Towards an appropriate regulatory environment for special economic zones in Nigeria

This study set out to examine the regulatory framework of the underperformed SEZ structure in Nigeria with the aim of identifying the factors that precluded it from achieving its objectives and hindering its competitiveness in the global market. The main question to be addressed is what regulatory deficits are in the implementation of SEZ programme in Nigeria that have precluded it from achieving its objectives. In approaching this question, this study examined the rationale underlying SEZ initiatives globally and the policy considerations for implementing sustainable SEZ. The study found that these policy components include strategic planning, comprehensive legal and regulatory framework, policy considerations, effective institutional framework, incentive framework, and physical development and management. The study further examined the regulatory framework underpinning SEZ development in Nigeria against the backdrop of the policy considerations identified. Using China's experience as benchmarks for successful SEZ development, the study draws lessons that could be useful in enhancing the competitiveness of the Nigerian zone programme. Moreover the study argues that weak regulatory environment is largely responsible for the underperformance of SEZ programmes in Nigeria in delivering its objectives. Specifically, the study made the following findings: ? Weak institutional and regulatory structures, infrastructural shortage, lack of linkages to the wider economy and policy instability are some of the challenges of SEZs in Nigeria. ? The study found that there is swiftness on the part of the government to create zones suggests that the government views SEZs as catalyst for economic diversification and industrialization. However, further evidence shows that the regulatory framework underlying the existing zone programme is not only weak but limited in scope to drive competitiveness. It also appears that the government has not been actively committed in the zone programme. The inference drawn here is that the Nigerian government does not actively see SEZ programme as part of its development strategy. ? The Nigeria zone regulatory framework needs a comprehensive restructuring with a view to improving the competitiveness of the zones. Concerted efforts could still be made to enhance the performance of the zones by strengthening the regulator to make it responsive to its responsibilities and engaging policies The research therefore concludes that engaging the instrumentality of SEZs as an engine of economic growth and industrial transformation will only be successful where the regulatory environment is favourable, attractive and competitive. Against the background of these findings, the study recommends that the starting point is for the government to adopt SEZ programme as part of its development strategy. The study also propose that adopting a comprehensive regulatory framework that will strengthening the institutional capacity of the regulator, give clarity to roles of the different stakeholders involved in SEZ development, support dynamic policies, constant policy reform and incorporate modern practices in the SEZ framework can jumpstart the competitiveness of the Nigeria zones.tm2017Centre for Human RightsLLMUnrestricte

China's Domestic Transformation in a Global Context

The phrase ‘New Normal’ captures the ongoing shift in the pattern and drivers of China’s economic growth. China’s new growth rate is both slower and imposing difficult structural change. These new economic conditions are challenging yet offer opportunities for China and its economic partners. Reforms must be deepened but also make growth more inclusive and environmentally sustainable, over this decade and beyond. This year’s Update offers both global context and domestic insight into this challenging new phase of China’s domestic economic transformation. How are policymakers elevating migrant workers concurrent with increasing consumption? Is China’s government spending enough on education and R&D to ensure it can achieve its aspirations to ascend the global manufacturing value chain and avoid the middle-income trap? Are energy market reforms reducing or increasing the price of gas and electricity in China? What are the consequences of China’s financial reforms and expanding Renminbi trading for foreign banks? What does China’s new growth model mean for the international resources economy and for Africa? Do SOEs face market conditions and are they dominating China’s fast-rising outbound investment? What is China’s strategy for navigating fragmented international trade policy negotiations

Campuses, Cities and Innovation:

The locations of technology campuses determine where innovation takes place. In a knowledge-based economy, the future of cities increasingly depends on the presence of universities, their industry partners, talent and (start-up) businesses. The relationship between (technology) campuses and cities was a central theme in Flavia Curvelo Magdaniel’s doctoral research, which was defended and published in September 2016. During her PhD study, she collected data of thirty-nine technology campuses, which we – as her promotor and co-promotor – considered worth a spin-off publication. This publication “Campuses, cities and innovation” contains descriptions of 39 international cases that accommodate tech-based research activities. These case descriptions (in part B) are introduced with background information about concepts and methods (in part A) and reflected upon in conclusions and recommendations (in part C). Based on our experience - after more than twenty years of campus research at TU Delft – we identified a demand for case study references to support decision making at both universities and municipalities. TU Delft’s campus research team aims at generating management information on all campus levels: from the changing academic workplace and new concepts for university buildings to the sustainable campus and the knowledge city. This book is part of a book series that combines insights from theory with references from practice, to contribute to smarter campus management. With a large number of facts, figures and maps this book “Campuses, cities and innovation” is relevant for board members and (campus) management staff at universities as well as policymakers at municipalities and regional authorities. Additionally, decision-makers of industry partners, (start-up) businesses and (other) members of the campus community could be interested in comparing their campuses with worldwide examples. “Innovation is what happens when preparation meets opportunity” was one of the propositions that Flavia Curvelo Magdaniel defended in September 2016. With this book, we wanted to take the opportunity to support the preparation process and hope to stimulate innovation

Federal Register

Daily publication of the U.S. Office of the Federal Register contains rules and regulations, proposed legislation and rule changes, and other notices, including "Presidential proclamations and Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest" (p. ii). Table of Contents starts on page iii

Informing industrial policy in Uganda: interaction between institutions, technology and market reforms

This study examines the motive ideas and assumptions that have informed industrial policy in Uganda since 1945. I deploy a historical perspective in order to understand the process of industrial policy and hope to capture the practices of industrial policy so as to explain the failure to pursue a successful industrialisation process in the country. The objective is to explain the nature of Uganda’s industrial policy practices, historically, with the view to deepening our understanding its impact on the industrialisation process. The study contends that industrial policy and industrialisation are often products of numerous historical, social, economic and political considerations. The major finding of this thesis is that the lack of a coherent industrial policy was a major contributing factor in the explanation of Uganda’s stunted industrialisation process. Secondly, the study analyses industrial policy practices in light of the imposition of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) on the country. Apart from the specific policies and institutional framework under SAPs, the study endeavours to explain their impact on industrial sector and it is focused on three themes: i) effects of liberalisation and privatisation on industry, ii) the sources of finance for industry and iii) the technology policy and its implications for industrial policy. The study as well addresses the public-private sector interactions which are seen as an expression of embryonic embedded autonomy. The study contends that for industrial policy to be effective at the national level and enhance competitiveness of industry there should be a selective, sectoral focus approach rather than a general regulation of the entire economy. Given the variant sectoral characteristics and features, the understanding of specific sectoral needs is critical to avoid a generalised industrial policy practices. The focus on sectors brings out similarities and differences which may inform state policy towards each of them. To illustrate the differences and similarities between sectors and the need for differentiated industrial policy options, we take the cases of the textile and fish processing industry sub-sectors. In conclusion, the thesis contends that to advocate for industrial policy in the current global context constitutes a movement away from traditional interventionism and goes beyond the market versus the state dichotomy and recommends their close interactions to realise sustained industrialisation. In this case, the interaction between institutions, technology and market reforms as the basis of a coherent industrial policy. From a policy perspective, this study attempts to provide an analysis that may lead to improved industrial policy-making within Uganda’s broad political economy

Technology campuses and cities:

This thesis examines the development of technology campuses as built environments and their role  in stimulating innovation. Technology campuses entail a variety of built environments developed to accommodate technology-driven research activities of multiple organisations. The science park is the most common type of technology campus. Other types include the campuses of universities  of technology and corporate R&D parks.In industrialised countries, the demand for developing  technology  campuses  to  stimulate innovation has been growing in line with the attention given to knowledge in global, national and regional policies. There are over 700 technology campuses worldwide occupying hundred thousands  of hectares in- and around cities. This type of built environments have emerged and developed during critical periods of technological advancements throughout the 20th century, to support technology-based development in industrialised countries. With the adoption of the knowledge- based economy, governments in many countries have encouraged research as an essential activity in their science, technology and innovation policies. The infrastructure that supports research is also gaining momentum. The number of registered science parks is steadily increasing since the late 1990s. The number of programmes supporting research infrastructure is growing in the European policy agenda. Municipalities are formally engaged with other public and private parties in the development of urban areas targeted to stimulate innovation. Governments, universities and R&D companies are investing billions of euros in developing the infrastructure that will not only support their core processes, but will help them to remain competitive by attracting and retaining the best talent. Part of these investments are targeted to develop new buildings or entire areas that often result in campuses as we know them: a concentration of buildings accommodating organisations, people, and their activities in a (green) field.The assumption that the concentration of research activities in one location stimulates innovation is promoting the development of technology campuses in many places. However, the  capacity  of these built environments to support the different processes associated with innovation is not well understood – i.e. Technology campuses are urban areas in the inner city and peripheral locations that have the capacity to support the processes of knowledge creation and diffusion, as well as of attracting and retaining knowledge workers. The existent knowledge about the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level is limited. This knowledge gap may lead to inefficient use of the resources employed to develop technology campuses including capital, land, and time. Also, this lack of understanding can have the opposite effect, because technology campuses could easily become problematic areas dealing with vacancy, poor spatial quality, and connectivity issues frustrating the societal goal of attracting and retaining talent in the knowledge economy. A potential way to address these problems is outlining the ways in which the built environment stimulates innovation in technology campuses.In this context, this research addresses as main question ‘How does the built environment stimulate innovation in technology campuses?’ This research is grounded in the field of corporate real estate management and its theoretical assumption that the built environment is a resource managed to support the goals of organisations. Research in this field has focused on the practice of real estate management from the end user’s view. Campus development is a comprehensive form of this practice, because it deals with activities that vary from developing real estate strategies, developing building projects, up to maintaining and managing the portfolio of an organisation. The relationship between innovation and the built environment has been addressed before in theories of corporate real estate management in a broad sense. Empirically, this has been explored on the supply side at the level of the workplace rather than at the urban scale. Although the contemporary discussion of innovation in complementary research fields focus on the urban level. Onthe demand side, the involvement of public and private parties in the development of these areas moves forward the organisational scope in corporate real estate management beyond the end-users in large scale built environments.This research provides an understanding of the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level. This research developed knowledge clarifying such relationship in the form of a conceptual model and recommendations for practitioners involved in the practice of campus development. This knowledge developed mainly throughout an inductive approach in two core studies. The first study is an exploratory research that uncovers and positions the link between innovation and the built  environment  by  using  inputs  from  theory  (literature  review) and empirical evidence (qualitative survey of 39 technology campuses). In this stage, the link between innovation and the built environment is provided in a form of a conceptual framework containing the proposition that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation. The second study is an explanatory research that clarifies the relationship between innovation and the built environment based on empirical evidence in the practice of campus development (theory building from case studies). In this stage, the theoretical constructs of the conceptual framework are applied and revised through the in- depth study of two cases in particular contexts (i.e. High Tech Campus Eindhoven in the Netherlands and the Massachusetts Institute of technology campus in the United States). As a result, the preliminary knowledge from the exploratory research was developed into a conceptual model bearing  a hypothesis and five propositions closely linked to empirical evidence.The answer to the main research question is that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation in technology campuses demonstrated by location decisions and interventions facilitating five interdependent conditions required for innovation. The following propositions explain how the built environment facilitates each of the five conditions for innovation: Location decisions and area development facilitate the long-term concentration of innovative organisations in cities and regions. Interventions enabling the transformation of the built environment at area and building levels facilitate the climate for adaptation along changing technological trajectories over time. Large-scale real estate interventions facilitate the synergy among university, industry and governments. Location decisions and interventions supporting image and accessibility define the innovation area by emphasising its distinct identity, scale and connectivity features. Real estate interventions enabling access to amenities increase the diversity of people & chances for social interaction regardless the distinct geographical settings in which the concentration of innovative activities takes place. This research acknowledges that the location decisions of some technology-driven organisations have coincidentally determined the concentration of innovative research activities in  particular  places.  Over the years, the accommodation of  the  research  activities  of  these  organisations  has  co-  evolved  with  particular socio-economic processes in their hosting cities creating unique conditions for innovation. The concentration of innovative organisations can be considered as  a  primal  condition enabling the co-existence of the other four conditions for innovation. Similarly,  this  research acknowledges the following interventions facilitating conditions for innovation at the area level and depending on the   particular location characteristics in which each campus has developed: Transforming areas through urban renewal and redevelopment, Building, adapting and re-using flexible facilities, Implementing the shared use of facilities accommodating different functions and users, Developing physical infrastructure enabling access to amenities and connection between functions Developing representative facilities and area concepts that support image. The empirical evidence supporting the propositions in the model is structured and converted into information available to decision makers involved in the development of technology campuses in the form of tools. The so-called ‘campus decision maker toolbox’ provides instruments that can guide planners, designers and managers during different stages of campus development. The tool for planners comprises campus models to frame the campus vision during the initiation of the campus based on location characteristics. The tool for designers consists of alternatives to enhance the  campus brief during the preparation of the campus. And the tool for managers contains an information map to steer the campus strategy during the use of the campus.This knowledge contributes to the existing understanding of  the  relationship  between  innovation and the built environment in theory and practice. In theory, this research adds to existing theoretical concepts connecting the fields of corporate real estate management, urban studies in the knowledge- based economy and economic geography. The conceptual model proposed a new combination of existing theoretical concepts addressing a new way to look at the relationship between innovation and the built environment. In practice, this understanding is expected to encourage the efficient and effective use of the many resources required to develop technology campuses. Particularly, by providing information that can help decision makers to steer such resources towards strategic decisions and interventions that -under certain conditions- facilitate innovation. The knowledge developed in this research clarifies a relationship between innovation and the built environment at urban area level, in which the built environment facilitates conditions for innovation

Technology campuses and cities

This thesis examines the development of technology campuses as built environments and their role  in stimulating innovation. Technology campuses entail a variety of built environments developed to accommodate technology-driven research activities of multiple organisations. The science park is the most common type of technology campus. Other types include the campuses of universities  of technology and corporate R&D parks.In industrialised countries, the demand for developing  technology  campuses  to  stimulate innovation has been growing in line with the attention given to knowledge in global, national and regional policies. There are over 700 technology campuses worldwide occupying hundred thousands  of hectares in- and around cities. This type of built environments have emerged and developed during critical periods of technological advancements throughout the 20th century, to support technology-based development in industrialised countries. With the adoption of the knowledge- based economy, governments in many countries have encouraged research as an essential activity in their science, technology and innovation policies. The infrastructure that supports research is also gaining momentum. The number of registered science parks is steadily increasing since the late 1990s. The number of programmes supporting research infrastructure is growing in the European policy agenda. Municipalities are formally engaged with other public and private parties in the development of urban areas targeted to stimulate innovation. Governments, universities and R&D companies are investing billions of euros in developing the infrastructure that will not only support their core processes, but will help them to remain competitive by attracting and retaining the best talent. Part of these investments are targeted to develop new buildings or entire areas that often result in campuses as we know them: a concentration of buildings accommodating organisations, people, and their activities in a (green) field.The assumption that the concentration of research activities in one location stimulates innovation is promoting the development of technology campuses in many places. However, the  capacity  of these built environments to support the different processes associated with innovation is not well understood – i.e. Technology campuses are urban areas in the inner city and peripheral locations that have the capacity to support the processes of knowledge creation and diffusion, as well as of attracting and retaining knowledge workers. The existent knowledge about the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level is limited. This knowledge gap may lead to inefficient use of the resources employed to develop technology campuses including capital, land, and time. Also, this lack of understanding can have the opposite effect, because technology campuses could easily become problematic areas dealing with vacancy, poor spatial quality, and connectivity issues frustrating the societal goal of attracting and retaining talent in the knowledge economy. A potential way to address these problems is outlining the ways in which the built environment stimulates innovation in technology campuses.In this context, this research addresses as main question ‘How does the built environment stimulate innovation in technology campuses?’ This research is grounded in the field of corporate real estate management and its theoretical assumption that the built environment is a resource managed to support the goals of organisations. Research in this field has focused on the practice of real estate management from the end user’s view. Campus development is a comprehensive form of this practice, because it deals with activities that vary from developing real estate strategies, developing building projects, up to maintaining and managing the portfolio of an organisation. The relationship between innovation and the built environment has been addressed before in theories of corporate real estate management in a broad sense. Empirically, this has been explored on the supply side at the level of the workplace rather than at the urban scale. Although the contemporary discussion of innovation in complementary research fields focus on the urban level. Onthe demand side, the involvement of public and private parties in the development of these areas moves forward the organisational scope in corporate real estate management beyond the end-users in large scale built environments.This research provides an understanding of the relationship between the built environment and innovation at the area level. This research developed knowledge clarifying such relationship in the form of a conceptual model and recommendations for practitioners involved in the practice of campus development. This knowledge developed mainly throughout an inductive approach in two core studies. The first study is an exploratory research that uncovers and positions the link between innovation and the built  environment by using inputs from theory (literature  review) and empirical evidence (qualitative survey of 39 technology campuses). In this stage, the link between innovation and the built environment is provided in a form of a conceptual framework containing the proposition that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation. The second study is an explanatory research that clarifies the relationship between innovation and the built environment based on empirical evidence in the practice of campus development (theory building from case studies). In this stage, the theoretical constructs of the conceptual framework are applied and revised through the in- depth study of two cases in particular contexts (i.e. High Tech Campus Eindhoven in the Netherlands and the Massachusetts Institute of technology campus in the United States). As a result, the preliminary knowledge from the exploratory research was developed into a conceptual model bearing  a hypothesis and five propositions closely linked to empirical evidence. The answer to the main research question is that the built environment is a catalyst for innovation in technology campuses demonstrated by location decisions and interventions facilitating five interdependent conditions required for innovation. The following propositions explain how the built environment facilitates each of the five conditions for innovation: Location decisions and area development facilitate the long-term concentration of innovative organisations in cities and regions. Interventions enabling the transformation of the built environment at area and building levels facilitate the climate for adaptation along changing technological trajectories over time. Large-scale real estate interventions facilitate the synergy among university, industry and governments. Location decisions and interventions supporting image and accessibility define the innovation area by emphasising its distinct identity, scale and connectivity features. Real estate interventions enabling access to amenities increase the diversity of people & chances for social interaction regardless the distinct geographical settings in which the concentration of innovative activities takes place. This research acknowledges that the location decisions of some technology-driven organisations have coincidentally determined the concentration of innovative research activities in  particular places. Over the years, the accommodation of  the  research  activities  of these organisations has co-evolved  with  particular socio-economic processes in their hosting cities creating unique conditions for innovation. The concentration of innovative organisations can be considered as a primal condition enabling the co-existence of the other four conditions for innovation. Similarly, this research acknowledges the following interventions facilitating conditions for innovation at the area level and depending on the particular location characteristics in which each campus has developed: Transforming areas through urban renewal and redevelopment, Building, adapting and re-using flexible facilities, Implementing the shared use of facilities accommodating different functions and users, Developing physical infrastructure enabling access to amenities and connection between functions Developing representative facilities and area concepts that support image. The empirical evidence supporting the propositions in the model is structured and converted into information available to decision makers involved in the development of technology campuses in the form of tools. The so-called ‘campus decision maker toolbox’ provides instruments that can guide planners, designers and managers during different stages of campus development. The tool for planners comprises campus models to frame the campus vision during the initiation of the campus based on location characteristics. The tool for designers consists of alternatives to enhance the campus brief during the preparation of the campus. And the tool for managers contains an information map to steer the campus strategy during the use of the campus. This knowledge contributes to the existing understanding of  the  relationship  between  innovation and the built environment in theory and practice. In theory, this research adds to existing theoretical concepts connecting the fields of corporate real estate management, urban studies in the knowledge- based economy and economic geography. The conceptual model proposed a new combination of existing theoretical concepts addressing a new way to look at the relationship between innovation and the built environment. In practice, this understanding is expected to encourage the efficient and effective use of the many resources required to develop technology campuses. Particularly, by providing information that can help decision makers to steer such resources towards strategic decisions and interventions that -under certain conditions- facilitate innovation. The knowledge developed in this research clarifies a relationship between innovation and the built environment at urban area level, in which the built environment facilitates conditions for innovation

Landscape infrastructure : urbanism beyond engineering

As ecology becomes the new engineering, the project of Landscape Infrastructure - a contemporary, synthetic alignment of the disciplines of landscape architecture, civil engineering and urban planning - is proposed here. Predominant challenges facing urban regions today are addressed, including changing climates, resource flows, and population mobilities. Responding to the inertia of land use zoning and overexertion of technological systems at the end of 20th century, the thesis argues for the strategic design of “infrastructural ecologies”, a synthetic landscape of living, biophysical systems that operate as urban infrastructures to shape and direct the future of urban economies into the 21st century. cum laude graduation (with distinction