D2.1 - Report on the current state of knowledge on Video game industry as Cultural and Creative Industry

1 August 2024 D2.1 Report on the current state of knowledge on Video game industry as CCIs 2 Project Details Acronym: GAME-ER Title: Gaming Clusters Across Multiple European Regions Project Coordinator: INOVA+ - INNOVATION SERVICES, SA (Portugal) Call: HORIZON-CL2-2023-HERITAGE-01 Type: HORIZON Research and Innovation Actions Topic-ID: HORIZON-CL2-2023-HERITAGE-01-06 Start: 1 March 2024 End: 28 February 2027 Duration: 36 months Website: www.game-er.eu Consortium: No Participant Name Short Name Country 1 INOVA+ - INNOVATION SERVICES, SA INOVA+ Portugal 2 UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI TORINO UNITO Italy 3 ASSOCIATION POUR LA RECHERCHE ET LE DEVELOPPEMENT DES METHODES ET PROCESSUS INDUSTRIELS CRG France 3.1 ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE EP France 4 ASOCIACE CESKYCH HERNICH VYVOJARU ZS GDACZ Czech Republic 5 SPIN SYSTEM SPIN Belgium 5.1 NOVARECKON NR Italy 6 UNIVERZITA KARLOVA CUNI Czechia 7 OGR-CRT - SCPA OGR-Torino Italy 8 PLUG AND PLAY PLATFORM SPAIN SL PNPTC Spain 9 KLASTER HRVATSKIH PROIZVODACA VIDEOIGARA CGDA Croatia 10 GAME ONLY GO France 11 HERNÍ KLASTR Z.S. HK Czech Republic 12 MUNICIPIO DO FUNDÃO CMF Portugal 13 THE UNIVERSITY COURT OF ABERTAY UNIVERSITY AU United Kingdom 3 Disclaimer Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or European Research Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the European Research Executive Agency can be held responsible for them. Grant Agreement no. 101132585. © Partners of the GAME-ER Consortium, 2024 This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Acknowledgements This deliverable was developed based on collective efforts from all partners of the GAME-ER consortium. 4 Deliverable Details Number: D2.1 Title: Report on the current state of the knowledge on Video game industry as CCIs Lead beneficiary: UNITO Work package: WP2 Dissemination level: Public Nature: R: Document, report (excluding the periodic and final reports) Due date: 31/08/2024 Submission date: 30/08/2024 Authors: Enrico Eraldo Bertacchini, University of Turin Cecilia Maronero, University of Turin Pier Paolo Patrucco, University of Turin Reviewers: Thomas Paris, Centre de Recherche en Gestion (CRG), École Polytechnique Chahira Mehouachi, Institut Supérieur de Gestion (ISG) Stefano de Paoli, University of Abertay Luís Leça, INOVA+ 5 Version History: Date Version No. Author Note 26/07/2024 0.1 Thomas Paris, Chahira Mehouachi, CRG First revision and input provided 05/08/2024 0.2 Stefano de Paoli, UA Scientific Revision and input provided 09/08/2024 1.0 Enrico Bertacchini, Cecilia Maronero, Pierpaolo Patrucco, UNITO Integration of inputs and final version sent for final revision and submission. 30/08/2024 1.1 Luís Leça, INOVA+ Revision of the final version and submission. Glossary and Abbreviations Augmented Reality AR Cultural and creative clusters CCC Cultural and creative industries CCI Creative cluster research CCR Creative economy research CER Department of Culture Media and Sports DCMS Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology DG Connect Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture DG EAC Digital Software Incorporated DSI Department for Science, Innovation and Technology DSIT Electronic Arts EA 6 Electronic games sports EGS European Game Developers Federation EGDF European Union EU Electronic sports Esports Hierarchical Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise HDBSCAN Information and communication technology ICT Large Language Models LLMs Location Quotient LQ Multiple Country Publications MCP Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la Communauté européenne NACE National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts NESTA Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics NUTS Research and Development R&D Regional Innovation System RIS Real Time Industry Classification RTIC Single Country Publications SCP Standard Industrial Classification SIC Small and medium-sized enterprises SMEs Software, video game development and editing electronics SVE Travel to Work Areas TTWAs United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNCTAD 7 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO Web of Science WoS Virtual Reality VR 8 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 12 2. MAPPING THE VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY IN EUROPE 14 2.1 The video games industry within the cultural and creative sectors 14 2.1.1 European reports addressing the video game industry 17 2.1.2 Other documents addressing the Video Game sector in European countries 20 2.2 Business statistics and industrial classification challenges in measuring the video game industry 22 2.3 Evidence on the spatial patterns of the Video Game industry in Europe 24 3. CLUSTERS IN INNOVATIVE AND CREATIVE SECTORS: AN OVERVIEW OF KEY ANALYTICAL DIMENSIONS 28 3.1 Drivers of clustering: agglomeration economies and spin-off dynamics 28 3.2 Pooled resources 32 3.3 Beyond geographical proximity 33 3.4 Different types of actors 35 3.5 Innovation and characteristics of clusters 38 4. THE CLUSTERING OF THE VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY: INSIGHTS FROM A SCOPING LITERATURE REVIEW 41 4.1 Methodology and data 41 4.2 Relevance of the territorial and cluster dimensions in the video game industry literature 43 4.3 Coverage of video game industry clusters 47 4.3.1 Methodologies adopted and geographical focus 47 4.3.2 Clusters analysed in the reviewed literature 50 a. Clusters outside Europe 51 b. European clusters 55 4.3.3 Key features in video games industry clusters 57 a. Main actors 57 b. Different types of proximity 60 c. Complementarities and relatedness 62 d. Inheritance and new path development 63 9 e. Resource pooling 64 f. Institutions and policies 65 5. CONCLUSIONS 67 6. REFERENCES 69 7. APPENDIX 81 7.1 Database search rationale 81 7.2 Descriptive analysis of the identified literature 83 7.2.1 Descriptive analysis 83 7.2.2 Methodologies adopted in the identified literature 86 7.2.3 Geographical distribution of the articles identified 86 7.2.4 Analysis of the core journals, most influential authors and articles 88 7.3 Additional bibliometric analyses 94 7.3.1 Bibliographic coupling 94 7.3.2 Co-citation analysis 96 7.3.3 Collaboration analysis 97 7.4 Video game industry clusters 99 16 In general, the video game industry has been recognized as an integral part of the macro sector of the creative economy since the earliest elaborations of classificatory models, as evidenced by the DCMS Creative Industries Mapping Document of 1998, which considers the Interactive Leisure Software sector among the creative industries. 1 However, in comparison to other more established and clearly delineated sectors identified in all the classification approaches, the definition and positioning of the video game industry within the CCIs have been much more heterogeneous. In some cases, this has involved emphasising the software component (as in the case of the World Intellectual Property (WIPO) model), interactivity (DCMS and UNESCO models), or including video games in a New Media category, to distinguish it from the audiovisual or traditional publishing sectors (as in the case of the UNCTAD model). The 2006 KEA concentric circle model is particularly illustrative of the conceptual challenges in classifying the video game industry within the cultural and creative economy. Commissioned by the Directorate-General for Education and Culture (DG EAC), this report is the first pioneering effort at the European level to define and investigate the economic contribution of the macro-sector of cultural and creative industries in Europe. 2 One of the key contributions of the report is methodological, that is delineating a workable classificatory framework for CCIs, which is partly inspired by the concentric circle model proposed by Throsby (2008). 3 More specifically, the centre is constituted of non-industrial cultural products, i.e. “the arts field”. A first circle around this core is that of “cultural industries”, which include economic activities whose output is made of cultural content. Notably, the conception, creation, and production functions in this first circle are linked to more industrial functions of manufacturing and commercialising at large scale, using material supports and communication technologies. Another distinctive feature of this circle is that economic activities heavily rely on copyright to incentivise output production and commercialisation. A second circle includes activities whose outputs are functional but that incorporate elements from the two previous layers into the production process, i.e. “creative industries and activities”. According to the KEA Concentric Model, video games are included in the classification of the Cultural Economy but discussed as a borderline sector. The report underlines that the games industry meets the criteria of “copyright” and “mass reproduction”. As a result, it has been categorised as a cultural industry, although some question whether video games are “cultural products” or belong to another category of products (such as toys). 1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/creative-industries-mapping-documents-1998 2 Full report available here: https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/culture/library/studies/cultural-economy_en.pdf 3 Throsby, D. (2008). The concentric circles model of the cultural industries. Cultural trends, 17(3), 147-164. 17 The 2010 EU Commission Green Paper on CCIs has essentially adopted the classification proposed by the 2006 KEA Report, thus distinguishing between cultural and creative industries (European Commission, 2010). 4 Video games are again included in the class of cultural industries, similar to book publishing, movie industry, and music: «"Cultural industries" are those industries producing and distributing goods or services which at the time they are developed are considered to have a specific attribute, use or purpose which embodies or conveys cultural expressions, irrespective of the commercial value they may have. Besides the traditional arts sectors (performing arts, visual arts, cultural heritage – including the public sector), they include film, DVD and video, television and radio, video games, new media, music, books and press. » (page 5) 2.1.1 European reports addressing the video game industry While the Green Paper enabled a systematisation and recognition of the cultural and creative sectors at the European level supporting the design of European policies and programs in line with this definition, the studies commissioned in subsequent years have mostly focused on capturing the complex patterns and potential of the heterogeneous activities included in this macro-sector as a whole, giving less prominence to the analysis of individual sectors, including that of Video Game. However, some recent reports show the increasing interest at the European level for the video game industry within the cultural and creative sectors and provide key insights about its features which are partly relevant for the GAME-ER project objectives. For instance, the 2017 report “Mapping the creative value chains: A study on the economy of culture in the digital age” 5 has utilised the case of video games software as a paradigmatic example of the multi-media sector, one of the main beneficiaries of the digital developments of the CCIs (Figure 1). 4 2010 EU Commission Green Paper, “Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries” (2010): https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1cb6f484-074b-4913-87b3-344ccf020eef/language-en 5 2017 EU Commission Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture (DG EAC), “Mapping Creative Value Chains - A study on the economy of culture in the digital age” (2017): https://op.europa.eu/en/publicationdetail/-/publication/4737f41d-45ac-11e7-aea8-01aa75ed71a1 18 Figure 1 - Stylised value chains for multimedia (2017, DG EAC report) Source: The figure has been extracted from the 2017 “Mapping the creative value chains” report, page 195. There are a number of key takeaways from the 2017 EU Commission DG EAC report that can inform GAME-ER research on factors affecting clustering dynamics and the spatial organisation of the video game industry: ● By using the value chain perspective with four core functions (Creation, Production, Dissemination/trade and Exhibition/reception), the report emphasises how developers and publishers are the two key economic actors along the video game value chain, confirming the priority of identifying and studying these players to understand the structure of the video game sector and its manifestations at territorial level. ● Although the subject is not explored in depth, the report confirms that some national differences in the value chain configuration and/or dynamics can be observed (with reference to developers specialising in different market segments, or niches, such as mobile games vs. console, AAA games, games with different monetization models, etc.). This implies that the emergence and evolution of video game clusters across regions must also be sought in the development trajectories of the video game industry at the national level, as different configurations of value chains may reflect different locational factors and conditions for spatial proximity. 19 ● According to the report, the creation phase (Figure 1) is marked by monopolistic competition, with many developers competing against each other but selling products that are differentiated from one another, and hence not perfect substitutes. Conversely, the production/publishing phase can be described as an oligopoly with a competitive fringe, dominated by a few major publishers alongside many mid-size or small publishers. These major publishers oversee critical business activities, particularly the pre-financing of games, which necessitates substantial resources and risk-taking capabilities, thereby advantaging larger companies. This dominant position endows major publishers with significant bargaining power within the value chain. ● The study also identifies international sourcing (de-locating teams in other countries), institutional competition between national regulatory frameworks, and competition in attracting skills as key forces influencing European multimedia (and video game) value chains. It is very likely that these factors are also relevant to influence video game industry cluster dynamics. The 2023 DG Connect report “Understanding the value of a European video games society” provides the most recent and comprehensive analysis of the video game industry in Europe. 6 According to the study, as of 2023, the video games sector in Europe employs around 74,000 people across 5,000 game development and publishing studios. 7 In addition, 70% of companies in the EU video games sector employ fewer than 10 people, but the diversification of distribution platforms beyond consoles and PCs has created a space for indie games from smaller companies to flourish. Still, capital-intensive parts of the market, such as hardware manufacturers, are generally located outside the EU, and only 14 of the 100 largest publicly listed companies in the gaming sector in the world are EU27-based. 8 Although not explicitly focusing on the spatial and territorial organisation of the video game industry, the report addresses several relevant issues that can be used to analyse video game industrial dynamics and the opportunities and challenges to support the video game industry in different European countries and regions. In particular: 6 European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, “Understanding the value of a European video games society – Final report”, Publications Office of the European Union, 2023, available here: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2759/332575 7 Estimates do not include the UK. 8 https://companiesmarketcap.com/video-games/largest-video-game-companies-by-market-cap/, accessed 30th July 2024. Note: the data also include companies specialised in digital entertainment and gambling. 20 ● The EU video game sector is mostly characterised by small to medium size companies that operate at different levels in the global video game industry, but includes some renowned global publishers and game studios, which are in many different European countries. Most of the studios develop games ranging from indie to AAA games, with a large part of the EU industry developing AA games (mid-sized games). The EU is host to some relevant developers of third-party software (game engine, a physics engine or a code compiler), which are relevant tools in the game development process. ● According to a survey conducted for the report, for European video game companies, the main perceived barriers to entry and growth in the video games sector are: (1) lack of finance, (2) strong competition and (3) lack of skilled labour. Conversely, weak supply chain/difficulty to find partners in the industry, inadequate IP protection and poor market conditions are not seen as relevant causes. Financing is a key challenge particularly for small and medium developers. The main problem lies in the fact that, unless a video games studio has already launched a successful game, it is often difficult to attract financing from traditional players, including banks. To solve these issues, studios are turning towards alternative ways of funding, such as crowdfunding projects or public loans and grants. ● In terms of attractiveness, the two key strengths of the EU market are the access to public support and access to staff with the right skills. Access to an adequate consumer market and to a strong supply chain are not perceived either as key elements of the EU’s attractiveness or otherwise. On the other hand, one of the main problems highlighted in the study by European video game companies is access to private finance. 2.1.2 Other documents addressing the Video Game sector in European countries Beyond official and commissioned reports by European Institutions, there are other sources of data and studies that help to build a knowledge base on the European video game industry’s spatial organisation, at least at the national level. The European Game Developers Federation (EGDF) 9 publishes annual key facts about the video game industry at the European level, providing a comparative view of the sector in terms of companies and employees between different countries. The data used in these annual reports generally comes from surveys produced by national game developers and publishers’ associations. 10 9 Available at https://www.egdf.eu/category/data-studies/ 10 This type of data has been used by the 2023 European report to estimate the size of the sector. 21 At the national level, beyond annual surveys produced by game developers and publishers’ associations, some white paper reports endorsed by national governments and ministries have been released in some countries (Spain, Ireland), providing a more comprehensive analysis of the sector structure, trends and challenges at the national level. Looking at other international organisations interested in the video game sector, it is worth to mention the WIPO Report 2024 "Making Innovation Policy Work for Development”, 11 which has used the video game industry to study the importance of leveraging local know-how to develop innovative capabilities and considered two European video game hubs, Poland and Finland, as paradigmatic case studies. Compared to other more established hubs, such as the United States and Japan, Finland and Poland are considered newer entrants into this industry, building primarily on computer art and programming hobbyist culture and translation/video game localization know-how, respectively. Poland developed its local video game industry mostly by focusing on PC and console games, and already has many AAA successes, which is rare for a newer hub. Finland has a long history of mobile games and is still a leading hub in this segment. In addition, these two countries followed separate developmental trajectories, showcasing different yet eventually successful paths for video game hub development. In particular, in Finland, the video game industry emerged from a subculture of teenage hobbyists who created computer audiovisual demos. This grassroots innovation led to the development of a robust video game sector, characterised by creative talent and technical expertise. On the other hand, Poland's video game industry paired game translation and distribution know-how with local literature and design talent. This combination of skills enabled the country to develop a thriving video game sector. 11 Available at https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4724 22 2.2 Business statistics and industrial classification challenges in measuring the video game industry A key issue in the spatial mapping of the video game industry and the identification of clusters is to understand to what extent it is possible to identify firms operating in the sector by means of standard industrial classifications. The NACE (Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community) classification, which serves as the standard system for categorising European industries, has been long acknowledged to provide an incomplete or inaccurate coverage of the Cultural and Creative sectors in general, 12 but this limitation especially applies for the video games ecosystem, leading to a partial representation of activities within the sector (EU Commission, 2023). While NACE category J58.21, "Publishing of computer games”, is directly relevant, it primarily addresses publishing and overlooks other essential aspects such as development, artistic direction, music creation, and distribution (EU Commission, 2023). Eurostat's 2019 statistics for category J58.21 encompass various metrics such as the number of enterprises, turnover, production value, and value-added. Sections R (Arts, entertainment, and recreation) and J (Information and Communication), which could potentially include relevant data for video games, do not provide specific references to the industry (EU Commission, 2023). According to the European Game Developers Federation (EGDF), 13 as game developers do not identify themselves as game publishers (meaning, companies that focus strictly on publishing thirdparty video games), studios developing games often end up registering themselves under other industrial classifications, such as, under 62.0.1 – Computer programming activities, R90.0.3 – Artistic creation, C32.4.0 – Manufacture of games and toys, R93.1.9 – Other sports activities, R93.1.9 – Other sports activities J62.0.2 – Computer consultancy activities, J63.1.2 – Web portals, M72.2.0 – Research and experimental development on social sciences and humanities, P85.6 – Educational support activities. 12 Measuring CCS Consortium (2020) Final Report - Measuring the Cultural and Creative Sectors in the EU, available at https://www.measuring-ccs.eu/the-measuring-ccs-consortium-publishes-the-final-report/ 13 EGDF (2021). EGDF position on the games industry statistical classification (NACE code) Available at: https://www.egdf.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/202004-EGDF-position-on-the-games-industry-statisticalclassification-NACE-code.pdf 23 In a few countries, such as in the UK, within the NACE category 62.0.1 – Computer programming activities, a five-digit SIC code has been expressly added (62.0.1.1) to account for enterprises whose main economic activity is “Ready-made interactive leisure and entertainment software development”. This finer classification, although possibly useful for measuring more accurately the number of video game companies in a country, is however not useful for comparative analyses at European level, as official statistics remain at the four-digit level. The measurement problem of the video game sector is further compounded at the regional level, where the official statistics collected by Eurostat on the number of enterprises are limited to two digits of the standard industry classification, rendering analysis impractical. Indeed, in the case of the publishing of computer games (NACE J5821), this activity is included in NACE code J58, corresponding to the broader category of publishing activities. To overcome the limitations imposed by standard industrial classifications to accurately identify firms operating in complex and innovative industries, more data-driven and web-based approaches have been proposed and tested, with particular reference to the UK context. The 2014 NESTA report “A Map of the UK Games Industry” (Mateos-Garcia et al., 2014) has developed a methodology that combines web sources with business registries to identify and map the companies operating across different segments of the video games value chain in the UK (i.e., developers, publishers, distributors, etc.). Data on video game companies has been collected through web directories with information about video games titles, developers and publishers, and other websites covering the video games industry. 14 By using validated data scraping and text matching techniques, the name of the active companies in the UK has been linked to business information available in company register databases, allowing to obtain information on their location and economic structure. The evidence collected through this approach provides a more accurate measure of video game companies operating in the country 15 and highlights how only one-third of the companies identified in the study are captured by official games SIC codes. 16 Crucially, by knowing the exact location of the companies, the report provides an in-depth analysis of the geography of the video game industry and its clustering structure. 14 Examples of web directories consulted are MobyGames, GameSpot, Pocketgamer, Tothegame, Develop 100, GameDevMap. 15 Specifically, the authors identify 1,902 video games companies. 16 The official games SIC codes 6201/1 and 5821 used in UK business statistics cover just over one–third (35 per cent) of companies, with the majority of video game companies having registered under other SIC codes, such as 6201/2 Business and domestic software development, 6209/0 Other information technology and computer service activities or 6202/0 Computer consultancy activities. 24 Another research initiative, which adopts a data-driven approach to identify innovative emerging sectors is the UK Innovation Clusters Map from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). 17 The study utilises the Real Time Industry Classification (RTIC) developed by Datacity 18 to detect emerging innovative sectors, which are not fully captured by official standard industry classification codes. This novel classification system classifies businesses using language patterns within the website text of individual companies to understand their key activities and operations. The video game industry is one of the 46 RTIC sectors identified through this approach. 2.3 Evidence on the spatial patterns of the Video Game industry in Europe One of the main objectives of GAME-ER is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the spatial organisation of the European video games cluster ecosystem, with a particular focus on local and regional clusters. Table 2 provides an overview of the state of the art of studies and initiatives that have provided mapping of the video games industry at the spatial level in Europe in recent years. The selection consists mainly of research investigating the spatial specialisation and clusters of CCIs and surveys by national trade associations that provide a picture of the video game industry's geography in given countries. 17 https://www.innovationclusters.dsit.gov.uk/ 18 https://thedatacity.com/rtics/ 25 Table 2 - Studies and reports with spatial mapping of the video games sector in Europe Source: Authors’ own elaboration 32 Application to Innovative and Creative Clusters Application to Innovative and Creative Clusters CCIs attract talented individuals, enhancing labour market collaboration Creative clusters foster entrepreneurial opportunities and spin-offs Development of infrastructure and support services tailored to creative industries Universities also contribute as sources of important spin-offs Key references Key references Florida, 2002; Cohendet et al., 2010; Garnsey and Heffernan, 2005; Bathelt et al., 2010 Klepper, 2007, 2010; Buenstorf and Klepper, 2009; Buenstorf and Guenther, 2011; Buenstorf and Costa, 2018; Cassi et al., 2010; Rizzo and Whitaker,2015. Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 3.2 Pooled resources Industrial and creative clusters originate, organise and develop around a wide array of resources within well-defined geographical spaces (Florida, 2002; Santagata, 2002; Scott, 2006; Santagata, 2009; Evans, 2009): ● Concentration of human capital, skills: geographical agglomeration and specialisation within a single industry support the formation of a local pool of skilled labour, input-output linkages and knowledge flows which occur along the supplier-buyer supply chain (Marshall, 1920; Becattini et al., 2009); ● Education/R&D: the role of institutions that generate formal knowledge and training to be transferred to firms has been stressed as a crucial factor in the birth and evolution of industrial and innovative clusters (Bathelt et al., 2010; Enrietti et al., 2022; Menzel and Kammer, 2019; Morrison and Boschma, 2019); ● Tacit knowledge/buzz: economic geographers revisited the Marshallian notion of “industrial atmosphere”, using the lenses of “untraded interdependencies” (Storper, 1995) and “local buzz” (Bathelt et al., 2004) to capture the idea that clusters benefit learning and the accumulation of tacit skills and knowledge that would be difficult to share without a common culture and social context and the thick network of local face-to-face and personal contacts; 33 ● Social capital: political and public resources and social capital more general are mobilised and aggregated in the emergence of clusters in industrial sectors (Rugafiori, 1999; Sorenson and Audia, 2000; Trigilia, 2007; Sine and Lee, 2009; Bathelt et al., 2010; Bagnasco, 2012; Antonietti and Boschma, 2021) as well as in creative and cultural clusters (Casadei et al., 2023); purely cultural clusters centred around public and non-profit cultural institutions such as museums, theatres, and libraries heavily rely on this type of resources (Lorenzen and Frederiksen, 2007); ● Infrastructures: clustering favours the pooling of different kinds of infrastructures, such as communication, transportation, commercial and economic infrastructure (Saxenian, 1994; Porter, 1998). 3.3 Beyond geographical proximity The formation of creative and innovative clusters is contingent upon the convergence of multiple forms of proximity, which in turn creates an environment conducive to collaboration, knowledge exchange, and trust. The various forms of proximity, including geographical, cognitive, organisational, social, and institutional, each contribute to the dynamics of these clusters in a distinctive manner. Proximity is a critical factor that supports the formation and success of creative and innovative clusters. Different types of proximity play distinct roles in fostering the necessary conditions for creativity and innovation (Paris, 2010; Cohendet and Mehouachi, 2018). A number of contributions to the field of innovation studies have highlighted the idea that the advantages in terms of growth and innovation due to location-specific factors are actually exploited only because of the presence of systemic interactions and networking in the process of generation and diffusion of innovation. This coupled effect of locational advantages and interactions has been recognised as a key determinant of the emergence and evolution of clusters. Clusters are found in well-defined areas where networking and knowledge flows between relevant actors are sufficiently dense and robust to facilitate the exploitation of external knowledge (Brenner et al., 2013). While in Saxenian (1994) and Porter's (1998) works, clusters develop spontaneously and organically, driven by advantages such as proximity, homophily, and spillovers, the knowledge-based view of clusters suggests that knowledge does not necessarily and freely spread in one specific region (Antonelli, 2006; Malmberg and Maskell, 1997, 2002). Rather, structured interactions are of paramount importance in encouraging the actors within a region to engage in knowledge processes and generate the fruitful local buzz (Bathelt et al., 2004; Bocquet and Mothe, 2015). 34 The concept of proximity, understood in its various forms, has been identified as a factor that facilitates interactions (Thompson and Fox-Kean, 2005; Antonelli et al., 2011; D’Este et al., 2013). This allows for the identification of the channels that enable local organisations to benefit from external economies (Gertler, 1995, 2003). Not only geographical proximity matters, as in traditional studies that highlight its effect in lowering transportation costs. Also, cognitive (Noteboom et al., 2007), institutional (Giuliani, 2007; Graf, 2006), social (Breschi and Lissoni, 2001) and cultural proximity matter for explaining participation in clusters, and their persistence. In these cases, proximity matters because it lower different and more intangible costs associated with the innovative and creative process such as imitation costs (Mansfield et al., 1981), absorption costs (Cohen and Levinthal, 2000; Griffith et al., 2003), networking costs (Agrawal et al., 2006; Beugelsdijk, 2007), cognitive costs (Nooteboom et al., 2007), relational costs (Glaeser and Scheinkman, 2000), congestion costs (Boschma, 2005a; Frenken, Van Oort, Verburg, 2007). The capability of actors to learn and share skills and knowledge depends on their network of relations and interactions, which are facilitated by immaterial kinds of proximity. In sum, these key forms of proximity have been identified and presented by Boschma (2005b) as: ● Geographical proximity: it is used to describe the physical closeness of firms and institutions within a cluster. Such proximity facilitates the occurrence of frequent face-to-face interactions, the transfer of knowledge, and the sharing of resources, all of which are crucial for innovation. For example, Boschma (2005a) emphasises how geographical proximity can enhance innovative performance by facilitating frequent interactions and knowledge exchanges, through enhanced communication, easier collaboration and the formation of local networks; ● Cognitive proximity: this type of proximity refers to the similarity in knowledge bases and cognitive frameworks among actors in a cluster. It guarantees that firms and individuals are able to comprehend one another's expertise and convey intricate concepts with efficacy. Cognitive proximity (Nooteboom et al., 2007) can facilitate effective knowledge transfer and innovation due to the ease of knowledge transfer, a common understanding of industryspecific languages and methodologies; ● Organisational proximity: it refers to the degree of similarity in organisational practices, cultures and structures among firms within a cluster. It fosters trust and reduces transaction costs, thereby facilitating collaboration. Creative and innovation hubs, where gatekeepers and knowledge brokers align organisational structures and practices, also encourage companies to adopt similar innovation practices and standards, which in turn lead to smoother inter-firm collaborations, shared norms and practices, and increased trust. These factors in turn support knowledge creation and innovation; 35 ● Social proximity: it is defined as the extent to which individuals in a cluster are connected through social relationships, networks, and trust. The existence of strong social ties can facilitate cooperation and the sharing of tacit knowledge. Maskell and Malmberg (1999) posit that social proximity fosters trust and informal networks, which are crucial for innovation. Art and design clusters may serve as illustrative examples of contexts where social networks among artists facilitate collaborative projects; ● Institutional proximity: it refers to the alignment of formal institutions, such as laws, regulations, and policies, within a cluster. This ensures that firms operate under similar institutional frameworks, thereby facilitating smoother interactions. The implementation of supportive policies and regulations serves to promote innovation, since they facilitate the proximity of institutions. For a recent review of the main proximity factors, although not directly applied to innovative and creative clusters, see for instance Wilke and Pyka (2024a, 2024b). 3.4 Different types of actors The exchange of knowledge and skills becomes a crucial variable in cluster growth via collaborations between firms and scientific and training institutions, and mobility of human capital. Hierarchical structures characterised by non-redundant connections favour knowledge sharing because of the key role played by “structural holes” (Coleman, 1990), knowledge brokers and gatekeepers: for example, large firms, technology transfer centres, incubators occupy a brokerage position between more “peripheral” actors. They arbitrate and flow knowledge between firms and groups of firms that are not connected directly, for this reason occupy a powerful and central position in the structure, which hence assumes a hierarchical configuration (Giuliani, 2007; Patrucco, 2005, 2014). Hubs are instead crucial in the evolution of clusters from more traditional business networks into complex innovation and creative ecosystems (Gill et al., 2019). Within innovative and creative clusters, gatekeepers, knowledge brokers, and hubs play a key role in facilitating the flow of information, resources, and opportunities. The role of gatekeepers, knowledge brokers, and hubs is interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Gatekeepers often rely on knowledge brokers to stay informed about emerging trends and potential opportunities. Knowledge brokers, in turn, use their networks to navigate through gatekeepers and connect with hubs. Hubs serve as the physical or conceptual focal points where gatekeepers and knowledge brokers operate and interact. Gatekeepers ensure quality and manage access, knowledge brokers facilitate information flow and innovation, and hubs provide the necessary infrastructure and community support. In what follows UNITO identified more specifically their features and role in innovative and creative clusters: 36 ● Gatekeepers are individuals or organisations that control access to resources, opportunities, and networks within a cluster. They play a pivotal role in filtering information and opportunities, ensuring that only high-quality ideas and projects gain traction. Gatekeepers often hold positions of power and influence, such as gallery owners, festival organisers, and editors, who determine which artists, works, or innovations receive visibility and support. By selectively endorsing certain projects, they create benchmarks for success and innovation. Finally, they often have extensive connections and can introduce newcomers to established networks, facilitating new collaborations and opportunities (Becker, 1982; Caves, 2000). ● Knowledge brokers are intermediaries who facilitate the transfer of knowledge and information between different actors within a cluster (Boschma and ter Wal, 2007; Bathelt and Cohendet, 2014). They connect creators, businesses, and institutions, enabling the exchange of ideas and fostering collaboration. Knowledge brokers often possess extensive networks and deep industry expertise, allowing them to bridge gaps between diverse sectors. They enable cross-pollination of concepts from different fields, leading to novel solutions and approaches. In creative clusters, knowledge brokers play a vital role in innovation by disseminating best practices, new technologies, and market trends (Howells, 2006). Knowledge brokers organise events, workshops, and seminars where knowledge can be shared, helping to build a culture of continuous learning and adaptation (Bessant and Tidd, 2011). Effective knowledge brokers build trust and credibility among cluster members. Their ability to facilitate open and honest exchanges of information fosters a collaborative environment. Additionally, knowledge brokers can help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) access resources and expertise that might otherwise be out of reach, levelling the playing field within the cluster (Dhanaraj and Parkhe, 2006). ● Hubs are central locations or organisations within a cluster that act as focal points for activity and interaction. They provide physical and virtual spaces where creative professionals can meet, collaborate, and innovate. Examples of hubs include co-working spaces, incubators, and innovation centres. Hubs facilitate the serendipitous interactions that are crucial for creative and innovative processes (Storper and Venables, 2004). By bringing together diverse individuals and organisations, hubs create environments where cross-pollination of ideas can occur, leading to novel solutions and breakthroughs (Florida, 2002). Moreover, hubs often provide essential infrastructure and support services, such as funding, mentorship, and technical resources, that enable creative enterprises to flourish (Pratt, 2008). Hubs also play a crucial role in the economic and social development of a cluster. They attract talent, investment, and tourism, contributing to the vibrancy and sustainability of the local economy (Porter, 1998). Furthermore, by fostering a sense of community and shared identity, hubs can enhance the social cohesion and resilience of creative clusters (Saxenian, 1994). 37 Table 5 integrates the roles of gatekeepers, knowledge brokers, and hubs with their impact on clusters and key references. Table 5 - Gatekeepers, knowledge brokers and hubs in innovative and creative clusters Role Description Functions Examples Impact on CCIs Key references Gatekeepers Individuals or organisations controlling access to resources, opportunities, and networks - Filter information - Maintain quality standards - Endorse projects - Gallery owners - Festival organisers - Editors - Maintain quality standards - Shape cultural and creative trends Caves (2000) Becker (1982) Knowledge brokers Intermediaries facilitating the transfer of knowledge and information - Connect creators and businesses - Disseminate best practices - Organise events - Consultants - Industry associations - Research institution - Facilitate innovation - Bridge gaps between complementary sectors Howells (2006) Bessant & Tidd (2011) Bathelt & Cohendet (2014) Boschma & Ter Wal (2007) Hubs Central and shared infrastructures or organisations acting as focal points for activity and interaction - Provide spaces for collaboration - Offer support services - Foster community - Co-working spaces - Incubators - Innovation centres - Foster collaboration and innovation - Share resources - Support economic and social development Florida (2002) Pratt (2008) Porter (1998) Saxenian (1994) Storper & Venables (2004) Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 38 3.5 Innovation and characteristics of clusters Empirical studies have provided substantial evidence of the positive relationship between clusters and innovation in both industrial and creative and cultural sectors (Breschi and Malerba, 2001; Chapain et al., 2010). For example, research conducted by Delgado, Porter, and Stern (2010) indicates that industries situated within robust clusters demonstrate elevated rates of patenting and enhanced economic performance. Similarly, Baptista and Swann (1998) found that firms located in clusters are more likely to innovate than those outside of clusters. However, the literature on the topic has emphasised how different innovation patterns and strategies may be associated with different cluster types or characteristics. For example, Lorenzen and Frederiksen (2007) propose that in cultural industries three types of product innovation—differentiation through variety, differentiation through novelty, and radical cultural product innovation—each align with specific geographic and clustering dynamics. Product differentiation through variety occurs within existing design spaces and markets. This type of innovation involves incremental changes and improvements to products, such as new versions or iterations of established products (e.g., sequels in film or updated editions in music). It thrives on localization economies where firms cluster to leverage specialised, related knowledge bases and deep skills. This clustering allows for efficient coordination among established actors, fostering a stable environment conducive to incremental innovation. Differentiation through novelty involves creating new design spaces within existing markets, introducing new styles or genres that break away from established conventions. This type of innovation requires diverse and broad skills, often brought together temporarily to coordinate unrelated knowledge bases. Urbanisation economies are crucial here, as urban clusters provide the diverse, dynamic environments needed for such innovative processes. Cities offer the necessary concentration of varied knowledge and skills, facilitating the emergence of novel products through the temporary convergence of diverse actors. Radical cultural product innovation introduces entirely new products that create new markets, such as the emergence of MP3s or webzines. This type of innovation necessitates both specialisation and diversity, demanding long-term coordination of previously unrelated knowledge bases. It benefits from both localization and urbanisation economies, often clustering in global and world cities where extensive networks and resources converge. These cities serve as hubs for both deep specialised skills and the broad, diverse knowledge necessary for groundbreaking innovations, supporting the complex processes required for radical product development. 39 Also recent studies on industrial (Wolf et al., 2019) and creative (Boix et al., 2015; Cohendet et al., 2021) clusters have also focused on the idea that innovation frequently arises from an interorganizational collaboration process, wherein a division of labour with regard to exploration and exploitation exists among the actors within a cluster. Innovative activities within clusters can exploit existing competencies or can be open to the acquisition of novel technologies through exploration. For instance, the case of Montreal (Cohendet et al., 2021) shows how the transition to a complex ecosystem of innovation hinges on the establishment of collaborative networks. The video game industry in Montréal has established collaborative networks comprising partnerships between game studios, academic institutions, research centres, and technology startups. The transition to an ecosystem of innovation signifies the evolution of the industry beyond conventional business interactions. It encompasses collaborative innovation, R&D initiatives, knowledge exchange, and partnerships with academia and other industries (e.g., digital media, AI, VR). This transformation has resulted in significant economic and technological developments within the gaming industry, influencing global trends and attracting talent and investments as a consequence of the transition to an innovation ecosystem. This perspective suggests that the advantages of collaboration for innovation within clusters can be realised in two distinct ways: 1. The formation of clusters can facilitate the enhancement of firms' knowledge bases, although there is a risk of undue emphasis being placed on the further development of existing competencies. 2. Collaboration within clusters can also stimulate the creation of new competencies essential for the development of entirely novel products. This may be achieved through collaboration with firms from other industries or by learning about new developments from science through cooperation in the cluster region with universities or research institutes. 40 Table 6 - Characteristics of clusters and types of knowledge and innovation Characteristics of cluster Type of knowledge Type of innovation process Type of innovation outcome -Specialisation -Intra-industry technical externalities -Industrial clusters -High proximity - “Hot spots” Existing, cumulative Exploitation -Incremental product innovation -Incremental process innovation -Diversification in related industries -Inter-industrial technical externalities -Technological clusters -Lower proximity - “Assemblages” Novel, recombinant Exploration -Significant/radical product innovation -Significant/radical process innovation Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 41 4. THE CLUSTERING OF THE VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY: INSIGHTS FROM A SCOPING LITERATURE REVIEW In this section, GAME-ER aims to investigate to what extent the academic literature focusing on the video game industry has addressed the analysis of clusters and its territorial dimension. To answer this question, it was developed a scoping literature review of the academic production on the video games sector in a CCIs perspective. More precisely, the research focused on the literature investigating the specificities of the video games industry and its clustering and territorial agglomeration dynamics. 4.1 Methodology and data In this analysis, GAME-ER adopts a two-step approach combining bibliometrics 22 with a more indepth content analysis of the studies selected (Kraus et al., 2022). Firstly, GAME-ER consortium partners relied on a bibliometric approach (Donthu et al., 2021) to ensure a systematic and replicable identification and selection of the relevant articles focusing on the video games sector within the broader literature on CCIs and its spatial clustering dynamics. A systematic literature search was performed using Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science (WoS). 23 More precisely, a search query was built based on the most relevant keywords to be searched in the publications’ titles, abstracts, and the keywords assigned by both authors and WoS (Keywords Plus). 24 The aim is to retrieve studies acknowledging the specificity of the gaming industry, which incorporates both a software and technological component as well as artistic features, such as storytelling and graphical elements, typical of the CCIs. Additionally, one of the main objectives of the research was to uncover the spatial clustering dynamics within this specific creative sector, its innovative component and its implications from a regional development perspective. Thus, search terms in the likes of “video games”, “gaming”, “video games industry” and their synonyms were used, together with keywords related to “creative and cultural industry”, “cluster”, “district”, “hub”, “scene”, “agglomeration”, “regional development”. 25 UNITO limited the search to articles, reviews, 22 Bibliometrics is a research stream of library and information science (LIS), where a collection of bibliographic resources is studied using quantitative methods (Broadus, 1987). Among the advantages of bibliometrics, these techniques provide scholars with the possibility of investigating a larger amount of data than systematic literature reviews (Bertello et al., 2023). Moreover, bibliometric analyses are performed following a more automated and relatively unbiased way (Öztürk et al., 2024), which ensures a transparent, sound, and replicable approach (Rey-Martí et al., 2022). 23 Web of Science is a comprehensive academic citation and indexing databases of peer-reviewed academic research. See: https://www.webofscience.com 24 The process of searching among titles, abstracts and articles’ keywords is referred to as “topic search”. 25 To keep a closer focus on the video games sector, UNITO explicitly excluded from the search keywords related to other online recreational activities that may generate confusion and result in the retrieval of non-relevant literature. 48 Notes: The figure shows the count of the reviewed studies in the content analysis by countries analysed and research methodology adopted. Studies have been counted only once and assigned to only one category of both country and methodology based on the prevailing framework developed and geographical focus chosen. Authors’ own elaboration. Overall, concerning the methodological approaches encountered, the large majority of the studies employ empirical qualitative approaches based on data collected through interviews. Generally, such interviews are conducted with video game development studios and their workers (e.g., among others: Vallance, 2014; Vang and Tschang, 2013; Parker and Jenson, 2017; Cohendet et al., 2018), industry stakeholders (Siemiatycki et al., 2016; Pottie-Sherman and Lynch, 2019; Cohendet et al., 2021; Gong et al., 2023), as well as with governmental agencies (Baeza-González, 2021), institutional informants (Barnes and Coe, 2011) and policy advisors (Darchen, 2016, 2017; Yang and Chan, 2021). To investigate the agglomeration dynamics and the characteristics of the video games clusters, other typical qualitative approaches encountered in this literature subset consist in case study analysis (e.g., Jorgensen et al., 2017; Lange and Streit, 2013; Miorner and Trippl, 2017) and surveys (e.g., Hanzawa and Yamamoto, 2017; and Snowball et al., 2021). Quantitative methods, instead, are commonly deployed in articles analysing different countries simultaneously (Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020, 2019; Belyaeva et al., 2022; Xu et al., 2023), and focusing on the evolution of the whole industry, often at the global level and over a long time period (Balland et al., 2013; De Vaan et al., 2013). This wider geographical perspective is dictated by the fact that granular quantitative data are generally scarce, limited, and difficult to gather, while aggregate data at the national level are collected and updated regularly by international organisations (De Vaan et al., 2013). To overcome these common data constraints, some of the articles analysed leverage on original data contained in freely accessible web repositories maintained by online communities of video games enthusiasts—such as MobyGames (De Vaan et al., 2013; de Vaan and Stark, 2015). Moreover, there are some quantitative empirical studies that adopt a narrower focus on a single country. Specifically, De Vaan et al. (2019) investigate the US video games market, trying to assess the level of entry of video games producers vis-à-vis the potential barrier represented by the existing social capital within a specific regional area. Adopting a micro-geography perspective of product innovation, Jang et al. (2017) analyse the sub-clusters of mobile games developing companies located in the Seoul Metropolitan Area. The authors uncover various product innovation activities, influenced by heterogeneous agglomeration effects. 49 Similarly, Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod (2019) focus on the concentration of software, video game development and editing electronics (SVE) companies, at different stages of maturity, located in the metropolitan area of Barcelona, suggesting that the clustering patterns of SVE firms are distinct from the ones displayed by the less technological creative industries. Finally, focusing on China, Xu et al. (2023) explore the spatial evolution of electronic games sports (EGS) in Wuhan, providing a regional and industrial policy perspective in support of the future development of this industry. Overall, it emerges that there is little comparative research among different countries. In fact, in the subset of the reviewed articles, only 12 offer a comparison between several countries. 34 Among these, the foundational work of Izushi and Aoyama (2006) provides a cross-country comparative analysis across the main geographical hubs of the gaming industry of that time. Focusing on the UK, the US and Japan, the authors explore the economic, social, and technological factors that are expected to drive the process of cross-sectoral skill transfer, which ultimately enables the formation and evolution of the video game industry in the respective countries. Similarly, Darchen and Tremblay (2015) offer a comparison between two gaming industry hubs, Montreal and Melbourne respectively. Firstly, the paper analyses whether these two hubs can be considered creative clusters, and secondly it examines the cross-fertilization with other creative fields located in the same metropolitan areas, the benefits of spatial clustering, and the role of specific policies in the maturation of these video games clusters. On the same line, by combining economic geography with international business perspectives, Cohendet et al. (2018) develop an original framework to understand how, in creative clusters, newly established multinational companies cooperate with pre-existing local actors to build a common infrastructure of innovation (i.e., “local commons”). The authors, in particular, analyse how this dynamic contributes to both the local and global development of the video game industry of France, the UK, Canada, Australia, which are all instances of clusters that successfully leveraged these cooperative efforts. The remaining articles generally adopt a global, and thus not particularly fine-grained, perspective (Balland et al., 2013; De Vaan et al., 2013; de Vaan and Stark, 2015; Belyaeva et al., 2022), or, alternatively, a regional viewpoint. In this second case, for instance, Jorgensen et al. (2017) retrace the formation of the Nordic game industry analysing the transition from the hobbyist subculture of the demoscene in Finland, Norway and Sweden into a formal and established business. 34 The label “Multiple Countries” in Fig.49 identifies those articles that treat simultaneously several countries and/or clusters and video games hubs. 50 Some studies, instead, provide comparative case studies across industries, rather than across countries. This approach consists in confronting some specificities of the development and localization of the video games industry against other industries. Specifically, Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod (2020) confront the location patterns of the software and video games industry in the metropolitan clusters of Barcelona, Lyon and Hamburg. They find that in all three hubs analysed, video games clusters display the tendency to co-locate with firms from other creative industries. However, it emerges that the three cities examined show very distinct concentration patterns. Finally, two articles adopt an interesting comparative approach, consisting in analysing the video games sector against industries that do not belong to the CCIs category. This is the case of the research conducted by Miorner (2022), who compares the process of industrial change and reconfiguration of the regional innovation system (RIS) in the digital games industry, located in the Swedish Scania region, and the automotive industry, established in West Sweden. These two empirical case studies support the proposed conceptual framework, for which three primary structure-agency dynamics (i.e., regional imaginaries, power relations and directionality) play a crucial role in RIS reconfiguration and new path development. In a similar way, Binz and Gong (2022) investigate the legitimation process in regional path development by providing a comparison between the potable water reuse industry in Los Angeles and the video games industry in Hamburg. Despite the fact that the focus of this paper is not strictly on CCIs, this work offers an interesting analysis of the video game hub of Hamburg, whose evolution happened in the context of an already highly developed region endowed with a complex web of knowledge spaces and capabilities. 4.3.2 Clusters analysed in the reviewed literature Among the first to analyse the video games industry and its geographical distribution, Johns (2006) reported how the games industry originated and concentrated in three major economic regions: Western Europe, Japan, and the USA. At present, the key publishers in the industry are still mostly located in the US and Japan (Parker et al., 2014). Nonetheless, the review of the recent research focusing on the clustering within the video games industry reveals numerous other clusters outside these major, and already extensively explored, clusters. UNITO provided a geographical overview, and present the key features, of the clusters explored in this specialised subset of literature. Figure 5 displays the worldwide distribution of the clusters analysed in the literature reviewed, generally located at both the city and regional level. 35 35 The map reports the cities, or regions, analysed in the literature and considered as clusters for the video games industry. The visualisation does not take into account national clusters that emerge, nonetheless, from the content analysis and as evidenced by Figure 4. In addition, Table 6A in Appendix reports the number of articles examining the respective clusters. 51 Figure 5 - Worldwide metropolitan and regional video games clusters investigated Notes: The dots, and their size and colour, represent the frequency of appearance of the cities, or regions, analysed in the literature. Source: Authors’ own elaboration using Google Sheets. a. Clusters outside Europe Concerning the countries analysed, Canada emerges as the most extensively explored hub for video games development. In fact, the country has long attracted the attention of academics and policymakers, especially after the landmark relocation of the French video game company Ubisoft in Montreal at the end of the 1990s (Pilon and Tremblay, 2013; Darchen and Tremblay, 2015), which spurred the development of the sector in the country. In the literature subset, Montreal appears to be by far the most analysed and cited cluster (Grandadam et al., 2013; Parker and Jenson, 2017; Tremblay, 2016). This is because of Montreal's video games sector's rapid and spectacular evolution, which, in only two decades, transformed the city into a leading global creative hub in the industry (Cohendet et al., 2021). Additionally, among the many Canadian clusters, it can be identified Vancouver as the second most prominent centre of video games development. The city represents an interesting case study as it underwent a remarkable shift from a staples economy—based on the extraction and processing of natural resources, primarily of forestry, fishing and mining—to a media and creative cluster (Barnes and Coe, 2011; Siemiatycki et al., 2016). The economic reorganisation of Vancouver and its entrepreneurial success stories eventually led to the formation of the reference cluster in British Columbia. 52 In this way, Vancouver managed to attract established players in the video game industry, such as Electronic Arts (EA) that ultimately established its Canadian division in the city. The subsequent process of new firms creation through splitting from the original company, Digital Software Incorporated (DSI), ultimately positioned Vancouver as a global video games cluster (Barnes and Coe, 2011). However, Siemiatycki et al. (2016) highlight the recent slowdown in Vancouver’s creative economy, including video games related activities. Interestingly, Parker and Jenson (2017) highlight the presence of a series of small and peripheral clusters in the Canadian video games sector. The authors, in fact, provide a fine-grained analysis of the national video games development scene, with the aim to map, along the well-known hubs of Montreal, Vancouver and Toronto, also under-studied Canadian clusters located in remote regions and cities. It emerges indeed that there are several small groups and developers located in peripheral and isolated locations, such as Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, and Pangnirtung, Nunavut. Traditionally, Japan and the US have played an hegemonic role in the games industry ever since its inception, therefore becoming the main global centres of the production and distribution of video games (Baeza-González, 2021). 36 Concerning Japan, Aoyama and Izushi (2003), in examining the emergence of the video game industry in the region, identified in the unique combination of creative resources from the animation industry and the technological knowledge accumulated in the consumer electronics the primary force behind the success of the Japanese video games sector. The primacy of Japan is confirmed by De Vaan et al. (2013), who first assessed the annual population of video games producers for the ten largest regions, between the inception of the industry in the early 1970s up to 2007. Among the top global clusters, the Kanto region, and Tokyo in particular, is by far the largest hub, which reached a peak of 219 companies in 1998, followed by Osaka with a peak of 29 companies in the same year (De Vaan et al., 2013). The Kansai region is the second most vibrant cluster of video games production, in particular around the cities of Osaka and Kyoto, where Nintendo is located (Ernkvist and Ström, 2018). Outside these two major clusters, recent literature identifies and investigates the nascent video games hub of Fukuoka (Hanzawa and Yamamoto, 2017). The US represents the other traditionally leading country in the video games sector (S. Adams, 2021). In particular, as reported by De Vaan et al. (2013), San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Seattle and Dallas emerge as the central clusters of video games production. Over time, San Francisco and Los Angeles became the reference clusters, while New York and Seattle also developed significant hubs. This present geographical distribution is the result of a structural shift with the past concentration of the arcade business in Chicago, where the four leaders in that industry (Gottlieb, Williams, Bally/Midway, and Chicago Coin) were initially located (de Vaan et al., 36 With some notable exceptions, such as the central clusters of Canada discussed at the beginning of the section, together with France and the UK. 53 2019). Some of these companies, such as Williams and Bally/Midway, successfully managed to transition from arcade games into digital arcade games, although this segment only boomed in the early 1980s and was eventually surpassed by the home gaming segment later (Williams 2004; Ernkvist 2008). Ultimately, San Francisco and Los Angeles became the main clusters of home gaming (de Vaan et al., 2019). However, despite being traditionally the reference regions for the video games industry, these two powerhouses are overall not extensively examined on the literature subset as compared to other clusters worldwide. For instance, in analysing further the specialised stream of literature, Australia emerges as an active country in the video games industry. Nonetheless, the Australian video game industry represents a “niche player”, mainly due to its smaller population of video games companies compared to the big and traditional hubs of Canada and the US (Darchen, 2017a). Notably, the cities of Melbourne and Brisbane constitute the two main clusters for the gaming sector (Parker et al., 2014; Darchen, 2016; Darchen, 2017). Specifically, Melbourne constitutes the bigger hub, where game developers are more centrally located in the business district or in South Bank. Generally, they work on more complex desktop games, which often require in-presence collaborative work compared to apps for mobile phones (Darchen, 2016a). In Brisbane, instead, the advent of the internet and new platforms enabled the specialisation of small companies gravitating in the mobile games business. However, Darchen (2016, 2017) argues that the two Australian cities show only limited overlap with the typical creative clusters. According to this author, the analysed agglomerations of video games companies—with the notable exception of central Melbourne and the Brisbane inner-city suburb of Fortitude Valley—emerge more as a result of their embeddedness in the technology sector, which makes it possible for game developers to operate at the geographic periphery of the two main urban agglomerations (Parker et al., 2014; Darchen, 2016). Thus, the literature tends to define these two cities as “networked communities” rather than spatially bound clusters of companies (Darchen, 2016a, 2017a). This is in opposition to larger and more mature creative clusters, such as Montreal, as in the Australian context the inner-city is not the only place from which successful games are produced (Parker et al., 2014; Darchen, 2017). Interestingly, there is a considerable number of recent studies focusing on the Chinese video games industry (Gong and Hassink, 2019; Gong and Xin, 2019; Jiang and Fung, 2019; Yang and Chan, 2021; Gong et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2023). In fact, in recent years, the Chinese economy has spectacularly evolved and the country has become one of the main global technology powerhouses. This remarkable development is also reflected in the video games sectors, with the presence of major industry players, such as Tencent, among the current global market leaders (Yang and Chan, 2021). Concerning the localization of video games companies, Shanghai represents a prominent hub (Gong and Hassink, 2019; Gong and Xin, 2019), together with Shenzhen (Yang and Chan, 2021) and Wuhan (Xu et al., 2023). 54 The emergence of the Chinese video game industry has been heavily determined by the government's neo-techno-nationalist policies, aimed at promoting domestic technological capabilities and cultural exports, while limiting foreign competition (Yang and Chan, 2021). In practice, this ambition translated into heavy infrastructure investment—for instance, in the creation of technology parks, such as Optics Valley, the R&D and production centre of optical fibres and cables in Wuhan (Xu et al., 2023)—regulatory barriers, and support for domestic companies to foster internal growth and position the industry as a global competitor (Yang and Chan, 2021). Another remarkable Asian player in the video games sector is represented by South Korea and its main metropolitan hub of Seoul. Among the studies analysed, Jang et al. (2017) adopt a microgeography perspective to examine Seoul’s local districts of video games, and how product innovation is influenced by firms' agglomeration dynamics. The authors analyse whether video game firms locate to form sub-clusters and whether they asymmetrically benefit from product innovation agglomerations at the individual and sub-cluster levels. First, the authors find that firms specialising in specific product innovation activities tend to form sub-clusters within a bigger industrial cluster. Secondly, it also emerges how the relationships between specific product innovation activities and commercial performances vary across individual firms and sub-clusters within the macro cluster. Finally, GAME-ER identifies a stream of research displaying a tendency to focus on countries and regions occupying a more peripheral position in the context of the global video games industry. For example, among the Latin American countries, Brazil and Chile have recently received some academic attention (Baeza-González, 2021; Diniz and Abrita, 2021). Brazil emerges as an active, although still minor, hub in the global video games industry. Nonetheless, Brazil hosts a significant number of video games companies that tend to colocate and concentrate mainly in the major cities of Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro (Diniz and Abrita, 2021). Chile, and specifically the clusters located in Santiago de Chile and Viña del Mar, appear to be young and small video games centres. Despite the peripheral position of Chile in the video games industry, these clusters have been nonetheless successful in developing in the early 2000s successful adaptations of popular video games. Therefore, Chilean companies managed to develop connections with global big publishers operating in the industry (Baeza-González, 2021). Focusing on South Africa, Snowball et al. (2021) analyse the video games cluster located in Cape Town, finding a unique ability of companies located in this cluster to combine innovation capabilities in digital technology, creative inputs and diversified workforce. 55 b. European clusters The review of the subset of the identified articles concerning the clustering within the video games sector reveals how this phenomenon has been analysed in a more limited way in Europe. More precisely, as evidenced in Figure 6, extant literature has generally analysed the bigger and highly structured metropolitan clusters of London, Liverpool, Paris, Helsinki and Hamburg. Figure 6 - European metropolitan and regional video games clusters investigated Notes: The dots, and their size and colour, represent the frequency of appearance of the cities, or regions, analysed in the literature. Source: Authors’ own elaboration using Google Sheets. Consistently, GAME-ER observes that the video games hub of Hamburg has been extensively analysed on the subset of selected articles as well (Binz and Gong, 2022; Gong, 2020; Gong and Binz, 2023; Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020). However, GAME-ER also finds a very limited coverage of the other developed and well-known European clusters of London and Paris (De Vaan et al., 2013) and Helsinki (Lehtonen et al., 2020). In contrast with previous research on European clusters (Nesta, 2014; Plum and Hassink, 2014), the studies included in the present analysis reveal how there are numerous emerging video games clusters. Generally, the clusters that emerge from the present review of the literature appear to be localised in cities of smaller size. Moreover, they are often the product of targeted regional innovation and industrial policies aiming at moving away these cities from declining, albeit traditional, manufacturing activities. In this respect, the Swedish region of Scania, and its main video games cluster of Malmo, have been analysed in detail by Miorner and Trippl (2017) and Miorner (2022). Particularly, the authors focus their attention on the process of new path development and adaptation of the region towards the new technological and creative sector of digital games. In the Scandinavian region, Norway, and 56 specifically Bergen, represent the other cluster for the gaming industry as documented by Hovig (2016). The author focuses in particular on the practices of game developers and their embeddedness with the local context, challenging the view of the video game industry as a "weightless industry". Specifically, the video game cluster of Bergen, although connected with the global industry, appears to be shaped by the local context through a co-evolutionary dynamic between actors, practices, and the local environment. In Germany, outside the traditionally prominent cluster of Hamburg, Lange and von Streit (2013) explore the two clusters of Munich and Leipzig. The paper analyses the governance structures put in place to facilitate the development of the software and games industry in the two cities and discusses how political institutions can adapt to provide more flexible governance for the creative industries. Specifically, rather than universal governance approaches, the authors suggest that context-specific support structures are best suited for the video games industry. Secondly, the authors highlight the importance of informal social networks among managers and entrepreneurs in an industrial context that tends to operate at the city-regional scale. In addition, Lange and von Streit (2013) recognize that the fast-paced market dynamics of the video games industry have outpaced the ability of the city of Leipzig to establish appropriate steering structures. Moving to France, the video games cluster of Lyon, situated outside the centralising cluster of Paris, has emerged as a reference hub for the gaming industry. Although Lyon already held an international reputation for its high-tech industries of pharmaceuticals and bioengineering, the city was not specialised in computer-related activities. The creation of a local video games industry was the result of an ambitious urban renewal project, named Confluence, and the establishment and creation of worldwide leader firms in computer games—Electronic Arts and Infogrames, respectively (Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020). In Spain, Barcelona is a main cultural hub for a number of creative industries, including video games (Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020, 2019). Similarly to the case of Lyon, the Barcelona hub emerged after the development of the urban development strategy called 22@, driven by the local city council and a combination of both public and private actors. This policy pushed the transformation of the vast urban area of Poblenou into a highly attractive venue for new firms of the knowledge economy and high-tech (Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020). For what concerns the United Kingdom, the city of Liverpool is host to a vibrant video game cluster (Anderton, 2017; Tsang, 2021), which strengthened its position after the change in the city leadership in 2010. The author suggests that the video games industry showed particular resilience to local political changes as it easily managed to leverage on private initiatives. Moreover, Tsang (2021) identifies other relevant “mini-clusters” of game development companies in Glasgow, Dundee, Newcastle, Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Cambridge, Manchester, Birmingham, Coventry, Bristol, Oxford, and Brighton. 57 Finally, from the analysis of the literature, the city of Dublin emerges as an interesting cluster (Murphy et al., 2015). Murphy's contribution analyses the location decision-making process of companies in the media and computer game sectors. In particular, firms are faced with the task of assessing the relative importance of both “hard” factors—such as market accessibility, availability of skilled workers, tax regimes, infrastructure, etc.—and “soft” factors—such as creative environment, urban amenities and “buzz”, quality of life, diversity and openness (Florida, 2004). The author suggests that, despite policymakers having been promoting policies aiming at boosting the soft factors, hard factors remain the primary localization determinants for companies active in the video games industry. In fact, the hard factors that are key for video games companies in considering Dublin as a location for their operations are the availability of skilled labour and the quality of communications infrastructure. 4.3.3 Key features in video games industry clusters Project-based industries, such as the video game industry, rely on a very different set of resources compared to manufacturing industries (De Vaan et al., 2013). Similarly, video games clusters leverage a combination of human capital, financial resources, technological infrastructure, and supportive policies to create dynamic ecosystems. In the present section, UNITO build upon the innovation literature analysed in the previous Section 3, and on the framework provided, to outline the main features and dynamics that characterise the identified video games clusters. a. Main actors Among the different actors that populate and give rise to video games clusters, large anchor firms seem to play a key role in the formation and growth of clusters in this specific industry (Johns, 2006). These are generally big and established companies that serve as a focal point around which smaller firms, service providers, and other entities collaborate. Anchor firms tend to facilitate networking and collaboration within the cluster, while they also drive innovation, attract talent, and create a network of suppliers and partners, thus fostering a thriving ecosystem. Moreover, anchor firms are able to attract skilled professionals, both locally and from around the world. Their presence enhances the overall talent pool in the given region, making the resulting cluster more attractive to other companies too (Cohendet et al., 2018). They often collaborate with smaller firms on specific projects, providing opportunities for these companies to grow and innovate, or they may partner with academic institutions, fostering a culture of continuous learning and development. For instance, Blizzard Entertainment, headquartered in Irvine, California, often engages in collaborations with local universities and startups, thus enhancing the collaborative environment within the local cluster. Similarly, companies like Ubisoft, in Montreal, have drawn numerous game developers and creative professionals to the area, boosting the local pool of talents and skills (Balland et al., 2013; Cohendet et al., 2010). Furthermore, anchor firms generally invest heavily in research and development, thus driving technological advancements and setting industry standards. Their R&D activities can lead to spillovers, where 64 characteristics. Instead, the authors suggest that this evolution was a contingent process mainly driven by external factors, and further argue that Vancouver's subsequent decline was driven by both external and internal factors that undermined the resilience of the local video games industry. On a similar note, Miörner and Trippl (2017) analyse the digital games sector in Sweden's Scania region to understand how key actors can convert a restrictive regional environment into a conducive one for new industrial path development. Their findings reveal that the actors involved in the process employed various modes of change, navigating across different spatial scales to mobilise resources and kickstart change at the regional level. Interestingly, a few key individuals, including both local insiders and returning outsiders, played a crucial role in the transformation processes. Still concerning the remarkable case of new path development of the Scania video games cluster, Miörner (2022) provides more recent findings. More specifically, the author examines how factors such as regional imaginaries, power relations, and directionality, shape the reconfiguration capacity of regional innovation systems. Additionally, results suggest that actors tend to improvise and choose strategies that work within existing structures, rather than trying to dismantle barriers, thus relying on the reinterpretation and redefinition of existing structures. e. Resource pooling The growth of video game clusters relies heavily on various dynamics of resources pooling. One of the essential needs is to gather specific human resources and skilled labour. Clusters can attract and foster talent, including game designers, programmers, artists, and marketers. In this respect, the presence of educational institutions providing specialised training programs, within or near clusters, are crucial to meet industry needs. Darchen (2016) notes how in the case of Brisbane, the emergence of a video game cluster between 1988 and 1993 coincided with the establishment of local university programmes in computer sciences, which began to provide the necessary skilled workforce. In that context, the majority of game developers in Brisbane had a background in computer programming or hold a degree in informatics. Therefore, universities and research centres within clusters contribute to the continuous development of technology and provide a considerable stream of new talents and skills (Vang and Tschang, 2013). Furthermore, in the case of the video games sector, there are also instances of the importance of particular subcultures in nurturing human capital with unique skills and sensibilities. This is the case of the role played by the demoscene subculture in the formation of the Nordic game industry between 1990 and 2005. As analysed by Jorgensen et al. (2017), the demoscene provided a crucial pool of skilled talent that enabled the rapid growth of early Nordic game companies. Although the transition from hobbyist to professional game development was not simple, without the demoscene the early Nordic game companies would have had difficulty finding interested and qualified employees (Jorgensen et al., 2017). 65 A second key asset consists in the access to venture capital, government grants, and other funding resources. Clusters often have a robust financial ecosystem that supports start-ups and fosters innovation. For instance, with respect to the video game industry in Atlantic Canada, PottieSherman and Lynch (2019) highlight how the provincial governments have played a key role by providing the financial incentives and support to help establish, and then sustain, the video game industry in the region. In return, video game firms in Atlantic Canada are actively promoting the region and its unique attributes to link local firms with the wider gaming industry. Meanwhile, universities and colleges have been crucial in nurturing local talent and cultivating a regional gaming culture. Finally, advanced technological infrastructure, including high-speed internet, pioneering hardware, and software tools, is essential for game development and distribution. Probably the most notable examples of the importance of technology for the video game industry is represented by Japan (Izushi & Aoyama, 2006; De Vaan et al., 2013) and the US (S. B. Adams, 2021; de Vaan et al., 2019), as pioneers in the industry, and recently by China (Gong and Hassink, 2019; Gong and Xin, 2019; Jiang and Fung, 2019; Yang and Chan, 2021; Gong et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2023), as a latecomer technological powerhouse. f. Institutions and policies A considerable stream of the analysed literature recognizes the fundamental role played by public institutions through the formulation of targeted policies aiming at fostering the video games sector. This is particularly relevant for the clusters that lack any form of inheritance. In this context, the literature on industrial clusters has already underscored the relevance of supportive government policies and incentives, tax waivers, grants, and infrastructure development, which can significantly influence the growth and sustainability of clusters. The Vancouver case analysed by Barnes and Coe (2011) provides another example of supportive policies and active institutional involvement. This Canadian cluster, shaped by key institutions like government subsidies and labour unions, has rapidly transformed from a resource-based economy to a media cluster. Likewise, Tremblay (2016) with respect to the Montreal Metropolitan video games cluster, concludes that the role of intermediary organisations and specialised collective governance bodies have been crucial for business innovation in the industry. In Europe, the role of institutional support is particularly important in the cases of the already mentioned case of new path development of Scania towards the video games sector (Miorner and Trippl, 2017; Miorner, 2022). Additionally, in the case of the UK, Anderton (2017) underscores how, for the Liverpool video games cluster, local political events have had an influence on the cluster, especially during uncertain times of change of leadership. The ad hoc policies implemented in the cities of Barcelona and Lyon are another example of the centrality of the role played by the public sector and the local institutions (Mendez-Ortega and Arauzo-Carod, 2020, 2019). Moreover, the market for British video games also greatly benefited from the work of the BBC, and the launch of 66 the BBC Computer Literacy Project in the 1980s, which aimed at boosting the development of microcomputing technology in the country (Tsang, 2021). Institutional support is also key to legitimate industries which are new to a region, and thus outside its traditional industrial sectors. This is the case of the Hamburg video game industry, whereas highlighted by Binz and Gong (2022), key legitimation and support efforts came from state and city actors. For the video game sector, legitimation hinged on system reconfiguration and institutional work driven by actors from both the industry itself and related sectors, operating at various scales. Specifically, the institutional work tended to be more intense when the industry faced moral scrutiny and had to draw on socio-technical schemes validated elsewhere, such as international narratives around successful age-labelling systems, industry associations, and funding schemes. Recently, the Chinese government has emerged as a particularly active actor, determined in developing its primacy in the market of video games. In this respect, the papers analysed highlight the policies aiming at supporting the sector and the creation of technology parks to foster cluster creation and development (Yang and Chan, 2021; Xu et al., 2023). 67 5. CONCLUSIONS The overall aim of the present report is to establish the knowledge base for the GAME-ER project to develop its future conceptual and empirical assessments in the subsequent tasks of the different work packages (WPs). Specifically, this deliverable intended to: (i) provide an overview of the relevant policy and academic research on the video games sector within the cultural and creative industries (CCIS), (ii) identify relevant analytical dimensions to investigate cluster formation and their characterization, and (iii) provide key insights through a detailed scoping review of the existing academic research on video game clusters. The first part of the deliverable, corresponding to Section 2, reviewed the key reports and policy documents that aimed to map and assess the video games industry at the European level. In doing so, the section contextualises the video game industry within the CCIs highlighting its increasing recognition, in particular in Europe. Despite the increasing relevance of the video games sector, the analysis presented in Section 2 reveals varied industry classification models and significant challenges in measuring the industry's perimeter. More generally, the territorial dimension of the video game industry in Europe has been rarely addressed in a systematic way. The reviewed documents highlight how within Europe national differences in the configuration and dynamics of the video game industry exist, but the implication in terms of spatial organization and clustering dynamics has not been sufficiently explored. Moreover, it emerges how traditional methods of mapping the industry's spatial organisation have been limited in identifying smaller and emerging video games clusters, thus often resulting in underreporting and misclassification. Nonetheless, recent data-driven approaches and methodologies show promise in providing more accurate mappings, thereby enhancing GAME-ER overall understanding of the industry's spatial structure and its potential to become a crucial section for local and regional development. The second part of the deliverable offers an interpretative framework, leveraging on the extensive and multidisciplinary literature on clusters. Precisely, Section 3 provides an overview of key analytical dimensions in the innovation, regional and creative industries research fields. The section examines various approaches in explaining cluster formation and their characterization, considering several crucial factors, such as agglomeration economies, spin-off dynamics, the types of resources pooled within clusters, proximity factors, and the role of innovation, all of which shape clustering in innovative and creative sectors. Therefore, this section aims to provide an initial interpretative framework for the GAME-ER project partners to build upon in their analysis of clusters. The third part provides a comprehensive examination of the scholarly research on the video game industry as a CCI. Therefore, Section 4 adopts a scoping literature review approach to assess the extent to which video game clusters have been analysed in academic research, and to draw insights into the clusters that have been analysed so far. Specifically, the review identifies 51 studies addressing specific video game clusters globally. 68 Looking more closely at the European clusters identified, the review shows how the existing literature has predominantly focused on the larger and well-structured metropolitan clusters. Conversely, smaller city and regional clusters have received only some minor attention. Additionally, this section offers a discussion of the central actors, the key features, and patterns characterising video game clusters. The analysis of the literature also confirms that comparative analysis of video game clusters has been rarely performed. Within the future developments of the GAME-ER project, each part contributes to the next steps of subsequent WPs. More specifically, Section 2 offers insights for the development of Europe-wide quantitative spatial mapping of gaming companies at the regional level and related clusters (T2.2). The analysis of the literature on the factors characterising clusters of innovative and creative industries developed in Section 3, along with the findings presented in Section 4 through the review of the video game clusters analyzed in the academic literature, will inform the qualitative research activities of WP3 and WP4 on the case studies of the GAME-ER project. Finally, the deliverable will guide WP5 in its development and delivery of the Interactive Methodological Toolkit and the formulation of cluster policy recommendations. 69 6. REFERENCES Adams, S. B. (2021). From orchards to chips: Silicon Valley’s evolving entrepreneurial ecosystem. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 33 (1-2), 15–35. Agrawal, A., I. Cockburn, and J. McHale (2006). Gone but not forgotten: Knowledge flows, labor mobility, and enduring social relationships. Journal of Economic Geography 6 (5), 571–591. Anderton, D. (2017). Changing leadership in peripheral city region development: The case of Liverpool’s high technology sectors. Local Economy 32 (4), 352–373. Antonelli, C. (2006). Localized technological change and factor markets: Constraints and inducements to innovation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 17 (2), 224–247. Antonelli, C., P. P. Patrucco, and F. Quatraro (2011). Productivity Growth and Pecuniary Knowledge Externalities: An Empirical Analysis of Agglomeration Economies in European Regions. Economic Geography 87 (1), 23–50. Antonietti, R. and R. Boschma (2021). Social capital, resilience, and regional diversification in Italy. Industrial and Corporate Change 30 (3), 762–777. Aoyama, Y. and H. Izushi (2003). Hardware gimmick or cultural innovation? Technological, cultural, and social foundations of the Japanese video game industry. Research Policy 32 (3), 423–444. Aria, M. and C. Cuccurullo (2017). bibliometrix: An r-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of informetrics 11 (4), 959–975. Aria, M., M. Misuraca, and M. Spano (2020). Mapping the evolution of social research and data science on 30 years of social indicators research. Social indicators research 149, 803–831. Arksey, H. and L. O’Malley (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8 (1), 19–32. Baeza-González, S. (2021). Techno-dependencies in video games production: A Chilean case study. Geoforum 121, 115–128. Bagnasco, A. (2012). Trust and Social Capital. In The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology, Chapter 22, pp. 252–262. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Balland, P.-A., R. Boschma, and K. Frenken (2015). Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics. Regional Studies 49 (6), 907–920. Balland, P.-A., M. De Vaan, and R. Boschma (2013). The dynamics of interfirm networks along the industry life cycle: The case of the global video game industry, 1987–2007. Journal of Economic Geography 13 (5), 741–765. Baptista, R. and P. Swann (1998). Do firms in clusters innovate more? Research Policy 27 (5), 525–540. Barnes, T. and N. M. Coe (2011). Vancouver as Media Cluster: The Cases of Video Games and Film/TV. In Media Clusters, Chapter Media Clusters. Edward Elgar Publishing. Section: Media Clusters. Basaraba, N. (2023). The emergence of creative and digital place-making: A scoping review across disciplines. New Media & Society 25 (6), 1470–1497. Bathelt, H. and J. S. Boggs (2003). Toward a Reconceptualization of Regional Development Paths: Is Leipzig’s Media Cluster a Continuation of or a Rupture with the Past? Economic Geography 79 (3), 265–293. Bathelt, H. and P. Cohendet (2014). The creation of knowledge: Local building, global accessing and economic development—toward an agenda. Journal of Economic Geography 14 (5), 869–882. Bathelt, H., D. F. Kogler, and A. K. Munro (2010). A knowledge-based typology of university spin-offs in the context of regional economic development. Technovation 30 (9), 519–532. Bathelt, H., A. Malmberg, and P. Maskell (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process 70 of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography 28 (1), 31–56. Beaudry, C. and A. Schiffauerova (2009). Who’s right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate. Research Policy 38 (2), 318–337. Becattini, G., M. Bellandi, and L. D. Propris (2009). A Handbook of Industrial Districts. Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Pub. Becker, H. S. (1982). Art Worlds (First Edition ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Belyaeva, Z., A. Petrosyan, and S. R. Shams (2022). Stakeholder data analysis in the video gaming industry: Implications for regional development. EuroMed Journal of Business 17 (3), 333–349. Benghozi, P.-J. and I. Lyubareva (2014). When organizations in the cultural industries seek new business models: A case study of the french online press. International Journal of Arts Management 16 (3), 6–19. Berg, S.-H. (2015). Creative Cluster Evolution: The Case of the Film and TV Industries in Seoul, South Korea. European Planning Studies 23 (10), 1993–2008. Bertacchini, E. E. and P. Borrione (2013). The Geography of the Italian Creative Economy: The Special Role of the Design and Craft-based Industries. Regional Studies 47 (2), 135–147. Bertello, A., P. De Bernardi, and F. Ricciardi (2023). Open innovation: Status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field. Review of Managerial Science. Bessant and Tidd (2011). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Beugelsdijk, S. (2007). The Regional Environment and a Firm’s Innovative Performance: A Plea for a Multilevel Interactionist Approach. Economic Geography 83 (2), 181–199. Binz, C. and H. Gong (2022). Legitimation dynamics in industrial path development: New-to-theworld versus newto-the-region industries. Regional Studies. Bocquet, R. and C. Mothe (2015). Can a governance structure foster cluster ambidexterity through knowledge management? An empirical study of two French SME clusters. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 13 (3), 329–343. Boix, R., J. L. Hervás-Oliver, and B. De Miguel-Molina (2015). Micro-geographies of creative industries clusters in Europe: From hot spots to assemblages*. Papers in Regional Science 94 (4), 753–773. Boix, R., L. Lazzeretti, F. Capone, L. D. Propris, and D. Sánchez (2012). The geography of creative industries in Europe: Comparing France, Great Britain, Italy and Spain. In Creative Industries and Innovation in Europe. Routledge. Boschma, R. A. (2005a). Does geographical proximity favour innovation? Économie et institutions (6-7), 111–128. Boschma, R. (2005b). Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional studies, 39(1), 61-74. Boschma, R. A. and A. L. J. ter Wal (2007). Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy. Industry and Innovation 14 (2), 177–199. Boschma, R. A. and R. Wenting (2007). The spatial evolution of the British automobile industry: Does location matter? Industrial and Corporate Change 16 (2), 213–238. Boyack, K. W. and R. Klavans (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology 61 (12), 2389–2404. Brenner, T., U. Cantner, and H. Graf (2013). Introduction: Structure and Dynamics of Innovation Networks. Regional Studies 47 (5), 647–650. Breschi, S., C. Lenzi, F. Lissoni, and A. Vezzulli (2010). The Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: The Role of Inventors’ Mobility Across Firms and in Space. In R. Boschma and R. Martin (Eds.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography. Edward Elgar Publishing. Breschi, S. and F. Lissoni (2001). Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: a critical survey. Industrial and corporate change 10 (4), 975–1005. 71 Breschi, S. and F. Malerba (2001). The Geography of Innovation and Economic Clustering: Some Introductory Notes. Industrial and Corporate Change 10 (4), 817–833. Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”. Scientometrics 12, 373–379. Buenstorf, G. and C. Guenther (2011). No place like home? Relocation, capabilities, and firm survival in the German machine tool industry after World War II. Industrial and Corporate Change 20 (1), 1–28. Buenstorf, G. and S. Klepper (2009). Heritage and Agglomeration: The Akron Tyre Cluster Revisited. The Economic Journal 119 (537), 705–733. Burlina, C., P. Casadei, and A. Crociata (2023). Economic complexity and firm performance in the cultural and creative sector: Evidence from Italian provinces. European Urban and Regional Studies 30 (2), 152–171. Callon, M., J. P. Courtial, and F. Laville (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics 22, 155–205. Casadei, P., M. Bloom, R. Camerani, M. Masucci, J. Siepel, and J. V. Ospina (2023). Mapping the state of the art of creative cluster research: A bibliometric and thematic analysis. European Planning Studies 31 (12), 2531–2551. Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2022.2158722. Casadei, P. and N. Lee (2019). Global cities, creative industries and their representation on social media: A microdata analysis of Twitter data on the fashion industry. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 52 (6), 1195–1220. Cassi, L. and A. Plunket (2014). Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: In search of the proximity paradox. The Annals of Regional Science 53 (2), 395–422. Caves, R. E. (2000). Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce. Harvard University Press. Chapain, C., P. Cooke, L. D. Propris, S. MacNeill, and J. Mateos-Garcia (2010). Creative clusters and innovation. Chapain, C. and D. Sagot-Duvauroux (2020). Cultural and creative clusters – a systematic literature review and a renewed research agenda. Urban Research & Practice 13 (3), 300–329. Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2018.1545141. Chapain, C. and K. Stachowiak (2017). Innovation Dynamic in the Film Industry: The Case of the Soho Cluster in London. In C. Chapain and T. Stryjakiewicz (Eds.), Creative Industries in Europe: Drivers of New Sectoral and Spatial Dynamics, pp. 65–94. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Cobo, M. J., A. G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, and F. Herrera (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology 62 (7), 1382–1402. Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (2000). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation *. In Strategic Learning in a Knowledge Economy. Routledge. Cohendet, P., D. Grandadam, C. Mehouachi, and L. Simon (2018). The local, the global and the industry common: The case of the video game industry. Journal of Economic Geography 18 (5), 1045–1068 Cohendet, P., D. Grandadam, and L. Simon (2010). The Anatomy of the Creative City. Industry and Innovation 17 (1), 91–111. Cohendet, P. and L. Simon (2007). Playing across the playground: Paradoxes of knowledge creation in the videogame firm. JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR 28 (5), 587–605. Cohendet, P., L. Simon, and C. Mehouachi (2021). From business ecosystems to ecosystems of innovation: The case of the video game industry in Montréal. Industry and Innovation 28 (8), 1046–1076. Cohendet, P., and Mehouachi, C. (2018). Des territoires géographiques à l’écosystème stratégique: Dynamiques de structuration du secteur du jeu vidéo en France. Revue française de gestion, (3), 155-173. Coleman (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Coleman, S. and N. Dyer-Witheford (2007). Playing on the digital commons: Collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. MEDIA CULTURE & SOCIETY 29 (6), 934. 72 Comunian, R., C. Chapain, and N. Clifton (2010). Location, location, location: Exploring the complex relationship between creative industries and place. Creative Industries Journal 3 (1), 5–10. Crossick, G. (2006). Knowledge Transfer Without Widgets: The Challenge of the Creative Economy: A Lecture to the Royal Society of Arts in Leeds on 31 May 2006. Goldsmiths College. Cruz, S. C. S. and A. A. C. Teixeira (2010). The Evolution of the Cluster Literature: Shedding Light on the Regional Studies–Regional Science Debate. Regional Studies 44 (9), 1263–1288. Darchen, S. (2016). “Clusters” or “communities”? Analysing the spatial agglomeration of video game companies in Australia. Urban Geography 37 (2), 202–222. Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1067981. Darchen, S. (2017). Creative clusters? Analysis of the video game industry in Brisbane, Australia (1980s-2014). International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development 8 (2), 168–182. Publisher: Inderscience Publishers. Darchen, S. and D.-G. Tremblay (2015). Policies for Creative Clusters: A Comparison between the Video Game Industries in Melbourne and Montreal. European Planning Studies 23 (2), 311–331. Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.865712. DCMS (1998). Creative Industries Mapping Documents 1998. Technical report. DCMS (2001). Creative Industries Mapping Documents 2001. Technical report. De Vaan, M., R. Boschma, and K. Frenken (2013). Clustering and firm performance in project-based industries: The case of the global video game industry, 1972–2007. Journal of Economic Geography 13 (6), 965–991. de Vaan, M., K. Frenken, and R. Boschma (2019). The Downside of Social Capital in New Industry Creation. Economic Geography 95 (4), 315–340. de Vaan, M. and D. Stark (2015). Game Changer: The Topology of Creativity. American Journal of Sociology . de Vaan, M., B. Vedres, and D. Stark (2015). Game Changer: The Topology of Creativity. American Journal of Sociology 120 (4), 1144–1194. Delgado, M., M. E. Porter, and S. Stern (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Geography 10 (4), 495–518. D’Este, P., F. Guy, and S. Iammarino (2013). Shaping the formation of university–industry research collaborations: What type of proximity does really matter? Journal of Economic Geography 13 (4), 537–558. DEV, Asociación española de empresas productoras y desarrolladoras de videojuegos y software de entretenimiento, DEV. and E. E. e. I. ICEX (2018). Libro Blanco del Desarrollo Español de Videojuegos 2018. Technical report. Dhanaraj, C. and A. Parkhe (2006). Orchestrating Innovation Networks. Academy of Management Review 31 (3), 659–669. Diniz, RG. and MB. Abrita (2021). THE GAMING INDUSTRY IN THE BRAZILIAN TERRITORY: A STUDY BASED ON RECENT DATA AND INDICATORS. REVISTA FORMACAO ONLINE 28 (53), 719–748. Donthu, N., S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research 133, 285–296. DSIT, Innovation and Technology, U. D. f. S. (2024). Identifying and describing UK innovation clusters. Technical report. Durmaz, B., S. Platt, and T. Yigitcanlar (2010). Creativity, culture tourism and place-making: Istanbul and London film industries. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 4 (3), 198–213. Eck, N. J. v. and L. Waltman (2009). How to normalize co-occurrence data? an analysis of some well-known similarity measures. Journal of the American society for information science and technology 60 (8), 1635–1651. EGDF (2019). 2019 EUROPEAN VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY INSIGHT REPORT. Technical report. EGDF (2020). 2020 EUROPEAN VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY INSIGHT REPORT. Technical report. EGDF (2021). 2021 EUROPEAN VIDEO 73 GAMES INDUSTRY INSIGHT REPORT. Technical report Enrietti, A., A. Geuna, C. R. Nava, and P. P. Patrucco (2022). The birth and development of the Italian automotive industry (1894–2015) and the Turin car cluster. Industrial and Corporate Change 31 (1), 161–185. Ernkvist, M. (2008). Down many times, but still playing the game: Creative destruction and industry crashes in the early video game industry 1971-1986. Ernkvist, M. and P. Ström (2018). Differentiation in digital creative industry cluster dynamics: The growth and decline of the Japanese video game software industry. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 100 (3), 263– 286. EU Commission (2010). Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries. Website, Publications Office of the European Union. EU Commission, ECORYS, and KEA (2023). Understanding the Value of a European Video Games Society: Final Report. Publications Office of the European Union. EU Commission and D. Power (2011). The European Cluster Observatory : Priority sector report: Creative and cultural industries. Technical report, Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission (2021). Creative Europe 2021-2027: Monitoring report. Technical report, Ufficio delle pubblicazioni dell’Unione europea. European Commission, IDEA Consult, KEA, and IMEC-SMIT VUB. (2017). Mapping the creative value chains: A study on the economy of culture in the digital age : Final report. Technical report, Publications Office, LU. Evans, G. (2009). Creative Cities, Creative Spaces and Urban Policy. Urban Studies 46 (5-6), 1003–1040. Florida (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Florida, R., C. Mellander, and K. Stolarick (2010). Music Scenes to Music Clusters: The Economic Geography of Music in the US, 1970–2000. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 42 (4), 785–804. FORFAS (2011). The Games Sector in Ireland: An Action Plan for Growth. https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/publications/the-games-sector-in-ireland-an-action-plan-for-growth.html. Frenken, K., F. Van Oort, and T. Verburg (2007). Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth. Regional Studies 41 (5), 685–697. Garcia and Bakhshi (2016). The Geography of Creativity in the UK - Creative clusters, creative people and creative networks. Technical report. Garnsey, E. and P. Heffernan (2005). High-technology clustering through spin-out and attraction: The Cambridge case. Regional Studies 39 (8), 1127–1144 Gertler, M. S. (1995). “Being There”: Proximity, Organization, and Culture in the Development and Adoption of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies. Economic Geography 71 (1), 1–26. Gertler, M. S. (2003). Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or The undefinable tacitness of being (there). Journal of Economic Geography 3 (1), 75–99. Gill, R., Pratt, A. C., & Virani, T. E. (Eds.). (2019). Creative hubs in question: Place, space and work in the creative economy. Springer. Giuliani, E. (2007). The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: Evidence from the wine industry. Journal of Economic Geography 7 (2), 139–168. Glaeser, E. L., H. D. Kallal, J. A. Scheinkman, and A. Shleifer (1992). Growth in Cities. Journal of Political Economy 100 (6), 1126–1152. Glaeser, E. L. and J. Scheinkman (2000). Non-Market Interactions. Gong, H. (2020). Multi-scalar legitimation of a contested industry: A case study of the Hamburg video games industry. Geoforum 114, 1–9. Gong, H. and C. Binz (2023). Cumulative causation in regional industrial path development 80 Globalisation and Regionalisation. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 112 (3), 256–273. Zackariasson, P. and T. L. Wilson (2012). The Video Game Industry: Formation, Present State, and Future. Routledge. Google-Books-ID: oQKFmX9m25sC. Zhao, MY. (2023). Fragmented Control of Platform Game Work in China. ECONOMIC AND LABOUR RELATIONS REVIEW 34 (2), 328–342. Zhu, F. and M. Iansiti (2012). ENTRY INTO PLATFORM-BASED MARKETS. STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL 33 (1), 88–106. 81 7. APPENDIX 7.1 Database search rationale UNITO preferred search strategy has been defined in the following fashion. UNITO was interested in articles treating two interrelated concepts: the video games industry and clustering. More precisely, on the second concept, UNITO was interested not only in the clustering and geographical agglomeration dynamics of firms operating in the video games sector, but also in the cultural and creative aspects and in the implications for the regional innovation systems. For these reasons UNITO included several relevant keywords related to these topics. The following Table 8 provides the conceptual structure behind UNITO preferred bibliographic search. Table 8 - Conceptual structure of the search strategy Search strategy Video games-related keywords AND Regional distribution and cluster-related keywords NOT Gambling-related keywords Terms connected by OR Terms connected by OR Terms connected by OR “video game* industry”; "video game*"; “videogame*”; "videogame*"; “gaming”; “online game*”; “digital game*”; "computer game*"; “software game*”; “mobile game*”; “e-sport”; “esport”; “eSport” “cultural and creative industr*”; “creative industr*”; “cultural industr*”; “CCIs”; “developer*”; "cluster*"; "regional cluster*"; "industrial cluster*"; "spatial cluster*"; “spatial*”; "region*"; "spatial distribution*"; "geograph* distribution*"; “regional distribution*”; “district*”; “innovation system*”; “regional innovation system*”; “regional development”; “hub*”; “agglomerat*”; “concentrat*"; “locat*”; “colocat*” "gambl*"; "casino*";“slot machine*”;“slotmachine*”;“bingo*” Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 82 In what follows, UNITO report the preferred search query specification: TS=(("video game* industry" OR "video game*" OR “video-game*” OR "videogame*" OR “gaming” OR “online game*” OR “digital game*” OR "computer game*" OR “software game*” OR “mobile game*” OR “e-sport” OR “esport” OR “eSport”) AND (“cultural and creative industr*” OR “creative industr*” OR “cultural industr*” OR “CCIs” OR “developer*” OR "cluster*" OR "regional cluster*" OR "industrial cluster*" OR "spatial cluster*" OR “spatial*” OR "region*" OR "spatial distribution*" OR "geograph* distribution*" OR “regional distribution*” OR “district*” OR “innovation system*” OR “regional innovation system*” OR “regional development” OR “hub*” OR “agglomerat*” OR “concentrat*” OR “locat*” OR “co-locat*” OR “territorial dynamic*” OR “territor*” OR “scene*” OR “communit*”) NOT ("gambl*" OR "casino*" OR “slot machine*” OR “slot-machine*” OR “bingo*”)) Figure 7 reports the scoping review flowchart, which represents the key inclusion and exclusion criteria adopted in the process of identification, screening and selection of records. Figure 7 - Scoping review flowchart Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 83 7.2 Descriptive analysis of the identified literature In this section, UNITO proceed with a bibliometric analysis of the identified literature collection. First, UNITO provided an overall descriptive analysis aiming at exploring the publishing trend, the main disciplinary areas where the literature on the video game industry have flourished, and the core journals, authors, and their countries of affiliation. UNITO then took a more in-depth exploration of the main themes addressed in this set of academic contributions by means of a thematic analysis. 7.2.1 Descriptive analysis A descriptive summary of the selected studies is reported in Table 9. The 182 documents in UNITO collection have been published between 2003 and 2023 and have been retrieved from 108 distinct academic journals. Concerning the type of document, 173 are academic articles, 7 are book chapters, 1 is a book and 1 is a review article. In the collection of studies, UNITO counts 318 authors affiliated to 218 different institutions worldwide. In this field of research, the majority of the studies are the result of collaborations between multiple authors (the average number of coauthors is slightly more than 2); however, 48 studies are single-authored efforts. Table 9 - Descriptive summary of the selected studies Description Results MAIN INFORMATION ABOUT DATA Timespan 2003:2023 Journals 108 Documents 182 Annual Growth Rate % 17.22 Document Average Age 6.36 Average citations per doc 24.2 Average citations per year per doc 2.681 References 9266 DOCUMENT TYPES article 173 book chapter 7 book 1 review 1 DOCUMENT CONTENTS Keywords Plus (ID) 444 Author's Keywords (DE) 661 AUTHORS 84 Authors 318 Author Appearances 411 Authors of single-authored docs 45 AUTHORS COLLABORATION Single-authored docs 48 Documents per Author 0.572 Co-Authors per Doc 2.26 International co-authorships % 30.22 Source: Authors’ own elaboration. The video games industry literature has been steadily growing in the past years. Figure 8 reports the scientific production over time. The graph shows how the academic research investigating the video games industry remained constant, and relatively limited, until 2012. However, from 2013 the number of publications treating this topic witnessed a sharp increase. In fact, the academic production over time reports three peaks: the first in 2015 with 16 publications, the second in 2019 with 19 articles, and the third in 2023 with 24 articles published. This trend may suggest a renewed interest among researchers in the exploration of the specificities of the video games industry within the borders of the CCIs research stream. Figure 8 - Annual academic production Notes: The graph reports the single number of studies published per publication year. Authors’ own elaboration generated using Biblioshiny. 85 The identified articles were also classified in terms of research domains, based on the topics addressed and the journals in which they have been published. 38 Overall, the majority of the publications belong to the broad research fields of economics and management. Analysing more closely the specialised subfields of research, UNITO found that most of the studies belong to economic geography, economics and management of innovation, management (in particular the research specialised on organisations) and economic sociology. The business research domain is also present, although it has witnessed a steady increase only in recent years, from 2014. Interestingly, only a limited share of the articles belongs to the cultural economics research domain, despite the fact that the first research efforts on creative clusters originated in this subfield of economics. Figure 9 - Articles published over time by research domain Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 38 The articles in the literature collection were also classified by type of methodological approach adopted: conceptual study, literature review and empirical analysis (quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods. See Section 5 (Appendix). 86 7.2.2 Methodologies adopted in the identified literature Qualitative methods greatly prevail in the video games industry research. Interestingly, quantitative research started to grow from 2013 onward, while research using mixed methods remained relatively limited over the period under investigation, except for a peak in 2021 (5 articles published used both quantitative and qualitative methodologies). Papers presenting theoretical models and other conceptual studies (such as reviews) remain limited and stable over time. Figure 10 - Studies published over time by methodology adopted Source: Authors’ own elaboration. 7.2.3 Geographical distribution of the articles identified The analysis of the geographical distribution of the publications in the collection provides relevant insights on the research activity concerning the video games industry. Table 10 reports the top 20 most productive countries (of affiliation of authors) per number of articles published. Country productivity is reported based on the total number of publications made by the affiliated authors, thus the ranking counts both single country publications (SCP) and multiple country publications (MCP). The majority of the publications on the topics come from the UK (27 documents), the US (22 documents), Canada (17 documents), Sweden (15), France and Germany (with both 11 documents). Together these prolific countries count more than half of all publications. 87 Table 10 - Top 20 countries per number of studies published Notes: Authors’ own elaboration. Number of articles per country of affiliation of the authors listed in the publication. SCP = single country publications, MCP = multiple country publications. Not limited to the top 20 most productive countries of affiliation, Figure 11 displays the worldwide scientific production calculated on the frequency of the authors’ appearance by all countries of affiliation in the literature collection. 39 The considerable concentration of the academic research on the video games industry in some countries rather than others might reflect specific policies towards CCIs, or the relatively longer tradition and knowledge accumulated by the respective institutions and research centres in this specific field of research. In this respect, the first publications appeared are the ones whose authors are affiliated with American, English or Canadian universities (Aoyama and Izushi, 2003; Izushi and Aoyama, 2006; Johns, 2006; Coleman and Dyer-Witheford, 2007; Cohendet and Simon, 2007), while research performed by authors affiliated with continental European universities started to appear only at a later stage (Lê at al., 2013; de Van et al;, 2013; Lange and Streit, 2013; Minassian and Boutet, 2015). 39 Each time an article includes authors affiliated to institutions in different countries, or includes an author with multiple affiliations, the appearance counter for each country’s affiliation increases by 1. For example, if an article has co-authors from the US, Canada, and France, each of these three countries’ appearance count will be increased by 1. Therefore, each article is attributed to the countries of all its co-authors, resulting in multiple counts equal to the number of authors. For this reason, the total count of the country's scientific production may exceed the total number of articles in the presence of co-authored studies (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017). 88 Figure 11 - Country scientific production Notes: The map shows the academic production per country of affiliation of the authors. Country’s scientific productivity is calculated as the sum of the single country publications and multiple country publications. High-productivity countries are in dark blue, while lower-productivity countries are in light blue; countries for which there is no data are coloured in grey. Source: Own elaboration using Google Geomap. Overall, the good number of studies conducted by authors affiliated to European research institutions reflects that the video games industry, and some specific European clusters (see Section 4.4), have attracted the interest of academics. However, there appears to be still a gap in the research as compared to other countries traditionally at the forefront of the research on this topic, such as the US, Canada and Australia, and recently China, whose interest in the video games industry has experienced a significant growth starting from 2019 (Jiang and Fung, Xi et al., 2022; 2019; Gong et al., 2023). 7.2.4 Analysis of the core journals, most influential authors and articles Concerning the core journals in the collection, Table 11 reports the most relevant outlets in terms of number of studies published in the timespan considered. Overall, the majority of the journals publish research in the domain of economics, entrepreneurship, business and management (Journal of Business Research, European Journal of Management, Creativity and Innovation Management), with a sharp focus on empirical studies on technology and innovation (Research Policy, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Technovation). 89 Numerous and relevant sources focus on media studies (Television & New Media, Convergence, Games and Cultures, New Media & Society, Media, Culture & Society), as well as on economic geography and regional studies (Geoforum, Journal of Economic Geography, Regional Studies, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Environment and Planning), organisation and communication (International Journal of Communication, Canadian Journal of Communication, Critical Studies in Media Communication, Culture and Organization). The degree of variety in the core journals’ aims and scopes signals the high interdisciplinarity of the research on the video games industry. Table 11 - Top 20 journals per number of studies published Source: Authors’ own elaboration. To identify the relationship between journals and to assess how they serve specific research groups, UNITO performed the analysis of the patterns of co-citation between journals (Martinez-Garcia et al., 2023). More specifically, co-citation is the frequency with which two documents (or, as in this case, journals) are cited together in the citation references of other documents (journals) (Small, 1973). In this particular analysis, the relation between journals is established by a third journal, and not the specific journal under examination (Boyack and Klavans 2010; Meyer et al. 2014; Kovacs et al., 2015). Figure 12 reports the co-citations mapping of the journals in the literature collection. As the total number of journals in the collection is 4,824, UNITO considered only sources above the minimum threshold of 20 citations received to focus on the most relevant ones. 96 7.3.2 Co-citation analysis The co-citation network between cited references is reported in Figure 15. Figure 15 - Co-citation network of cited references Notes: Network of co-citations of cited references in the collection of selected studies (139 cited references displayed, min. 5 citations of a cited reference). Own elaboration using VOSviewer. Figure 16 displays a three-field plot (Sankey diagram) reporting cited references on the left, authors in the middle, and WoS Keywords Plus on the right. The diagram illustrates the transition between the intellectual roots, represented by the most relevant cited references (CR), to the most prolific authors (AU) and the research themes they have addressed, represented by the database keywords (ID). The rectangular diagrams of different colours represent the most frequent and relevant elements (Aria and Cuccurullo, 2017). 97 Figure 16 - Three-field plot of authors, keywords and journals Source: Own elaboration using Biblioshiny. 7.3.3 Collaboration analysis The analysis of the social structure of a research field aims at exploring the interactions among the research actors involved, focusing in particular on the collaborations among countries, institutions and authors (Donthu et al., 2021). Figure 17 displays the country collaboration network. The nodes in the network are the countries of affiliation of the authors in the collection, node’s size is proportional to the number of publications, and collaborations are represented by the links connecting the nodes. The colours assigned to the nodes do not denote clusters, but they are assigned based on the average year of publication of the studies authored by researchers affiliated to an institution base in that country (the oldest publication years in dark blue and the latest publication years in yellow). 98 Figure 17 - Country collaboration network Notes: Collaboration network of countries of affiliation visualisation (32 countries displayed, 1 min. document published and min. 10 citations received) time overlay specification. The figure has been generated with VOSviewer. Source: Own elaboration. The graph displays a central network of interconnected countries and a periphery of more isolated nodes. England, Canada, the US, France and Australia occupy a central position in the cluster visualisation and their colour also indicates that their publications are among the oldest and foundational instances of research in the video games sector, dating approximately around 2015. In the central part of the network there are also several European countries, notably Italy, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands. These nodes are of different shades of green and yellow, thus representing more recent research efforts in the exploration of the video game industry. Still focusing on the European countries of affiliation in the literature collection, among the isolated nodes and of different colours there are Czechia, Poland, Ireland, Spain, and Estonia. Interestingly, countries sharing the same language show collaboration bonds. This is the case of France and Canada, Canada and England, Spain and Mexico. Figure 18 reports the collaboration network visualisation between the institutions of affiliation of the authors of the studies in collection. The graph shows several interconnected nodes. The node size is proportional to the number of studies published by affiliation of their authors, while the colour indicates the average year of publication of the articles authored by the respective affiliated authors. 99 Figure 18 - Collaboration network of the institutions of affiliation Notes: Collaboration network of institutions of affiliation (64 institutions displayed, min. 1 document published, and min. 30 citations received). The figure has been generated with VOSviewer. The figure displays a spherical network structure made of small clusters of affiliated institutions. The collaboration pattern seems to develop primarily at the national level. For instance, the graph displays a cluster of UK-based collaborating institutions (City University London, University of Durham, University of Leicester, University of York, University of Warwick) and of Sweden-based institutions (Lund University, Lulea University of Technology, University of Gothenburg, Stockholm School of Economics). 7.4 Video game industry clusters UNITO identified and explored the features of the clusters analysed in our subset of 51 articles, which have been extracted from the identified literature collection of 182 documents. Table 13 reports the number of articles examining the respective clusters: 100 Table 13 - Article count by video game clusters analysed in the literature Video game hub Count Country Article Atlanta 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Atlantic Canada 1 CANADA POTTIE-SHERMAN Y, 2019, CAN GEOGR-GEOGR CAN Austin 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Barcelona 2 SPAIN MENDEZ-ORTEGA C, 2020, ANN REGIONAL SCI; MÉNDEZ-ORTEGA C, 2019, J URBAN TECHNOL Bellevue, WA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Bergen 1 NORWAY HOVIG OS, 2016, NORSK GEOGR TIDSSKR Birmingham 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Brighton 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Brisbane 2 AUSTRALIA DARCHEN S, 2016, URBAN GEOGR; DARCHEN S, 2017, INT J KNOWL-BASED DE Bristol 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Calgary 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Cambridge 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Cape Town 1 SOUTH AFRICA SNOWBALL J, 2021, J CULT ECON Chicago 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Coventry 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Dallas 1 US DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR Dublin 1 IRELAND MURPHY E, 2015, GROWTH CHANGE Dundee 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Edmonton 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Eugene, OR 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Fukuoka 1 JAPAN HANZAWA S, 2017, GEOGR ANN B Glasgow 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Halifax 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN 101 Hamburg 4 GERMANY BINZ C, 2022, REG STUD; GONG HW, 2020, GEOFORUM; GONG HW, 2023, GEOFORUM; MENDEZ-ORTEGA C, 2020, ANN REGIONAL SCI Helsinki 1 FINLAND LEHTONEN MJ, 2020, IND AND INNOV Houston, TX 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Irvine, CA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Kansai 2 JAPAN ERNKVIST M, 2018, GEOGR ANN B; HANZAWA S, 2017, GEOGR ANN B Kanto 1 JAPAN ERNKVIST M, 2018, GEOGR ANN B Kirkland, WA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Las Vegas 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Leeds 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Leipzig 1 GERMANY LANGE B, 2013, Z WIRTSCHAFTSGEOGR Liverpool 2 UK ANDERTON D, 2017, LOCAL ECON; TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV London 2 UK DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Los Angeles 3 US DE VAAN M, 2019, ECON GEOGR; DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Lyon 1 FRANCE MENDEZ-ORTEGA C, 2020, ANN REGIONAL SCI Malmo 1 SWEDEN MIÖRNER J, 2017, EUR PLAN STUD Manchester 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Melbourne 2 AUSTRALIA DARCHEN S, 2016, URBAN GEOGR; DARCHEN S, 2015, EUR PLAN STUD Miramichi 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN 102 Montreal 5 CANADA COHENDET P, 2021, IND INNOV; DARCHEN S, 2015, EUR PLAN STUD; GRANDADAM D, 2013, REG STUD; PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN; TREMBLAY DG, 2016, INT J KNOWL-BASED DE Munich 1 GERMANY LANGE B, 2013, Z WIRTSCHAFTSGEOGR New York 3 US DE VAAN M, 2019, ECON GEOGR; DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Newcastle 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Nottingham 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Osaka 1 JAPAN DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR Ottawa 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Oxford 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Pangnirtung 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Paris 1 FRANCE DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR Portland, OR 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Quebec City 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Redmond, WA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Redwood City, CA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Rio de Janeiro 1 BRAZIL DINIZ RG, 2021, REV FORM ONLINE San Diego 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF San Francisco 3 US DE VAAN M, 2019, ECON GEOGR; DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF San Jose, CA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF San Rafael, CA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Santa Monica, CA 1 US VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Santiago de Chile 1 CHILE BAEZA-GONZÁLEZ S, 2021, GEOFORUM São Paulo 1 BRAZIL DINIZ RG, 2021, REV FORM ONLINE 103 Scania 2 SWEDEN MIÖRNER J, 2022, REG STUD; MIÖRNER J, 2017, EUR PLAN STUD Seattle 3 US DE VAAN M, 2019, ECON GEOGR; DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; VANG J, 2013, ELGAR ORIG REF Seoul 1 SOUTH KOREA JANG S, 2017, J BUS RES Shanghai 3 CHINA GONG HW, 2023, GEOFORUM; GONG HW, 2019, GROWTH CHANGE; GONG HW, 2019, GEOFORUM Sheffield 1 UK TSANG D, 2021, BUS HIST REV Shenzhen 1 CHINA YANG C, 2021, TIJDSCHR ECON SOC GE Sudbury 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Tokyo 3 JAPAN DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR; HANZAWA S, 2017, GEOGR ANN B LEHTONEN MJ, 2020, IND AND INNOV Toronto 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Vancouver 4 CANADA BARNES T, 2011, NEW HORIZ REG SCI; PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN; SIEMIATYCKI E, 2016, URBAN GEOGR; DE VAAN M, 2013, J ECON GEOGR Victoria 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Vina del Mar 1 CHILE BAEZA-GONZÁLEZ S, 2021, GEOFORUM Winnipeg 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Wuhan 1 CHINA XU JJ, 2023, 3C EMPRESA Yarmouth, Canada 1 CANADA PARKER F, 2017, CAN J COMMUN Notes: UNITO considered as a video game hub the cities and regions investigated in the reviewed literature. Source: Authors’ own elaboration.