Ms Ade Marsinta Arsani (p)

This paper examines the resilience of regional clusters in Indonesia during the COVID-19 crisis using a phase-specific and cluster-based perspective. Rather than treating regions as homogeneous units, the study conceptualises clusters as distinct resilience regimes shaped by differential exposure, institutional capacity, and industrial path dependence. Resilience is defined as a two-phase process, distinguishing resistance to the initial shock from subsequent recovery. Empirically, the paper applies Kml3d, a longitudinal clustering technique, to identify multidimensional resilience trajectories that combine resistance and recovery outcomes with Resilio capacity indicators. These indicators capture insight capacity, government capacity, knowledge and innovation, learning, networking and cooperation, and infrastructure, observed over the 2020–2023 period. This temporal design enables the analysis to capture both regional conditions and institutional dynamics during and after the shock. Robustness checks confirm stable cluster configurations, indicating structurally anchored resilience paths. Four cluster types are identified. Cluster 1 exhibits strong resistance but slow recovery, reflecting limited exposure combined with weak endogenous reconfiguration capacity. Cluster 2 shows weaker resistance but strong recovery, supported by functional institutions enabling incremental, path-dependent adaptation. Cluster 3 consists of institutionally thick clusters with strong knowledge, innovation, and network capacities; despite high exposure and weak resistance, these clusters recover rapidly through coordinated adjustment. Cluster 4 displays the weakest resistance but moderate recovery and comprises highly exposed metropolitan and tourism-based clusters, including Indonesia’s capital region and Bali, where recovery is driven by institutional upgrading and learning rather than low exposure. Overall, the findings demonstrate that cluster resilience operates through mechanisms distinct from aggregate regional resilience. By clustering resilience trajectories, the paper contributes to debates on cluster resilience and regional industrial paths, showing how shocks may reinforce, adapt, or reconfigure development trajectories rather than simply disrupt them.

Dr. Yuval Arbel (p)

This study examines the relationship between lung and bronchus cancer mortality, vertical urban density, and smoking prevalence across 48 U.S. states from 1999 to 2022. Using
2034 state-year observations, skyscraper counts are employed as a proxy for vertical urban density, together with sex-specific, age-adjusted mortality and smoking data. A fully interacted empirical model identifies a non-linear, inverted U-shaped relationship between vertical density and lung cancer mortality for both men and women: mortality initially increases with greater vertical density but declines at higher levels, consistent with offsetting effects of environmental exposure and improved access to healthcare in highly dense urban
environments. Importantly, the shape and magnitude of this relationship differ by gender. While smoking prevalence is strongly associated with lung cancer mortality for both sexes,
mortality rates are consistently higher among males, and the marginal effect of smoking on mortality is more pronounced for men than for women. These findings highlight the importance of accounting for both non-linearity and gender heterogeneity when assessing the public health implications of urban form

Mr Juan Alvarez Vilanova (p)

Economic uncertainty sparked by shocks negatively affects inward Foreign Direct
Investment, as evidenced during the 2016–2019 Brexit negotiation period. In an era
of geopolitical fragmentation and structural transitions, understanding how regions
respond to global uncertainty shocks has become central to regional science. This
paper examines whether regional Investment Promotion Agencies (IPAs) helped
protect inward FDI during the Brexit negotiation period (2016-2019), exploiting
heterogeneous pre-Brexit sector-targeting strategies across UK regions. I find that
pre-2015 IPA targeting strategies increased inward FDI specifically in repeat investments
within Knowledge Intensive Services (KIS) sectors —- those relatively
under-exposed to Brexit uncertainty and more sensitive to ecosystem-building activities.
Targeted region-sectors were 4.4 percentage points more likely to receive
repeat KIS FDI, with 27.9% higher capital value. New FDI and manufacturing
investments saw no impact. Effects concentrate outside South East England and
among investments explicitly motivated by regional ecosystem factors, suggesting
that IPAs’ protective role during uncertainty operates primarily through ecosystembuilding
rather than information-assistance mechanisms. By embedding MNEs into
specialised regional ecosystems, IPAs provide operational benefits that prove decisive
when facing uncertainty shocks. These findings highlight how place-based
institutions shape differentiated regional responses to global transition-era disruptions,
contributing to uneven but policy-contingent patterns of regional resilience.