2009年-世界发展银行全球_SpatialTerritorial_Development_Policies_in_the_United_States_47页_399kb

Summary of Spatial/Territorial Development Policies in the United States

Core Content

This document provides an in-depth analysis of spatial development policies in the United States, focusing on federal, state, and local initiatives aimed at addressing regional disparities and promoting economic growth. It explores the evolution of these policies, their implementation, and their effectiveness in the context of changing economic and social conditions.

Main Viewpoints

• Regional Development in the US: Unlike the EU or Canada, the US does not have a centralized, formal regional development strategy. Instead, it features a complex and often poorly integrated network of programs across federal, state, and local governments.
• Historical Context: The US has a long history of addressing spatial inequalities through various initiatives, including the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC).
• Policy Evolution: Over the decades, the role of the federal government in spatial development has shifted, reflecting changes in the structure of the economy, globalization, and public priorities.
• Federal Role: The federal government plays both a direct and indirect role in spatial development, often through infrastructure investment and targeted assistance to distressed areas.
• State and Local Initiatives: States have increasingly taken the lead in regional development, often adapting federal programs to their specific needs and contexts.
• Challenges: The document highlights several challenges, including the fragmentation of economic activity, the impact of globalization, and demographic shifts such as labor mobility and aging populations.
• Policy Evaluation: The effectiveness of programs like the ARC is evaluated using control group methodologies, indicating mixed results with some positive impacts on income and population growth.

Key Information

1. Overview of Spatial Development in the United States

• The US lacks a formal, EU-style regional development strategy.
• A complex web of federal, state, and local programs exists, often operating at different spatial scales.
• These programs have evolved significantly over the past 30–40 years due to changes in economic organization and globalization.
• The concept of "regional dualism" (uneven development between regions) has been a central concern, especially in the 1960s and 1970s.

2. National-Level Policy and Initiatives

2.1 Formal Large-Scale Programs

• The federal government has numerous programs aimed at regional development, including infrastructure, education, and economic assistance.
• These programs are rarely "bundled" into a single strategy but have indirect spatial impacts.
• Over 180 "economic development" programs are associated with federal agencies.

2.2 The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC)

• Created in 1965, the ARC was a response to regional poverty and underdevelopment in Appalachia.
• The region is large (larger than California) and heterogeneous, consisting of three sub-regions: old heavy manufacturing, mountainous coal areas, and exhausted agricultural areas.
• The ARC's approach was comprehensive, focusing on infrastructure, social programs, and regional coordination.
• Infrastructure investment was a major component, with 85% of funds allocated to highways.
• The program had mixed results, with some evidence of selection bias and unintended consequences, such as increased unemployment in some areas.
• By 1991, the ARC had produced $8.4 billion in additional income in one year alone, despite the challenges.

2.3 Economic Development Administration (EDA)

• The EDA is the only federal agency explicitly charged with sub-state regional development.
• Its mission is to promote innovation, competitiveness, and growth in American regions.
• The EDA has evolved over time, with a focus on both rural and urban distressed areas.
• It supports planning, infrastructure, and technical assistance through a network of Economic Development Districts (EDDs).
• The 1998 legislation reauthorized the EDA and introduced reforms, including a focus on distressed urban areas and encouraging regional cooperation.
• The EDA also encourages greater local participation by limiting federal funding to 50% of project grants and 80% of total investment.

3. Federal Role: Changing Priorities

• The federal government's role in spatial development has shifted over time, reflecting changing economic priorities and the impact of globalization.
• There has been a move towards more localized and flexible approaches, with an emphasis on regional strategies and collaboration.

4. State Role in Spatial Development

• States play a significant role in spatial development, often directing resources to different priorities based on local needs.
• Examples of state initiatives include the designation of growth centers and the support of local development districts.
• State-level policies have been influenced by federal programs but adapted to local conditions.

5. New Challenges

• The changing organization and ownership of industry, including outsourcing and the hollowing out of manufacturing, have impacted regional development.
• Spatial spillovers and interstate trade have become more significant due to globalization.
• Business cycles and demographic changes (e.g., labor mobility, immigration, aging populations) pose ongoing challenges to regional development.
• The question of which regions should be targeted for development remains central to policy debates.

6. Convergence, Divergence - What is the State of Regional America?

• The document examines whether regional disparities are converging or diverging.
• Using a control group approach, it finds that Appalachian counties grew significantly more slowly than their non-Appalachian counterparts, suggesting the presence of selection bias.
• Despite this, the EDA and ARC programs have had a measurable impact on regional development, particularly in terms of income and population growth.

7. Summary

• The US has a long history of spatial development policies, though they are often fragmented and ad hoc.
• The ARC and EDA are two of the most significant federal initiatives in this area.
• The effectiveness of these programs is mixed, with some positive outcomes and notable challenges.
• The evolving role of the federal government and the increasing importance of state and local initiatives reflect broader shifts in the US economy and society.