in economicdevelopment is verified by the fact that productive chainsoperate more and better under governance andcollaboration than under market laws.

Governance in local policy defines the development modelwhich, materialized by the territorial socio-economic block,determines a productive chain and human resources thatwill be required by the regional dynamics.

Local cultural, economic and social conditions establishthe innovation capacity of governance to absorb the newparadigms for economic development.

Governance nourishes elements that make innovationviable, making it possible, such as: intellectualinfrastructure; qualified workforce; quality of life; businessenvironment; risk capital; a receptive market for newproducts and processes; a commitment with industrialmodernization; culture for industrialization with flexibilityand cooperation; and a social system in which innovation,founded on diversity, flows.



Small diversified industrial nuclei account for increasinglycustomized products for segmented markets, allowing

larger companies to decentralize their productions insmaller productive units.

Large companies, when acting supportively and innetworks, not necessarily located in the same country or region, are integrated to an international fabric based onsmall and medium-sized companies in different regions of the planet, strengthening regional economies, since they

are capable of positively reacting to this restructuring.

For the local productive structure to respond to thesestimuli, issues such as integration and cooperation, whichallow for articulation and complementarity to integrate theproductive chain of a serial industrial product in thelocalities, have to be assimilated by the communitieswhich are to intervene in this transformation process so

that their local productive bases correspond to the needsof the production cycles.

Political orientations with no social commitment, whenseeking competitive industrial production in a predatoryway, disarticulate cooperation in the industrial baseexisting in the regions, extracting the collaborativeelement, a fundamental factor of a real regional

competitive advantage.Economic growth does not guarantee political,environmental, cultural and technological developmentprocesses, indispensable for the human societydimension, once the progressive inter-relations of theseprocesses limit the unique motive capacity of economy for the complex contemporary society.



Civic Entrepreneurship:Government, Society and Companies

The aware absorption of economic complexity in acompetitive and collaborative strategy, providing localitieswith conditions for structuring their productive bases,qualifies regional leaderships for greater analysis capacity,broadening the view of the economy with morecomprehensive focuses, involving environmental, socialand technological issues.

Community leaderships have to struggle to overcome theold paternalistic vision - which predominates both withinand without municipal administrations - of the communitystrategic management, since this vision prevents the fullinstitutional and organizational capacity of the publicsector, hindering the articulation of society andcompromising local development.

The public sector reluctance in adopting localdevelopment policies as they do not usually provide thecommunity with immediate visibility of their benefits, whichare better perceived in the medium and long run, shouldbe fought by the entrepreneur community.



Identification of entrepreneurship capacity in the locality

Characteristic Environment Configuration

Local economy Open and fluent Without barriersfor newbusinesses

Social structure Dynamic Outsiders arewelcome

Business Competitive Without largeemployers

Finances Competitivebanks

Access to ventureinvestments

Labor Specialized andprofessional

Will for innovativeinitiatives

Government Support to small

and newbusinesses

Differentiated

taxes for smalland mediumcompanies

Innovation University Supply by meansof research center

Local media Attention toentrepreneurs

Dissemination of innovativebusinesses

Job generation Stimulus Basis for new andsmall businesses

Local atmosphere Amenities Good quality of life, culture,education andleisure



In those localities, the governing person is also required tohave an entrepreneur performance in the local economic

development policy, with characteristics such as:transparent use of finances; budget guided towardsinvestments; and thinking visionary administrative andexecutive echelons, with professional style guided towardsresults; innovative, competitive and high quality publicservices; culture of participation of citizens, seen asconsumers and stakeholders of the development program.

This causes the implementation of a wide mentalitytransformation, which should occur not only to politicians,but also to private managers, since the entrepreneur community, while requiring a new public managementmodel, more active in the economic field, places theentrepreneurial community in a new productive dimension,in which the efficacy of its operation in the territory isconnected to the effective cooperation with localdevelopment agents.

A minimization of the military origin of the term strategicoccurs, as this type of planning efficiently andsystematically identifies the advantages anddisadvantages of an area. When determining opportunitiesfor its development, this planning provides a sense of direction for local programs, providing a scenario for

assessing and modifying the development program of thelocality and its region, and also allowing the integration of independent actors to the planning action, which is nolonger exclusive of the public sector.

The emergence of a fundamental actor in thecommunities, to conduct the execution of this process



towards capacity building is identified: the civicentrepreneur.

The civic entrepreneur’s innovating role requires the will tobuild efficacious connection and integration betweenhis/her region and a global economy.

The actuation of this local development agent will mold thelocality for internationalized relations, in which a culture of shared vision, work, decisions and actions is the motionforce of the community economic development, foundedon collaborative competitivity.

From this perspective, the conduction of regionaldevelopment processes under the support of planningbacked by the logic of an external central coordinationgives way to management plans by the local initiatives.These are made possible through the local developmentagency concept.

The agency has its attention directed to the conduction of projects under a territorial vision that guides thedissemination of economic growth and job generation bymanaging regional endogenous potentials.

There is an alteration in the centralized standard of formulating and operating policies, traditionally marked by

verticality in the State-Society relations, due to spacegenerality and sectorial segmentation. A decentralizedstandard occurs, characterized by horizontality in thesocial agents’ relation and by the space selectivity,integration and territoriality of a regional policy.

Managerial and interpretative resources, more adequateto economic development, are acknowledged to be foundin the private sector, yet companies count on a limited



territorial coverage, short time and few resources tounderstand and tackle social responsibility issues.

Development agencies represent an effective form of support, as they allow incorporating essential businessworld characteristics to the collective, economic, socialand cultural development aim of a community as a whole.

An agency constituted with the participation of the publicsector in a partnership with the private sector is the mostflexible structure a community can count on to acquireregional, viable competitivity by the collaboration betweenthe economic and social agents of its actuation region andby inter-institutional cooperation.

A vigilant position on the economy, on the social andcultural life of the development agency region requires adeep understanding of the problems and potentials of thegeographic area of its actuation.

The agency is required a strong ability of working with theeconomic, political, cultural and social structures alreadyexisting in the region, following a concrete intervention andoperational standard, useful and both economically andsocially important, by stimulating the creation of new jobs,of new opportunities and new solutions, which enhancesits focus on technological development and innovation.

Continuous complex tasks are required for implementingthese cooperation and strategy structures, in whichinstitutional development is the foundation of their decentralized operation.

Insufficient institutional development of communities anddiscontinuity in the State policy were the main problemsfor implementing the decentralized economic development



plan "State Competitive Strategy" elaborated by the IPTfor the SCTDE/SP.

With tactics based on regional seminars in someadministrative regions of the State of Sao Paulo, aiming toraise interest in the political and entrepreneurialleaderships of the municipalities, this State of Sao Paulogovernment plan did not gain significant adhesion from theState communities for creating their local developmentagencies: the ADLs.

The Ourinhos agency, one of the few ADLs implementedunder the SCTDE/SP stimulus, for example, was notgranted credibility by the community due to the resistanceof local political and entrepreneurial segments which sawit as a competitor in the struggle for political space, andnot as a community agency that would be working to carryon its projects and which sought resources, both financial

and human, besides political support for the regioneconomic growth.

The ADEO actuation in Ourinhos, however, should not beseen as a failure, as it guided the community discussion of the local problems towards economic development andforced the leaderships to reflect on the future of the cityand to formulate actions to explore its potentialities

viewing growth.The Ourinhos agency, considered by SCTDE/SP aninnovative initiative in community development for orienting the local policies in the macroeconomic nationaland international scenario, provided strategic meaning toinvestment decisions, both by the public and the privatesectors; as it created a progressive atmosphere of



entrepreneur city, the agency stimulated the emergence of other community participation tools, such as the

Participative Budget and the Bank of the People,contributing to the civic development of its citizens.

The great ADEO flaws were the assessment of its owninter-institutional articulation capacity, the weak actuationof its managers for mobilizing the productive segmentsand low academic participation. This led to the emptying of the organization as an entity capable of making resources

viable to the municipality at external level and of gatheringcommon efforts towards local development.

By connecting the two initiatives, that of the Ourinhos Cityand that of the State of Sao Paulo, one verifies the needfor an effective central decentralization policy to stimulatethe flow of local efforts to overcome the apparent paradoxthat occurs in function of the interference of central

governments in eminently regional and endogenousactions, characterized as the exclusive ambit of the localpolicy and subjected to particular pressures by the localpolitics.

This paradox has to be overcome with decentralizedplanning, respecting the relevance of the regional social,economic, political and cultural context as observed in the

plan put into practice by the Italian federal government.Concentrating on continuity and changes in the Italianregional policies, the differences in the local governmentsperformance were perceived to have deep connectionswith the history of each region, which explains specificaspects of their civic life and, therefore, of the regionaleconomic development.



The performance of the regional institutions, establishedby the Italian central government, was dependent on the

economic, social, cultural and political environments that,in turn, depended on the institutional developmentdynamics and ecology.

In Italy, industrialization has been a process determined,in its spatial and economic organization, by the regionalsociety that generated it, being a market socialconstruction of a development supported and molded by

cultural and historical regional characteristics.

The acknowledged efficiency of the productive mode of the Emilia-Romagna region, for example, is propelled by acomplex system of relations between companies andhorizontal service centers that act as sectorial interfacesamong companies, and by the productive chain, in whichexternal suppliers are the greatest strength of a

manufacturing system that provides the possibility of progress for smaller companies, usually family ones,which work in production networks.

This type of structuring is observed in the formation of industrial agglomerations in the South and Southwestregions of Brazil where, although family relations of European immigrants prevail, regional and local,

entrepreneurial and political leaderships have sought toimplement some autonomy in the local industrial policy.

In surveys, it was noticed that in the industrialagglomerations identified by IPEA, the models are similar among themselves, seeking to involve traditional labor qualification institutions, such as SENAI, managementones, such as SEBRAE, besides fostering agencies such



as BNDES and educational ones, usually technicalschools and universities in the region, yet they keep

regional particularities.

In Brazil, there are initiatives with positive results:Blumenau, where a textile company network establishedthe Blumenau Fashion Foundation, institutionalarrangement aimed at technological capacity building for the apparel sector; Criciúma, where local producersimplemented the Ceramic Technological Center; Vitória,

which stimulates the interaction of the local university withmetallurgical companies through the Capixaba Center of Metal-Mechanical Development; Santa Rita do Sapucaí,where Luiza Rennó Moreira, with articulations with theFederal Engineering School of Itajubá and with largecompanies in the telecommunications sector, managed togenerate spin-offs of the local educational institutions and,consequently, the formation of small and medium-sizedcompanies in the electronic and telecommunicationsareas; São Carlos, which, through the ParqTecFoundation, established the Technological CompaniesIncubator Center with companies in the instrumentation,precision mechanics, microelectronics, robotics,automation and new materials areas, and Votuporanga,with its AIRVO, established a furniture pole in the region,

managing to insert local companies in the internationalmarket.

There are also initiatives with negative results, such as theColatina one that, despite having invested in the creationof its Technological Center of the Apparel Industries of Espírito Santo, little used it. This difficulty may beattributed to the deficient managerial structure of the



sector, basically constituted of small and family apparelcompanies.

In Brazil, in the agglomerations considered technologicalpoles, such as Campinas, São Carlos, São José dosCampos, Rio de Janeiro and Florianópolis, the necessaryinnovation process undergoes difficulties for not attaininga growing synergy, the so-called spin-off , in whichacademic researchers would feel stimulated to participatein concrete projects in large companies, possibly due to

the non-commitment of companies, usually multinationalones, headquartered in other countries.

It was verified that structuring an internationaltechnological pole, such as the Sophia Antipolis model, asuccessful development strategy of a region withtraditional tourist vocation, apparently without attractivelocational factors for the logistic of high technology

enterprises, the major success factors in the innovationprocess were: international airport with severaldestinations; advanced telecommunications infrastructure;cooperation among companies; greater productivity byprofessionals; availability of high qualificationprofessionals; presence of high level university centers;social and cultural life with diversity and quality; largegreen spaces neighboring companies; good supply of

health professionals and of international schools withbilingual education.

Problems also exist in Sophia Antipolis; mainly due to itsfast growth, some services are deficient: the internationalschools do not offer new places, public administrationshave no representation in Sophia and the cost of lifeturned very high.



Another growing difficulty in the internal development of the French Technopolises derives from the inexistence of

spin-off in the teaching and research centers with the largecompanies. This makes it very dependent on theestablishment of new companies to keep growing andabsorbing the qualified labor formation in the region.

This lack of synergy is a problem mainly generated by theattraction of companies, the centers of decision of whichare in the USA. They are not free to foster collaboration

opportunities with local companies, which makes SophiaAntipolis have some similarity with the Braziliantechnological poles.

Therefore, capacity building for technological innovation ina pole is not only a result of integration betweencompanies and the academic community, but it alsodepends on a regional cooperation atmosphere among

companies that favors productive synergy, an identifiableexemplar competitive advantage in the Emilia-Romagnaregion, as previously discussed.

It can be concluded that this phenomenon is not onlycharacterized as a result of an articulation betweenpotential partners of a community interested in adynamization of its productive base by incorporating

technology-based enterprises; there is a greater complexity in it.

Isolatedly, the pole does not manage to trigger a regionaleconomic development process, as a project that aims atlocal development founded on technology-basedenterprises must consider the regional territory as aproductive space full of innovation.



This paradigm carries the hope for a real sustainabledevelopment, and the regions in which it is applied are

called Technopolises, where knowledge developmentoccurs.

Balanced architecture, buildings enveloped by light andagreeable air amidst impeccable sceneries, where peoplework happily in pure and healthy environments, withurbanism and infrastructure working as a support to anatmosphere that favors knowledge exchange and

stimulates creativity. This utopian image of a “NewEconomy” is represented by an icon that is being printedin our minds: the Technopolises.

Globalization, information technology, emerging marketsand reorganization of governmental management,generating new information and new knowledge, basicmaterials for innovation, may be in the same place - the

Technopolises - thanks to the partnerships that form thecooperation matrix, at local and regional level, aligned towork with the challenging forces of the “New Economy”.

It was also observed, however, that the complex socialand economic interactions caused by the impact of theinformational economy within regional urban spaces,coexisting with intense information and communication

flows, may cause imbalance in the communities.That is the case of Bangalore, in India, which haspresented a growing urban tension caused by chronicdeficiencies, such as growing poverty and unequalincome, together with a chaotic real estate market,deriving from massive migration from neighboring regionswith social imbalance.



This migration problem was also detected in Japan, whichmade Tokyo and its metropolitan area swell, due to the

concentration of high technology industries, which led to anational encompassing plan which aimed at providingtechnological development conditions to several regions,some of them apparently having no vocation for that, so asto revert the migratory flow.

A balance in regional development by means of equalshares of opportunities provided by the global “New

Economy” was the goal of the Japanese Technopolisesprogram. Yet fully attaining this goal would depend on asolution for serious problems, such as the integration of peripheral cities to the research and developmenteducational facilities, and the use of the infrastructures for the local companies to implement high technologyindustries; the operational arm syndrome i ; feebleintegration between universities and industries, due to theregulation of the public universities actuation and lack of high-level professionals for the researches. Theseprofessionals preferred to remain at the top universitieslocated in the metropolitan regions, since the latter providebetter work opportunities owing to the nearness to largeindustries headquarters.

The main difficulty was to establish spin-off in the regions

out of the Tokyo-Osaka area, having as the main causethe formal inflexibility of the Japanese researchers, butalso caused, as in Sophia and in the Brazilian poles, bythe limited autonomy of the branches of global hightechnology companies to start the innovation process.

The result is that the Japanese strategy of promoting thebuilding, structuring and operation of branch plants of



large industrial conglomerates did not guaranteetechnological innovation capacity to the regions and did

not significantly improve the regional development morebroadly and nationally, as was aimed by the program. Thereason is that these plants did not provide stability to theregional economic and technological development.

These initiatives in Japan, of adequatelystructuring its peripheral regions in the technologicalscenario that is emerging, are pioneering. Despite

susceptible to errors, they push forward the regionaldevelopment concept based on technology, serving as amodel for the industrial decentralization policy issue for itsterritorial comprehensiveness and political continuity,going through many governments with no significantalteration, an essential condition for the project credibility.

The combination of local and national initiatives

to keep its global technological position makes of Japanthe center of attention for its magnitude and ambitiousperspective. However, a great difficulty will be toovercome the extreme structural inflexibility of itseconomy, founded on the traditional alliance betweencompanies and the federal government. This ends upestablishing a sort of innovation “monopoly”, discouragingthe dissemination of the technology-based enterprises to

the peripheral regions.

In the creative process necessary for inducingtechnological innovation, the agility of the productivestructures plays a fundamental role, since there is animposition for permanent flexibility to adapt to the new andconstant transformations deriving from globalcompetitivity.



The search for innovative solutions does not only involvethe individual, but requires a reflection that involves the

community structure as a whole within a wide collectivecontext. In it, the territory is the field for a constantassertion of the population that interacts with it, proactivelyparticipating with its endogenous resources, viewingflexibility and creativity, based on the historical and culturaldevelopment of the local society.

There is some concern about this connection in the

Londrina strategic positioning, in which the resumption of the enterprising initiatives in the early North of Paranácolonization in the mid-1940s can be observed. Thisoccurred after the perception of local politicians andentrepreneurs that there was an inefficient use of theLondrina potential for development, which led to their hiring an international consultancy to re-qualify the citythrough an industrialization guided by the communitycommon sense.

When seeking the correction of its history course,Londrina makes a correct recovery of its entrepreneurship,characterized by the communitarian establishment of themajor public services companies. They have supportedthe growth of economic activities in this region ever sinceits foundation, guiding collectivity efforts to the belief

prevailing in the contemporary global scenario: technologyas a base for regional development.

However, if on the one hand, Londrina found the rightroute, on the other hand it has not yet found the way tofulfill the community expectations, as shows the presentsituation of its IDP. Its implementation ended up in thebureaucratic ambit of a municipal organism instead of that



of an autonomous development agency, as suggested bythe consultants and communities to ensure a continuous

collective interference process in the local development.

An attempt at reintegrating the IDP to the community isconducted by the non-governmental organizationADETEC, as the Londrina “technological map”, idealizedby the entity aiming to identify technological competenciesexisting in the region so as to integrate the academicenvironment to the regional productive chains, starting

from the industrial diagnosis elaborated in the IDP, intendsto re-establish a cooperation environment betweenuniversities and companies in the region. With this, it maycountervail the apathy occurred in the industrialdevelopment management, but which was not actuallyoccurring in the ambit of the local municipal administration.

To the idea of removing technological bottlenecks and

generating innovation in the products and servicesproduced in the North of Paraná, projecting the city as theheadquarter of an international level Technopolis, thediscussion on structuring an inter-institutional network,technologically based, and inserted in the regionalproductive environment in the region should be added, achallenge to a society traditionally identified withagribusiness.

The development agency, as seen in the Londrina IDP,elaborated by Andersen Consulting to manage the workprogram, would meet the permanent need for strategicadjustments in the IDP. It was not possible, however, tomake it happen in the municipal ambit, bureaucratic bynature, in which the plan was inserted; therefore, to attainthe necessary efficiency, the institution concept should be



expanded and disseminated to the region which actuallyinteracts with the Londrina metropolitan region, re-thinking

the comprehensiveness of the plan.

The point is to know whether the concrete formation of aTechnopolis in this city in the North of Paraná is viable,since it implies a society and an economy intrinsicallyreceptive to innovation, as this requires: an educationalsystem that stimulates creativity and the quest for scientific and technological knowledge; a laboratory

network capable of conducting team work to develop andacquire knowledge as from information coming fromoutside; a structure for developing and controlling thequality of products, abiding by international norms;technical resources, such as equipment, precisionmachinery and computational stores; an industrialstructure to support a productive “industrial ecology”, inwhich small suppliers, potentially innovative andtechnologically-oriented supply large companies whichhave access to resources and to the market; institutionsand programs that connect researchers and inventors topotential users of the knowledge they generate, as well asto investors; a legal system to protect both local andimported technological innovation; an economic politicalenvironment that stimulates research, development and

investment in innovation; a reliable energy system withgood frequency and amplitude control; an adequateinfrastructure for telecommunications, communicationsand transport; besides an excellent urban life quality,which implies sophisticated leisure and cultural facilities,including a professional level theater, which, however difficult it is to believe, the city still does not count on.



Faced with the complexity of these recommendations, itcan be seen that, so as to create the ideal Technopolis

atmosphere in Londrina, mobilization of material andintellectual resources is mandatory. Yet it goes beyond thelocal ambit, echoing in the decision spheres of the federaland state governments, also being related to aninteraction with the national and international academicand entrepreneurial communities, in which there would befinancial resources capable of taking on a project of such

magnitude.It is concluded that, even counting on competence toimplement the necessary local actions, sufficiently provenwith the organizations that show to be able to make themoperational, such as ADETEC, besides founding them onwell elaborated strategic plans, which is the case of IDP, if there is not a commitment of the public sector at all levels,from local to federal, very little will be attained so thatLondrina can actually be considered a Technopolis in thecompetitive international scenario of the complex “NewEconomy”.

This conclusion on the experience of that city in Paraná isapplicable to others that have to face the amazing number of variables manifested with the globalized economy thatgrows at the same rate as it expands beyond the national

territories and of the regional technological poles thatestablished the base for its development at global scale,which causes an interdependence in the globalizationprocess of localities.

It will be necessary to reflect on how to understand theeconomic system as part of a world social system withstructural constraints, with groups, members and



coexistence rules, seeking a possible coherence from theresult of conflicting forces which keep the socio-economic

system balanced.

Thus understood, it is similar to an organism, in whichthere is a time that defines the path of life; this will beobserved to change in some aspects whereas others keepunchanged in their permanent evolution.

The urbanism of the early XXI century has its corepenetrated, with urgent issues such as the destruction of the familiar structure which causes the emergence of newbeings, generated by the city itself: the mother city, aplace where one gets intoxicated with speed, with alcoholand now with the Internet.

Connected, the world society thinks and workscybernetically, weaving a physical and emotional networkthat goes beyond territories. Being here or farther on,

where it is possible to find someone like us, is a questionof being online.

Life dynamics turns global, yet the day-to-day universe of human beings is in the locus. Therefore, the great issue isthe city. There, all wishes are amalgamated, as are all our expectations for our short existences, while temporalbeings.

Time is a tyrant; it imposes conflicting, convergenttemporalities. In this sense, all times are global, yet thereis not a world time. “Space is globalized, but it does notbelong to the world, except as a metaphor. All spacesbelong to the world, but there is not a world space. Thosethat really globalize, are people and places”, said MiltonSantos (1998).



How can we work with this persistent maze posed by our modern pluralistic society and its increasingly more

autonomous values, in which a vast uncertainty, notsimply economic, is created? We will certainly be sailingseas never before navigated, with the need of aneconomic focus comparable to the quantic uncertainty of the physicist Max Planck.

Development is a process, the planning of which shouldnever be a product delivered in a cast, a final one.

Inserted in this context, globalization - with its emergingparadigms - should be understood as a continuouschallenge deriving from the human beings’ need to gobeyond their physical and territorial boundaries. This issomething that has occurred ever since the beginning of civilization, but that now occurs at a speed never beforeobserved.

This process is verified to be altered and to undergoconstant operational mutations in function of thetechnological innovations pushed by man’s longing toleave behind the old site, seeking to break away from thepast, from that already conquered.

Being in many places simultaneously, and pulling downthe oldest of fears: time. This may be the true

accomplishment that globalization, forged by the XXcentury civilization, leaves as a legacy to the followingcentury.

Time. Velocity. Supports for the wave of a global levelcompetition based on the expansion of informationtechnology, which makes viable a “New Economy” thatemerges at high speed, making communities bloom and



connect to the transformations, competent as they are tounderstand the complex process required by this

connectivity.

Localities provide occasions in a world that providespossibilities and that “globalizes people, their places andtheir regions”. However, it is in the diversity of the locus and in creativity that their cultures may provide that liesthe cradle of knowledge, as well as new perspectives for the future of sustainable global development.

It is thus necessary to elaborate new models so as toconduct the economic development of the XXI centurylocalities, composed of collective activities such as:

1. defining strategic visions so as to understand the local-global relationship;

2. creating planning processes so that communities may

conduct this relationship;3. adopting a market attitude in relation to products and

clients in their regions;

4. establishing quality in programs and services in order to compete with other regions;

5. counting on ability to efficiently transmit anddisseminate their competitive advantages;

6. diversifying their economic base and creatingmechanisms to get flexibly adapted to the newconditions;

7. developing and nourishing entrepreneurshipcharacteristics;



8. stimulating the private sector so that it takes on socialresponsibility;

9. elaborating their own project of economictransformation, as a result of the cultural, political andleadership processes differences;

10. establishing organizational and executive mechanismsthat support its implementation and maintain thestrength of the initial enthusiasm for the localdevelopment project, once it is started.

The reflection on these actions should stimulate theestablishment of instruments to carry them out. Thereason for this are the powerful forces, both external andinternal, which interact in the localities, raising theimportance of the regions to the same level as that of thenations in the competitive global challenge, imposes anurgent capacity building in the community collective and

individual resources.

Regional competitivity will depend on the capacity of itscommunity to exercise complex functions, such as:

a. integration, seeking the logic of the regiontogether with its needs and potentialities, aswell as supporting the articulations between

the sectorial and the global, among theeconomic, social and cultural sectors;

b. mediation, by supporting several actors for conceiving and for conducting a project; byfavoring conditions for decision-making andensuring the permanent flow of informationand connection among actors;



c. innovation, by surveying the populationneeds and by translating them into a

feasible development project, accepted byall;

d. mobilization, by promoting the communityinitiatives and by ensuring the participationin the institutional and human resourcesprojects.

In sum, it can be concluded that there is a need toestablish civility processes in the community so that itbuilds capacity to deal with the complex challenges of theknowledge era and with chances for success.

The question is how to conduct such local developmentprojects, the model of which was created and developed innations and localities where society counts on civicpractice, where the various collective tasks depend on

participation and on cooperation, as a habit thatsometimes goes back by centuries of years of the historyof a country, when the country does not count on such atradition, as is the case of Brazil.



Founding of The Cognitive City

As from the perception that:The technical-scientific-informational environment, whichshows to have increasing complexity, guides andpermeates all the human activities in a successive chain of social and economic transformations that materialize inthe communities territorial space;

Knowledge, being a resource from this environment,

would validate the use and operation of the local space asa productivity global locus, ensuring the combination of latent possibilities and the opportunities provided by the“New Economy” for the regions. It would also allow areaction to the perverse effects that globalization mightbring to the local development;

The local economy shall never be stagnant in order to be

competitive, as its scenario is permanently changed andtoday this is as fast as the information flows that crosscontinents;

Contemporary technological civilization achievementshave created barriers in the communication amongsocieties, excluding communities unable of grasping thecomplexity of relations under mutation, which means a

noise in the sustainable global development.The knowledge gap is the challenge for structuring regionsand localities;

And considering that:

Acquiring knowledge means stimulating creativity andflowing into innovation, which is a vitality and survival



factor for the “New Economy” organizations and for thedynamic communities in the globalized world.

It may be stated that:

A radical change in the collective mentality urges, as theone that determined the importance of technology in theIndustrial Revolution, during the transformation processfrom an agricultural society into an industrial society. Now,with its metamorphosis into digital society, the relevance iscognition.

“What we call Information Revolution is actually aKnowledge Revolution. What has made it possible toroutinize processes is not machinery; the computer is onlythe trigger. Software is the reorganization of traditionalwork, based on centuries of experience, through theapplication of knowledge and especially of systematic,logical analysis. This means that the key to maintaining

leadership is not electronics; it is cognitive science”ii.

It is established that:

To learn not to die is the new paradigm determined byglobalization in the localities in the knowledge era;

Local development is not and will no longer be as it used

to − the creative destruction imposed by the globalized

“New Economy” requires an original posture in thecommunities: a permanent need of acquiring andprocessing information and knowledge.



Proposition

The fundamental idea is that, in information economy, thechallenge of the regional or entrepreneurial competitivitydepends on innovation, and innovation requiresknowledge creation.

Innovation, knowledge and competitivity are sustainableonly where they can count on an adequate nationalinnovation system, a strategic factor in the competitivity of regions and their organizations, by means of an efficientpermanent mobilization in the companies, in theeducational complex, in the governmental organisms andagencies.

“Competitivity is only viable through an adequate nationalpolicy for innovation, requiring the formulation of a planthat lies without the scope of market economy.Nevertheless, can economic goals be met without giving

up the comfortable framework of the traditional nationaldevelopment plans? The beginning may be somethingsuch as seeking the competitivity based on thetransformation of mentalities, embedding it in thesymbiosis of economic policies into cultural policies, inwhich the purpose is to understand that a societycompetence is only possible with knowledge acquisition

through stimulating creativity. The economists’ monopolyis broken in this new type of economic policy as there isthe need for “interdisciplinary teams in which economists,anthropologists, philosophers, sociologists, managers,entrepreneurs, bureaucrats and... artists coexist”iii.

Now, when we are faced with the concrete need of stimulating regional development, it is possible to believe



that kindling local, biological and cultural diversity providesa wealth of possibilities that may raise the community

importance to the level of knowledge society.

The greatest asset of innovation is creativity, which is notattained solely by means of multifunctional teams, but alsothrough cultural diversity, enhancing the role of knowledgein the regional space as a factor of competitive advantageof enterprises, once it creates the adequate atmospherefor entrepreneurial synergy and the strengthening of local

activities.

Local productive agglomeration creates entrepreneurialcollaborative advantage. Small, medium-sized and largecompanies may cooperate for the same projects and later get involved in new projects, establishing a continuousnetwork process. Firms share talents and intellectualcapital throughout a common geographical area in which

enterprises of all sizes develop relations nets so as to helpone another a obtain speed, quality, flexibility andknowledge that are essential factors for competitiveadvantage at global level.

Competitive advantage is acquired through collaborativeadvantage. Collaborative advantage derives from the factthat knowledge is the new material resource of companies

and, incorporated by people, turns into intellectual capitalwhich is the source of competitive advantage.

In the “New Economy” knowledge, abilities and experienceincorporated by individuals has greater value than capitaland, for this reason, it is believed that it may beconsidered a post-capitalist economy.iv

And if:



Technological integration spills over the countriesgeographical boundaries, it determines a growing

decentralization of national development policies;

The new globalized “New Economy” incorporatesproductivity factors, such as flexibility and innovation, andit depends on local development policies;

The fall of the space barrier in the economic and socialrelations of humanity reveals to human beings therichness of their cultural diversity and the culturalcomplexityv of the global society;

Technique for the sake of technique cannot ensure theparticipation of individuals in a technological society inwhich difference is not a synonym of inequality;

The human capacity to manipulate new pieces of knowledge emerges in permanent evolution, a result of

findings and researches at global level, which areincorporated to the day-to-day of people andorganizations. It will be a reality in the localities;

The human cultural scale for acquiring knowledge, vital for making the world economic integration process viable,cannot be left aside.

It should then be considered that:

There is an urgent need for an operationalized policy withparticipation, decision and support mechanisms in thecommunities that have to be organized for local actionsaiming to stimulate the connection between the regionaland the world economy by strengthening the civicbehavior of the individual as an intellectual being and bylegitimating his/her role as a world citizen.



It may hence be concluded that:

The importance of understanding the intertwinement of alocality microcosm with the world dimension is critical for adevelopment model; and

The sustainability of this model is obtained by the societycapacity of conducting its own local experience.

And, finally, we get to the author’s proposition:

This capacity building, until then a particular function of

historical institutional developments, should have as aprinciple a collective cognitive process, making it viable for knowledge. In it one finds the elements that allowunderstanding the complex and abstract relations, asthose of the “New Economy”, to establish the forms of organization and judgment of the ideas and conceptsnecessary for building an original model assimilable by the

region it will be applied, enhancing the population culturalidentities, and for contributing to the sustainable globaldevelopment with creativity and innovation.

With this, it is expected that:

Civility processes are constituted in Brazilian communities,building their capacity to perform the numerous collectivetasks required by the knowledge era challenges, with

complexity;

By means of perception, understanding and knowledgeproduction, regional cultural characteristics enhancementis obtained to meet the need of conducting the communityalong the unsure way of economic globalization byinstituting a collective innovative mentality; and



The hundreds of years of civic practice history that werenecessary to model the development of nations and

localities by their collaborative societies may not thus beindispensable to trigger processes that result in originaleconomic development models in a country without thistradition, such as Brazil, as they would be elaborated withcreativity and innovation by those that could then be calledcognitive cities.

In the early 1990s, the Londrina economy was faced with

challenges. A pole of the agricultural-economic activities inthe North of the State of Paraná, the city was losing itsdynamics, with unemployment and lack of diversifiedproductive investments. The perception that this factderived from the exhaustion of its economic model,anchored in the traditional agricultural products market,pointed to the logic reformulation of this model asessential for resuming its development.

Having identified this issue in my birthplace, I aimed toshare my observation of its economic decline in informaltalks with local entrepreneurs, which resulted in the idea of taking advantage of the global industries relocationphenomenon, stimulating the international capital flow todirect its industrial investments to the city. The view wasthat industrialization, still incipient in the region, could

perform a more important role to rekindle the economy inLondrina.

So as to conduct marketing actions with large national andinternational companies, it was deemed necessary toconduct a high quality diagnosis, with entrepreneurialreliability, of the regional vocation for industrialization.



From Cognitive to Creative City

In December 1994, after articulations of entrepreneurswith the Municipal Government, the Andersen Consultingcompany was hired to elaborate the Londrina IndustrialDevelopment Plan (IDP). The work was conducted bymeans of several meetings, debates and seminars,discussing issues so that a strategic plan was applied tothe city.

The analysis of this methodology and others, similarlyapplied in many cities, intended to adjust its localdevelopment policies to the new conditions deriving fromthe global economy. This would justify the proposal, basedon local economic development studies, for my doctoratethesis at the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of theUniversity of Sao Paulo (USP), under the advisory of Prof.Ualfrido Del Carlo.

Hired by the Sao Paulo Institute for TechnologicalResearch (IPT), between 1996 and 1997, I had theopportunity to participate in the elaboration of the "StateCompetitive Strategy" plan of the State of Sao PauloSecretariat of Science, Technology and EconomicDevelopment (SCTDE/SP), focusing on technologicalpoles and local economic development, counting on

excellent literature provided by the IPT and USP libraries.At the same time, I improved my knowledge givinglectures on Local Development Agencies in seminarspromoted by the SCTDE/SP within the State of Sao Paulo,besides participating in meetings with regional leadershipsaiming to create a local development agencies forum inthe State of Sao Paulo.



During the works for the IPT, I could verify the importancetechnology could have as a factor to induce regional

development, which led me to believe in a viableeconomic development model to be implemented inLondrina. It presented the characteristics of atechnological pole, some of them with nationalacknowledgement, such as the State University of Londrina (UEL), the Londrina Telephone CommunicationService (SERCOMTEL), the Agronomic Institute of Paraná

(IAPAR) and the Brazilian Agricultural ResearchCorporation (EMBRAPA).

Stimulated by my advisor, I started to work on conceptsand theories that could be applied to the regionaldevelopment conditions of the "capital" of the North of Paraná, seeking to direct researches towards theidentification of a local economic development modelfounded on technology-based industries.

This led me to study the conditions found in Emilia-Romagna, with which Londrina had permanent contact,thanks to the Paraná-Europe Program existing in the city.There were regular visits by Londrina local leaderships tothat region of Italy, internationally known for its economy,founded on a network of small and medium-sizedcompanies.

The investigations extended as far as Japan, a countrywhich used to welcome a large number of "dekasseguis"from Londrina who, after working in factories of all sectors,including high technology ones, went back to Londrinawith resources to invest in the region. However, for a lackof alternatives, investments were restricted to urban andrural real estate. Technology and innovative productive



processes transfer could be assimilated by the localculture, since these workers, serving as facilitators, would

be potential entrepreneurs. The Japanese regionaldevelopment model is based on the implementation of theTechnopolises Program, regions that have their productivestructure founded on technological innovation.

The identification of productive chains in industrialsegments in the food area and apparel "clusters" by theLondrina IDP, made me direct the researches towards

industrial agglomerations, seeking an industrialdevelopment model analogous to the spontaneousorganization process, then identified in Londrina. Excellentsurveys on Brazilian industrialized regions and medium-sized municipalities were found at the Institute of AppliedEconomic Research (IPEA).

In 1997 and 1998, the establishment of the Ourinhos

Economic Development Agency (ADEO), by means of acontract with the local Municipal Government, was anexcellent opportunity for applying the concepts andtheories approached in my studies. I acted as TechnicalDirector at ADEO, accounting for the formulation of itsstrategic planning. I identified cultural and institutionalhurdles to stimulate managerial and technologicalinnovation, not only for the micro and small local

companies, but also in the public sector. Hence, even withthe support of important institutions, such as the BrazilianMicro and Small-Business Support Service (SEBRAE) andthe Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), the failure of theADEO main project, an entrepreneurial incubator, couldnot be avoided.



The work in Ourinhos allowed a greater approximationwith Londrina. Thanks to the nearness between the two

municipalities, I could closely follow the efforts for formatting a technological pole in the North of Paranáregion, inspired by the IDP conclusion and developed for industrializing the region. In 1998, at the end of the workwith ADEO, I was hired by the Londrina MunicipalGovernment for establishing a regional developmentagency, viewing at the implementation of the Londrina

Metropolitan Region.Until late in 1999, the coexistence with the Londrinacommunity was intense, and I participated in twotechnological journeys promoted by the TechnologicalDevelopment Association (ADETEC): in 1998, as arepresentative of the Municipal Planning Secretariat and,in 1999, with a lecture on the development agency.

After these observations and analysis, based onsignificant literature and document surveys, personalobservations in my professional experience, researchesand theoretical studies, I came to the conclusion that it isnot possible to build an economic development model thatis not original. That is, if there is a model, it is unique andcultural, applicable solely to the society in which it wasoriginated. That is a paradox.

The predominance of a world development model, as theone existing so far, results from a strong institutionalarticulation, broad organizational power andhomogenization of localized cultural values that, amongother factors, such as the technological one, seeks toguarantee its expansion throughout the global market.Globalization is the coming winter and there is no way of



avoiding it, but the simple assimilation of its model doesnot guarantee the Brazilian regions competitivity.

The problem of peripheral economies exclusion cannot befaced without first transforming the mentality of the agentsaccounting for the governance of the localities and alsothat of their citizens. The use of technological evolutionhas to be taken care of to stimulate regional economies,but a broad collective cognitive process must beundertaken so as to allow endogenous development

capacity.

Economic development, more than a mere technologicalissue, is a cultural problem.

The cultural problem, as today presented to theknowledge society, through the emergence of asustainable social diversity, has its best guidance bymeans of the Creative Economy.

Creative regions and classes, by means of innovativecommunities, will make of cognitive cities the networks for the global creative economy, ensuring more sustainablesocial and economic prosperity of regions.



i The same problem is faced in the Brazilian technological polesand also detected in Sophia Antipolis. Yet, if, on the one hand,

in Japan the decision centers are the Japanese industries

headquartered in the Tokyo-Osaka axle, both in France and in

Brazil this syndrome derives from multinational companies

headquartered in other countries, where investment and research

decisions are taken.

ii Drucker, Peter – Beyond the Information Revolution, TheAtlantic Monthly, p. 27, October, 1999.

iiiSchwartz, Gilson – Nova competição global exige política

cultural, Tendências Internacionais, Folha de São Paulo,

December 12, 1999.

ivHenton, Doug & Walesh, Kim – Linking the New Economy to

the Livable Community, The James Irvine Foundation, April,1998. In http://www.coecon. com /ahwahnee.pdf, May, 2000.

vThe fact of this complexity being cumulative, the rapid

advancement of knowledge power and the network created to

facilitate the growing digital economy, make Max Weber’s

considerations on the importance of culture and civic values of a

society for its economic growth even more relevant, as these are

the abstract conditions and non-material factors that support theinformation flows that make a region development viable.

cognitive city 2011

Documents