Advertisement

Regional Research of Russia

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 126–136 | Cite as

Theoretical Arguments versus Empirical Evidence in Strategic Planning

  • L. V. Mel’nikovaEmail author
To the 60th Anniversary of the Siberian Center of Regional Science
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

The question this paper raises is whether implicit theoretical premises of seminal strategic planning documents are confirmed by empirical data. It is necessary to answer this question in order to assess the validity of proposed regional policy measures; in this respect, these measures may vary significantly depending on their academic basis. It is shown that, despite the latest achievements in regional science, current regional policy remains trapped in the theoretical frameworks of the twentieth century. That being said, there are obvious problems with empirical confirmation of agglomeration economies. The difficulties in interpreting observable data relate to the use of macroeconomic indicators for testing initially microeconomic models. One is compelled to use this practice for methodological reasons and due to a lack of data. We verify empirically the assertions that the territorial concentration of economic activity in cities and towns creates absolute advantages in terms of production efficiency, ensuring national economic growth and reducing regional disparities. According to our estimates, higher labor productivity is not inherent only to large cities; there is no sufficient evidence in favor of concentrating economic growth in agglomerations; rising interregional inequality is observed in most countries, including ones with high per capita income. We conclude that the results contradict widely disseminated declarations about the higher economic efficiency of agglomerations. It is particularly disturbing that some of these declarations are included in the Fundamentals of the State Policy of Regional Development of the Russian Federation until 2025 and in the Spatial Development Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2025, thus having acquired the force of law.

Keywords

spatial development strategy agglomeration production efficiency interregional inequality empirical estimates 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Mel’nikova, L.V., Sovremennaya regional’naya ekonomika: teorii i modeli. Uchebnoe posobie (Modern Regional Economics: Theories and Practice. Manual), Novosibirsk: Novosib. Gos. Univ., 2015, pp. 301–303.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fan, P., Chen, J., and Wang, Z., Urbanization in Siberia: a satellite view, EKO, 2017, no. 7, pp. 20–33.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tseli i resursy v perspektivnom planirovanii (Aims and Resources for Prospective Planning), Maiminas, E.Z., Tambovtsev, V.L., and Fonotov, A.G., Eds., Moscow: Nauka, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beaudry, C. and Schiffauerova, A., Who’s right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate, Res. Policy, 2009, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 318–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox, E. and Longlands, S., City systems: the role of small and medium-sized towns and cities in growing the northern powerhouse, IPPR North, 2016. http://www.ippr.org/files/publications/pdf/city-systems_June2016.pdf. Accessed June 1, 2017.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dijkstra, L., Garcilazo, E., and McCann, P., The economic performance of European cities and city regions: myths and realities, Eur. Plan. Stud., 2013, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 334–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Florida, R., The Rise of the Creative Class, New York: Basic Books, 2014.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Duranton, G., Henderson, V., and Strange, W., Eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2015, vol. 5.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Henning, M., Stam, E., and Wenting, R., Path dependence research in regional economic development: cacophony or knowledge accumulation? Reg. Stud., 2013, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 1348–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, S., Spatial inequality and development: theories, facts and policies, in Urbanization and Growth, Buckley, R., Annez, P., and Spence, M., Eds., Washington, DC: World Bank, 2009, pp. 133–166.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Martin, R., Gardiner, B., and Tyler, P., The Evolving Economic Performance of UK Cities: City Growth Patterns 1981–2011, London: Gov. Off. Sci., 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/-attachment_data/file/358326/14-803-evolving-economic-performance-of-cities.pdf. Accessed February 1, 2018.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCann, P., Modern Urban and Regional Economics, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2013.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mel’nikova, L.V., Space-neutral and place-based regional policies: the problem of choice, Reg. Res. Russ., 2015, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    OECD Territorial Reviews: Competitive Cities in the Global Economy. Paris: OECD, 2006.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rigby, D.L. and Essletzbichler, J., Agglomeration economies and productivity differences in US cities, J. Econ. Geogr., 2002, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic Geography. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering, Siberian BranchRussian Academy of SciencesNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Novosibirsk National Research State UniversityNovosibirskRussia

Personalised recommendations