Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficiency and Equality: Twenty Years of Discussion on Spatial Development

  • SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT
  • Published:
Regional Research of Russia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on three strata of the literature, the evolution and mutual influence are analyzed of the ideas about efficiency and equality in spatial development, including the reflection of these ideas in competing regional-policy concepts from the 1990s to the present day. The first stream of publications captures the debate about the role of space in the era of globalization and revolutionary changes in information transfer. Polarized hypotheses, from the “death of space” to the “tyranny of space,” have stimulated empirical assessments on the impact of distance on the level of economic interactions. These assessments have not confirmed the thesis about a “flat world,” where economic activity is distributed evenly. At the same time, the expert community has become dissatisfied with the results of traditional redistributive regional policies, giving rise to a second stream of literature, i.e., the debate between the proponents of place-neutral and place-based policies. The former policy approach focuses on urban agglomerations as sources of growth while the latter seeks to unlock the underutilized potential of each place. The debate has clarified possible implications of these approaches in terms of achieving efficiency of national economies and reducing regional disparities. Recognizing the value of each place has led to a new requirement, i.e., that for the place-based policy to be place-sensitive. Simultaneously, a similar discussion about the focus areas of spatial development of the Russian economy and the principles of regional policy has been unfolding in the Russian-language segment. The major issues are the spatial concentration of growth in cities and the ways to reduce regional inequality. The main feature of the debate is its focus on the changing versions of spatial development strategies, which are often based on opposing principles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspx ?ReportId=95.

  2. https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/files/2018-03/Country_Grouping_in_UNIDO_Statistics_2013.pdf.

  3. The Theil inequality index for Small regions (TL3) was estimated by OECD analysts on the basis of 1509 regions in 26 OECD countries as the ratio of GDP per capita in the top quintile (the richest regions) to GDP per capita in the bottom quintile (the poorest ones).

  4. A similar toolkit for reducing inequality is used in the neoclassical model of interregional migration of production factors. However, even in the strict conditions of this model (perfect competition, free movement, and flexible labor market), these tools do not necessarily lead to regional equalization because the outcome of migration could be a concentration of economic activity in one region (Carlberg, 1981).

  5. https://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2019/03/25/world-development-report-2009-reshaping-economic-geography#3.

  6. Compared to the Marxian era, when the accelerating growth of capital expanded the geography of markets, in the modern conditions, time is transforming from an instrument of “space annihilation” into a resource, the scarcity of which raises a barrier to the complexity of space.

  7. It is an extensive agricultural and industrial area of the European part of Russia, named by the predominant type of soil.

  8. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 3, 1996 No. 803 On the Fundamental Principles of Regional Policy in the Russian Federation, Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 1996, N 23, Article 2756.

  9. Main Focus Areas of Social and Economic Policy of the Government of the Russian Federation for the Long Term. https://web.archive.org/web/20100918062948/http://budgetrf.ru/Publications/Programs/Government/Gref2000/Gref2000000.htm.

  10. The authors of the book highly appreciated the contribution of Colonel A.P. Parshev. Back in 1999, he published his book Why Russia Is Not America, where he attempted to examine the role of climate and geography in the fate of the Russian economy.

  11. Russia: Principles of Spatial Development, CSS VFD Analytical Report, ed. by V.L. Glazychev and P.L. Shchedrovitskii. http://www.glazychev.ru/projects/2004_ProstRazv/2004_DocladProstRazv_oglav.htm. Accessed July 20, 2021.

  12. http://www.giprogor.ru/analytics/reports.

  13. https://media.strelka-kb.com/gdpcities.

  14. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/13052.

  15. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 16, 2017 N 13 On Approval of the Fundamental of Regional Development Policy in the Russian Federation for the Period until 2025. http://pravo.gov.ru/laws/acts/4/4951.html/. Accessed November 11, 2019.

  16. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 13, 2019 N 207-r. http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001201902150042. Accessed November 11, 2019.

  17. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 25, 2022 N 1704-r. http://actual.pravo.gov.ru/text.html#pnum =0001202206280075. Accessed July 11, 2022.

REFERENCES

  1. Artobolevsky, S.S., Regional policy aimed at reducing territorial economic and social disproportions in the Russian Federation: draft concept, Reg.: Ekon. Sotsiol., 2001, no. 1, pp. 4–34.

  2. Barba Navaretti, G. and Marcovic, B., What Are We Building On? Place-based policies and the foundations of productivity in the private sector, Background paper for the OECD-EC High-Level Expert Workshop Series “Productivity Policy for Places,” OECD, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barca, F., An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy: A Place-Based Approach to Meeting European Union Challenges and Expectations, Brussels: European Commission, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barca, F., McCann, P., and Rodríguez-Pose, A., The case for regional development intervention: Place-based versus place-neutral approaches, J. Reg. Sci., 2012, vol. 52, pp. 134–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9787.2011.00756.x

  5. Beyer, R.C., and Smets, F., Labour market adjustments and migration in Europe and the United States: how different? Econ. Policy, 2015, vol. 30, no. 84, pp. 643–682. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiv011

  6. Blainey, G., The Tyranny of Distance, Melbourne: MacMillan, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boisso, D. and Ferrantino, M., Economic distance, cultural distance, and openness in international trade: Empirical puzzles, J. Econ. Integration, 1997, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 456−484.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bolton, R., Place prosperity vs people prosperity’ revisited: An old issue with a new angle, Urban Stud., 1992, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 185–203. http.//doi.org/10.1080%2F00420989220080261

  9. Bukhvald, E.M., What should be the spatial development strategy for Russia?, Ekon. Vozrozhdenie Ross., 2016, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 41–52.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Busse, M., Tariffs, transport costs and the WTO Doha Round: The case of developing countries, The Estey Centre J. Int. Law and Trade Policy, 2003, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cairncross, F., The Death of Distance: How the Communications Revolution Is Changing Our Lives, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.

  12. Carlberg, M., A neoclassical model of interregional economic growth, Reg. Sci. Urban Econ., 1981, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-0462(81)90003-X

  13. Carrere, C., de Melo, J., and Wilson, J., The distance puzzle and low-income countries: An update, J. Econ. Surv., 2012, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 717–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2011.00715.x

  14. Cheshire, P., Nathan, M., and Overman, H., Urban Economics and Urban Policy: Challenging Conventional Policy Wisdom, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2014.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Chuguevskaya, E.S., On territorial and spatial aspects of the spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation, Academia. Arkhitektura i Stroitel’stvo, 2017, no. 1, pp. 67–71.

  16. Coe, D.T., Subramanian, A., and Tamirisa, N.T., The missing globalization puzzle: Evidence of the declining importance of distance, IMF Staff Papers, 2007, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 34–58. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.imfsp.9450003

  17. Conconi, P., Magerman, G., and Plaku, A., The gravity of intermediate goods, Rev. Ind. Organization, 2020, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-020-09762-2

  18. Disdier, A.-C. and Head, K., The puzzling persistence of the distance effect on bilateral trade, Rev. Econ. Stat., 2008, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.90.1.37

  19. Duranton, G. and Venables, A.J., Place-Based Policies for Development, Policy Research Working Paper, No. 8410, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-8410

  20. Ehrlich, M. and Overman, H.G., Place-based policies and spatial disparities across European cities, J. Econ. Perspectives, 2020, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 128–149. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.34.3.128

  21. Eichengreen, B. and Irwin, D.A., The role of history in bilateral trade flows, in The Regionalization of the World Economy, Frankel, J.A., Ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Florida, R.L., The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life, New York: Basic Books, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Friedman, T.L., The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Glaeser, E., Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier, and Happier, London: Macmillan, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Graham, D. J., and Gibbons, S., Quantifying wider economic impacts of agglomeration for transport appraisal: Existing evidence and future directions, Econ. Transportation, 2019, vol. 19, Article no. 100121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecotra.2019.100121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Head, K. and Mayer, T., Gravity equations: workhorse, toolkit, and cookbook, in Handbook of International Economics, Gopinath, G., Helpman, E., and Rogoff, K., Eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014, vol. 4, pp. 131–195.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Henning, M., Time should tell (more): Evolutionary economic geography and the challenge of history, Reg. Stud., 2019, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 602–613. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.1515481

  28. Hill, F. and Gaddy, C., The Siberian Curse: How Communist Planners Left Russia Out in the Cold, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Iammarino, S., Rodríguez-Pose, A., and Storper, M., Why regional development matters for Europe’s economic future, Working Papers of the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, WP 07/2017, 2017.

  30. Janelle, D., Spatial reorganisation: A model and concept, Ann. Assoc. Amer. Geographers, 1969, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 348–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1969.tb00675.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kivisto, P., Time-space compression, in The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization, Ritzer, G., Ed., Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2012. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470670590.wbeog557

  32. Kolomak, E.A., Kryukov, V.A., Melnikova, L.V., Seliverstov, V.E., Suslov, V.I., and Suslov, N.I., Spatial development strategy of Russia: Expectations and realities, Reg. Res. Russ., 2019, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970519020114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kuznetsova, O.V., Spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation: Illusion of solutions and reality of problems, Prostranstvennaya Ekon., 2019, vol. 15 no. 4, pp. 107–125. https://doi.org/10.14530/se.2019.4.107-125

  34. Lall, S.V., Territorial development policy: A practitioner’s guide (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2009. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/12698. Cited November 15, 2021.

  35. Leksin, V.N., Roads that we do not choose (on the government’s “Strategy for the spatial development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025”), Ross. Ekon. Zh., 2019, no. 3, pp. 3–24. https://doi.org/10.33983/0130-9757-2019-3-3-24

  36. Litvine, A.D., The annihilation of space: A bad (historical) concept, Histor. J., 2022, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 871–900. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X21000601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Maier, G. and Trippl, M., Regional policy in a globalized economy, in Globalism and Regional Economy, Egashira, S., Ed., Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2014, pp. 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  38. McCann, P., The UK Regional-National Economic Problem: Geography, Globalisation and Governance, London: Routledge, 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. McCann, P. and Rodríguez-Pose, A., Why and when development policy should be place-based, in OECD Regional Outlook 2011: Building Resilient Regions for Stronger Economies, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2011.https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264120983-en

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. McCann, P. and Shefer, D., Location, agglomeration and infrastructure, Papers Reg. Sci., 2003, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10110-003-0182-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Melitz, J., North, south and distance in the gravity model, Eur. Econ. Rev., 2007, vol. 51, pp. 971–991.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2006.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Minakir, P.A., Spatial development strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025: Political response to the challenges of the 21st century, in Vyzovy i politika prostranstvennogo razvitiya Rossii v XXI veke (Challenges and Policy of Russia’s Spatial Development in the 21st Century), Kotlyakov, V.M., Shvetsov, A.N., and Glezer, O.B., Eds., Moscow: KMK, 2020, pp. 346–362.

  43. Mikheeva, N.N., Spatial development strategy: A new stage or repetition of old mistakes?, EKO, 2018, vol. 527, no. 5, pp. 158–178. https://doi.org/10.30680/ECO0131-7652-2018-5-158-178

  44. Moretti, E., Local labor markets, in Handbook of Labor Economics, Card, D. and Ashenfelter, O., Eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2010, Vol. 4B.

  45. Neumark, D. and Simpson, H., Place-based policies, in Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Duranton, G., Henderson, J.V., and Strange, W.C., Eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2015, vol. 5b, pp. 1197–1287. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59531-7.00018-1

  46. Nijkamp, P. and Ratajczak, W., Gravitational analysis in regional science and spatial economics: A vector gradient approach to trade, Int. Reg. Sci. Rev., 2021, vol. 44, nos. 3–4, pp. 400–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017620980519

  47. O’Brien, R., Global Financial Integration: The End of Geography, London: Royal Institute of International Affaits, Pinter, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  48. OECD Regions and Cities at a Glance 2020, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1787/959d5ba0-en

  49. Ottaviano, G. and Thisse, J.-F., Integration, agglomeration and the political economies of factor mobility, J. Public Econ., 2022, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 429–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(00)00166-3

  50. Parr, J.B., Neglected aspects of regional policy: A retrospective view, Envir. Planning C: Government and Policy, vol. 33, pp. 376–392. http.//doi.org/1068%2Fc1371r

  51. Peck, J. and Sheppard, E., Worlds apart? Engaging with the world development report 2009: Reshaping economic geography, Econ. Geogr., 2010, vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 331–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/40929676

  52. Pirie, G., Distance, in International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Kitchin, R., and Thrift, N., Eds., Oxford: Elsevier, 2009, Vol. 1, pp. 242–251.

    Google Scholar 

  53. The gravity model: What does the data say about international trade and distance between countries?, PwC, 2017. http://www.iberglobal.com/files/2018/pwc-the-gravity-model.pdf. Cited July 15, 2021.

  54. Rietveld, P. and Vickerman, R., Transport in regional science: The “death of distance” is premature, Papers Reg. Sci., 2004, vol. 83, pp. 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10110-003-0184-9

  55. Rigg, J., Bebbington, A., Gough, K. V., Bryceson, D. F., Agergaard, J., Fold, N., and Tacoli, C., The World Development Report 2009 ‘reshapes economic geography’: Geographical reflections, Trans. Inst. Brit. Geographers, 2009, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2009.00340.x

  56. Robertson, P.E. and Robitaille, M.-C., The tyranny of distance and the gravity of resources, Econ. Record, 2017, vol. 93, no. 303, pp. 533–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4932.12368

  57. Rodríguez-Pose, A., The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it), Cambridge J. Reg., Econ. Society, 2018, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsx024

  58. Seravalli, G., An Introduction to Place-Based Development Economics and Policy, Springer Cham, 2015.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Smith, A., An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith ed., Vol. 2), Campbell, R.H. and Skinner, A.S., Eds., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.

  60. Sulakshin, S.S., Leksin, V.N., Malchinov, A.S., Gligich-Zolotareva, M.V., Kolosov, V.A., Borisova, N.A., and Khavansky, N.A., Doktrina regional’nogo razvitiya Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Maket-proekt (Doctrine of Regional Development of the Russian Federation. Layout Project), Moscow: Nauchnyi Proekt, 2009.

  61. The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, Boschma, R. and Martin, R., Eds., Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Tlusta, A., The Effect of Distance on International Trade: A Meta-Analysis, Prague: Charles Univ. in Prague, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Tobler, W.R., A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region, Econ. Geogr., 1970, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 234–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Todes, A. and Turok, I., Spatial inequalities and policies in South Africa: Place-based or people-centred?, Progress in Planning, 2018, vol. 123, pp. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2017.03.001

  65. Tranos, E. and Nijkamp, P., The death of distance revisited: Cyber-place, physical and relational proximities, J. Reg. Sci., 2013, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 855–873. https://doi.org/10.1111/jors.12021

  66. Warf, B., Excavating the prehistory of time-space compression, Geogr. Rev., 2011, vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 435–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1931-0846.2011.00106.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Winnick, L., Place prosperity vs people prosperity: Welfare considerations in the geographical redistribution of economic activity, in Essays in Urban Land Economics, Los Angeles, CA: Real Estate Research Program, UC-LA, 1966, p. 273–283.

  68. World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic Geography, Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2009.

  69. Zubarevich, N.V., Spatial development strategy: Priorities and tools, Vopr. Ekon., 2019, no. 1, pp. 135–145. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-1-135-145

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 20-110-50400 “Efficiency and Equality: Twenty Years of Discussion on Spatial Development.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russia

    L. V. Melnikova

  2. Novosibirsk National Research State University, Novosibirsk, Russia

    L. V. Melnikova

Authors
  1. L. V. Melnikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. V. Melnikova.

Ethics declarations

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Translated by A. Kobkova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Melnikova, L.V. Efficiency and Equality: Twenty Years of Discussion on Spatial Development. Reg. Res. Russ. 12, 439–450 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970522700137

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970522700137

Keywords:

Search

Navigation