With 78 specially commissioned entries written by a diverse range of contributors, this essential reference book covers the breadth and depth of human geography to provide a lively and accessible state of the art of the discipline for students, instructors and researchers.

This paper considers the two concepts: the cultural and creative ecosystem, and the circular economy. It explores superficial commonalities and differences, as well as what can be learned from this ‘cyclical’ thinking (which we later frame as relational and contextual thinking). We lay out the common narratives of circularity in the representation of environmental and cultural sustainability. The aim is to move beyond superficial comparisons and understand the conceptual shifts that underlie them. The paper then seeks to explore what lessons can be learned from this understanding for the creative economy, about which there has been recent debate about its environmental impact. The final section turns to the governance of the (proto-) circular economy, and explores what sort of a ‘fit’ these new ideas have with existing institutions, and what changes are likely to be needed to current institutions and governance.

The aim of this paper is to interrogate the idea of the creative hub. It argues that hubs are more than buildings or containers, they can provide a crucial link between intermediary activities (social and economic). It argues against generalisation of an abstract and general hub model and in favour of an understanding of creative hubs in their empirical diversity embedded local conditions. The paper is divided into four parts. The first, explores how creative hubs are framed by economic theory; the second explores the importance of context – the specificities of history and place – in shaping our notions of creative hubs. The third part examines the ‘user experience’: the cultural economy and the cultural workers occupying such spaces, finally we explore evaluation of hubs concluding with the importance of shifting the focus from infrastructure provider to that of supporting user needs.

The aim of this symposium is to examine the situation of the creative economy in cities-specifically cities of sub-Saharan Africa. In this introduction we set out the case for the need to 're-describe' the (much derided) phenomenon of the creative city. This task requires clarification of what is understood in academe and policy communities by the term 'creative economy', the pronounced growth of this sector, particularly in the global South, and its particular urban character. Secondly, in the face of conceptual and policy confusion we argue for the actually existing, and growing, importance of the urban creative economy. Thirdly, with this ground clearing achieved, we seek to frame, and focus on, the emergence of new research on the urban creative economy. Finally, we use the evidence from the symposium contributions to argue for a reformulation of the creative economy within African sub-Saharan urbanization.

An important component of employment change in both Greater London and the South East concerns the increasing numerical importance of females in the workforce. The distribution of employment problems was associated with particular sectors of industry. The Department of Employment has carried out an analysis of the Greater London labour market in order to explore the fact that many companies were apparently having recruitment difficulties at a time when so many people were out of work. The popular image of London dominated by the City and its financial institutions is reflected in the current industrial structure, dominated as it is by banking, insurance and finance activities, closely followed by distribution, public administration, defence and education, and health and other services. The deregulation of financial dealing – culminating in the "Big Bang" of 1986 - helped to sustain London as a key world actor in this field.

This article argues that the analytical pendulum has swung too far in prioritizing consumption in analyses of the cultural economy. The article adopts a version of the ‘production of culture’ perspective and is illustrated through discussion of three interrelated fields of the cultural economy: the new economy, creativity and consumption. The article argues in favour of studies of the material culture of production (redefined to take in the whole ‘cycle’ of the making and shaping of cultural commodities) and recommends this as a basis of policy development.

This chapter discusses the transition in the last 50 years from cities dominated by public culture in the public realm to a privatised consumption culture increasingly on the peripheries. Culture is now instrumentalist to rescue and re-animate the city: either in the form of major institutions that are overburdened with symbolic communication (heritage) or re-branding as a 'creative' city. This chapter argues that, in the face of social and economic changes, these approaches offer little more than a 'sticking plaster' solution. An alternative vision needs to be found; cities that are open and facilitate social and economic action founded on an idea of open innovation: cities for culture. In such cases 'the city' (that is the cultural ecosystem and its people) must be the resource that adds value, not a backlot. A real alternative would be a city based on open production ecosystems drawing upon the diverse resources and ideas (from outside and inside) that the city offers.

In this commentary piece, we are reminded that naming (in-formality) is an inherently political act. Informality is discussed through a number of dimensions: conceptually in relation to the term 'formal'; considering its (ordinary) presence in the city; discussing the recognition and devaluation of the informal economy; and pointing to the contribution it makes to the global economy. Analytically, it is argued that informality requires a balancing concept of the formal; politically, informality is 'the Other', bound into a teleological relationship with the formal, but unable to ever achieve it. As such, informality is tied to and legitimates the 'formal'. By reviewing the ontological critique and epistemological diversions deployed by some of the articles of this special issue, the commentary shows that the informal economy is not a 'residual' category but one that encompasses the majority of the human experience (urban and non-urban). In this sense, it puts forward the suggestion of viewing formality as exception and informality as the norm, for it is difficult to imagine a totally formal activity with no informality. Informality, then, should be interpreted as a hybrid of what is termed formal and informal. In all its varieties, it is shown that informality constitutes the everyday of the city. Yet, this commentary also calls to resist generalisations so as to be able to 'see' particular timed and placed informalities that exist in relation to a wider (local) social, political and economic setting, as well as a global one.