Papers of the Regional Science Association

, Volume 66, Issue 1, pp 61–76 | Cite as

Transportation: Benign influence or an antidote to regional inequality?

  • Vlasta Dugonjić
Infrastructure and Regional Development

Abstract

In this paper a paradigm for the dynamics of long-run structural change in specialised and relatively nondiversified regions is presented. My claim is that the present deterioration in economic performance of these regions results from the limits of the model of industrial development that casts interregional transportation in the lead role. I argue that improved relative efficiency in interregional transportation may result in prohibitively high transportation costs in the long run, due to the absence of intermodal competition in the transport sector, the prevalence of highly specialised operations and an investment bias towards the original export sector. This will inhibit and indefinitely delay an economy's potential for a take off from a “vicious circle” and a boom and bust development. I outline further a conceptual approach to treating transportation costs and regional change by raising regional resource mobility via coordinated investments in intraregional transportation.

Keywords

Structural Change Economic Performance Relative Efficiency Industrial Development Transportation Cost 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, A. E. 1986. Presidential address: The four logistical revolutions.Papers of the Regional Science Association 59: 1–12.Google Scholar
  2. Baran, P. 1957.The political economy of growth. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  3. Blum, U. 1982. Effects of transportation investment on regional growth: a theoretical and empirical investigation.Papers of the Regional Science Association, 16: 97–122.Google Scholar
  4. Blumenfeld, H. 1955. The economic base of the metropolis.Journal of the American Institute of Planners 4, 21.Google Scholar
  5. Caves, R. 1960.Trade and economic structures. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Chenery, H. B. 1965. Comparative advantage and development policy. InSurveys of Economic Theory. Growth and Development, vol. 2; 125–56. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chinitz, B. 1961. Contrast in agglomeration: New York and Pittsburgh.American Economic Review 51: 279–89.Google Scholar
  8. Council of Ministers (CEMT). 1986.Trends in the development of international traffic and infrastructural needs. Paris: Conference Européene des Ministers des Transports. Report CM (86) 2.Google Scholar
  9. Dugonjić, V. 1981.Equity versus efficiency argument: regions of Yugoslavia. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, mimeographed.Google Scholar
  10. Dugonjić, V. 1983.Transportation policy and the regional aspects of economic development in Yugoslavia. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, Department of Urban Studies and Planning.Google Scholar
  11. Dyckman, J. W. 1985. Address given at the occasion of the first coordination plan for the Venice region. Padova (April 20).Google Scholar
  12. Eckaus, R. 1955. Factor proportions in the underdeveloped areas.American Economic Review 45: 539–65.Google Scholar
  13. Economic Council. 1946.The first five-year plan. Belgrade: Yugoslav Government.Google Scholar
  14. Faini, R. 1984. Increasing returns, non-traded inputs and regional development.Economic Journal 94: 308–23.Google Scholar
  15. Fleming, M. 1955. External economies and the doctrine of balanced growth.Economic Journal 65: 241–56.Google Scholar
  16. Greenhut, M. L. and Ohtal, H. 1975.Theory of spatial pricing and market areas. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hamilton, I. 1986. International division of labour under capitalism and socialism. InDivision of labour, specialization, and technical change, eds. G. Törnqvist, B. Gyllström, J.-E. Nilsson and L. Svensson, pp. 70–83. Lund: Locus Series.Google Scholar
  18. Heckscher, E. 1949. The effect of foreign trade on the distribution of income. InReadings in the theory of international trade, eds. H. S. Ellis and L. A. Metzler (First printed in Ekonomik Tidskriff, Vol. 21 (1919)).Google Scholar
  19. Hirschman, A. O. 1958.The strategy of economic development. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hoover, E. M. 1937. Spatial price discrimination.Review of Economic Studies 4: 182–91.Google Scholar
  21. Isard, W. and Peck, M. J. 1954. Location theory and international and interregional trade theory.Quartely Journal of Economics, 68, 1: 20–54.Google Scholar
  22. Jacobs, J. 1970.The economy of cities, New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  23. Johannisson, B. 1986.Local entrepreneurship—relict or potential in regional development. Lund: LOCUS Series.Google Scholar
  24. Kaldor, N. 1970. The case for regional policies.Scottish Journal of Political Economy 17: 337–48.Google Scholar
  25. Lande, P. S. 1978. The interregional comparison of production functions.Regional Science and Urban Economics, 8: 339–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luger, M. I. 1984. Does North Carolina's high-tech development program work?JAPA 50: 280–89.Google Scholar
  27. Markusen, R. A. 1985.Profit cycles, oligopoly, and regional development. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. McKenzie, L. W. 1953–1954. Specialization and efficiency in world production.Review of Economic Studies 21: 165–80.Google Scholar
  29. Meade, L. M. 1952. External economies and diseconomies in a competitive situation.Economic Journal, 62: 54–67.Google Scholar
  30. Mera, K. 1973. Regional production functions and social overhead capital: An analysis of the Japanese case.Regional Science and Urban Economics 2, 3: 157–86.Google Scholar
  31. Meyer, J. 1959.The economics of competition in the transportation industries. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Meyer, J., Kraft, G. and Vallet, K. 1971.The role of transportation in regional economic development. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.Google Scholar
  33. Mirkovic, M. 1958.Izbor iz ekonomskih radova. Zagreb: Naprijed.Google Scholar
  34. Moore, J. 1980.Growth with self-management: Yugoslavia. Stanford: Hoover Institution.Google Scholar
  35. Myrdal, G. 1975.Economic theory and under-developed regions. London: G. Duckworth & Co.Google Scholar
  36. Nelson, R. J. 1973. A critique of governmental intervention in transport. InPerspectives on regional transportation planning, ed. J. S. De Salvo, pp. 229–78. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Health and Company.Google Scholar
  37. Nelson, R. and Winter, S. 1977. In search of a useful theory of innovation.Research Policy 6: 36–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Novakovic, S. 1963, 1978, 1985.Uticaj transportnih troskova no privredu. Beograd: Saobracajni Institut.Google Scholar
  39. Nurkse, R. O. 1959.Patterns of trade and development. Stockholm: Almquist Wiksell.Google Scholar
  40. Ohlin, B. 1933. Interregional and international trade. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Pred, A. 1968. Behaviour and location: Pt. 1.Lund Studies in Geography Series B 27.Google Scholar
  42. Ricardo, D. 1963.Principles of political economy and taxation. Homewood, Ill.: R. Irwing, original 1817.Google Scholar
  43. Richardson, H. 1973.Regional growth theory. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  44. Robinson, J. 1969.The economics of imperfect competition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  45. Rosenstein-Rodan, P. 1943. Problems of industrialization of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe.Economic Journal 53: 202–11.Google Scholar
  46. Scitovsky, T. 1954. Two concepts of external economies.Journal of Political Economy 62: 143–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scitovsky, T. 1959. Growth: balanced or unbalanced? InThe allocation of economic resources, eds. Abramowitz et al., pp. 207–216. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Shapero, A. 1981. Entrepreneurship: key to self-renewing economies.Economic Development Commentary 5, 2: 19–23.Google Scholar
  49. Simon, H. A. 1957.Models of man. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  50. Snickars, F. 1987. Structural change in peripheral and rural areas—an introduction. InStructural change in peripheral and rural areas, eds. U. Wiber and F. Snickars, pp. 7–14. Umea: CERUM.Google Scholar
  51. Stöhr, W. 1987.The spatial dimension of technology policy. InStructural change in peripheral and rural areas, eds. U. Wiberg and F. Snickars. Umea: CERUM.Google Scholar
  52. Tiebout, C. M. 1956. Exports and regional economic growth.Journal of Political Economy 64: 160–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Uno, K. 1986. Regional translog production functions with capital and labour inputs differentiated by educational attainment: the case of Japanese industry, 1968–1977.Regional Science and Urban Economics, 69: 115–33.Google Scholar
  54. Valavanis-Vail, S. 1955. The theory of monopolistic competition.American Economic Regiew 45: 637–58.Google Scholar
  55. Viner, J. 1937.International trade theory. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  56. Weber, A. 1929.Theory of the location of industries. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Wiewel, W. et al. 1984. Planners, technology and economic growth.Journal of the American Planning Associaton, 50: 290–96.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Regional Science Association 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vlasta Dugonjić
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Architecture, Urbanism and Spatial Planning at the School of ArchitectureUniversity of SarajevoSarajevoYugoslavia

Personalised recommendations