IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2676-d758231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Site Selection of Co-Working Spaces under the Influence of Multiple Factors: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China

Author

Listed:
  • Weiwu Wang

    (Institute of Urban and Rural Planning Theories & Technologies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Center for Balance Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Jingyi Liang

    (Institute of Urban and Rural Planning Theories & Technologies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Jie Niu

    (Institute of Urban and Rural Planning Theories & Technologies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

Co-working spaces (CWSs) have gradually become a new form of spatial economic activity in large cities in China. This not only innovates the traditional office model, but also helps to realize the efficient utilization of office buildings and the sustainable development of office spaces. Taking Hangzhou as a case study, this paper uses big data analysis technologies including Python and ArcGIS to reveal the distribution characteristics of CWSs. From the perspectives of traffic accessibility, business atmosphere, innovation environment, living convenience, and rental cost, we innovatively constructed an indicator system of factors affecting site selection of CWSs. We then conducted an empirical study to reveal the influence mechanism behind different factors. Our conclusions are as follows: (1) CWSs in Hangzhou generally present a multi-center distribution pattern; (2) based on the different degrees of dependence of the target customer groups on resources such as commerce, capital, and information, the factor that has the most significant impact on the site of CWSs is the regional innovation environment, and its weight is 0.3941. The order of importance of other influencing factors is the convenience of life (0.3147), business atmosphere (0.1352), and traffic conditions (0.1171). The cost of rent has the most negligible impact on site selection, and its weight is only 0.0195. We hope that the research can be used to provide a scientific basis for the rational planning and development guidance of CWSs.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiwu Wang & Jingyi Liang & Jie Niu, 2022. "Site Selection of Co-Working Spaces under the Influence of Multiple Factors: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2676-:d:758231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2676/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2676/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rickard Enström & Olof Netzell, 2008. "Can Space Syntax Help Us in Understanding the Intraurban Office Rent Pattern? Accessibility and Rents in Downtown Stockholm," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 289-305, April.
    2. S. M. Towhidur Rahman & Ahsanul Kabir, 2019. "Factors influencing location choice and cluster pattern of manufacturing small and medium enterprises in cities: evidence from Khulna City of Bangladesh," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, December.
    3. Bianca Tescașiu & Gheorghe Epuran & Alina Simona Tecău & Ioana Bianca Chițu & Janez Mekinc, 2018. "Innovative Forms of Economy and Sustainable Urban Development—Sharing Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Eunsuk Sung & Hongbum Kim & Daeho Lee, 2018. "Why Do People Consume and Provide Sharing Economy Accommodation?—A Sustainability Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Ilaria Mariotti & Carolina Pacchi & Stefano Di Vita, 2017. "Co-working Spaces in Milan: Location Patterns and Urban Effects," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 47-66, July.
    6. Liu, Pingkuo & Gao, Pengbo & Chu, Penghao, 2021. "How to evaluate the feasibility on renewables’ sharing economy in China: A case study of Uber-like mode plus wind," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 80-94.
    7. Liguo Lou & Lin Li & Sung-Byung Yang & Joon Koh, 2021. "Promoting User Participation of Shared Mobility in the Sharing Economy: Evidence from Chinese Bike Sharing Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pierfrancesco De Paola & Francesco Tajani & Marco Locurcio & Felicia Di Liddo, 2022. "Sustainable Real Estate and Resilient Cities: Management, Assessment and Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-9, July.
    2. Nazatul Shima Abdul Rani, 2022. "The Influencing Factors on Bumiputra Entrepreneur Intention to Use Co-Working Space ," GATR Journals gjbssr622, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonio Menor-Campos & María de los Baños García-Moreno & Tomás López-Guzmán & Amalia Hidalgo-Fernández, 2019. "Effects of Collaborative Economy: A Reflection," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Nur Amira Zainul Armir & Sarani Zakaria & Rawshan Ara Begum & Noratiqah Mohd Ariff & Norshamliza Chamhuri & Jalaluddin Harun & Noorlaila Mohd Talib & Mohd Amin Kadir, 2022. "Factors affecting industrial localization of timber mills in Peninsular Malaysia by econometric and spatial analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 7833-7850, June.
    3. Sonny Rosenthal & Jean Yi Colette Tan & Ting Fang Poh, 2020. "Reputation Cues as Signals in the Sharing Economy," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, April.
    4. Madhuri Mahato & Julie Vardhan, 2022. "The spatial distribution of self-employment — evidence from Jharkhand," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 291-304, December.
    5. Han, Ouzhu & Ding, Tao & Zhang, Xiaosheng & Mu, Chenggang & He, Xinran & Zhang, Hongji & Jia, Wenhao & Ma, Zhoujun, 2023. "A shared energy storage business model for data center clusters considering renewable energy uncertainties," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 1273-1290.
    6. Ogbu, S. Okonkwo, 2022. "The Contributions of Market Facilities in Industrial Location at the 9th Mile Area of Enugu State, Nigeria," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 6(9), pages 16-28, September.
    7. Sofia Morgado, 2021. "Urban Rehabilitation, Social Innovation, and New Working Spaces in Lisbon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Di Matteo, Dante & Mariotti, Ilaria & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Transport infrastructure and economic performance: An evaluation of the Milan-Bologna high-speed rail corridor," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    9. Zakia Jabeen & Jabir Ali & Nadia Yusuf, 2021. "Difference in business obstacles faced by firms across sizes: evidence from enterprise survey data of India," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 11(1), pages 71-81, December.
    10. José Alberto Martínez-González & Eduardo Parra-López & Almudena Barrientos-Báez, 2021. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Participate in the Sharing Economy: An Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Cindy Helinski & Gerhard Schewe, 2022. "The Influence of Consumer Preferences and Perceived Benefits in the Context of B2C Fashion Renting Intentions of Young Women," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-25, August.
    12. Lee, Jiyoon & Ryu, Min Ho & Lee, Daeho, 2019. "A study on the reciprocal relationship between user perception and retailer perception on platform-based mobile payment service," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 7-15.
    13. Rossmannek, Oliver & David, Natalie & Schramm-Klein, Hanna, 2022. "Suppliers’ loyalty to their sharing platform: The influence of multiple roles," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 272-281.
    14. Patrick Klein & Bastian Popp, 2022. "Last-Mile Delivery Methods in E-Commerce: Does Perceived Sustainability Matter for Consumer Acceptance and Usage?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-27, December.
    15. Swantje Robelski & Helena Keller & Volker Harth & Stefanie Mache, 2019. "Coworking Spaces: The Better Home Office? A Psychosocial and Health-Related Perspective on an Emerging Work Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-22, July.
    16. Lamprecht Mariusz, 2022. "Space syntax as a socio-economic approach: a review of potentials in the polish context," Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, Sciendo, vol. 26(1), pages 5-14, January.
    17. Eva Coll-Martínez, 2019. "Creativity and the city: testing the attenuation of agglomeration economies in Barcelona," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(3), pages 365-395, September.
    18. PETRACHE (LANG), Beatrice Georgeta & ISMANĂ-ILIȘAN, Camelia Maria & CREȚOIU, Raluca, 2019. "The Opinions And Preferences Of The European Buyers On The Furniture And Furniture Accessories Market," Annals of Spiru Haret University, Economic Series, Universitatea Spiru Haret, vol. 19(1), pages 95-114.
    19. Moriuchi, Emi, 2023. "Encouraging Respect?: Understanding consumers’ perspective on the two-way evaluation system in a sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    20. Michał Roman & Monika Roman & Piotr Prus & Małgorzata Szczepanek, 2020. "Tourism Competitiveness of Rural Areas: Evidence from a Region in Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2676-:d:758231. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.