1 / 38

Neglect and Rediscovery: Economics and Spatial Interactions in Economic Geography

This lecture explores the role of economics in analyzing spatial interactions in economic geography, with a focus on the neglect and missed opportunities in the field. It discusses the New Economic Geography (NEG) model and its key insights, as well as the challenges and policy relevance of applying this model in empirical research. The lecture uses urbanization in China as an example to illustrate the comparative advantage of the NEG approach.

kclement
Download Presentation

Neglect and Rediscovery: Economics and Spatial Interactions in Economic Geography

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Economic Geography as seen from Economics: Neglect, (Re)Discovery & (Missed) Opportunities Harry Garretsen (Spatial Economic Analysis (SEA) Lecture, RSA 2012 Delft) .

  2. SEA journal: “… methods of spatial economics” Central theme RSA 2012 conference: spatial interactions Why me? →→→→→→→→

  3. Spatial interactions or dependencies…….. • ……..central to the field of economic geography (EG).. • …....aims to explain (uneven) spatial development….. • ………various analytical approaches……… • This lecture: what does economics have to offer to the analysis of spatial interactions and hence to EG?

  4. OUTLINE • Central theme: EG & spatial interactions…. • …….. in economics prior to 1991 • …….. 1991: New Economic Geography (NEG) • Krugman’s NEG: his 3 key ”Nobel” insights • 20 years on: missed opportunities?? • Example: Urbanization in China • How to proceed with (N)EG?

  5. The Litmus Test of EG Does it matter where Delft is located in The Netherlands? YES: space & location matter

  6. Spatial interactions in economics pre-1991 • International economics? • Regional economics? • Urban Economics? • CONCLUSION: Neglect or, at best, partial analysis

  7. Krugman: Nobelprize 2008 Something changed between 1991 and 2008!!!

  8. New Economic Geography/Geographical Economics • Three main insights make for core NEG model • NEG what’s in a name? NEG vs geographical economics • This model sets the scene for remainder lecture

  9. NEG 3 key insights (I) • NEG’s core model: Krugman (1991, JPE) • NEG originates in international trade theory, not in urban/regional economics • We proceed in 3 steps: Krugman (1979, 1980, 1991) • International trade theory in 1979: old (=18th century) theory (Ricardo) at odds with facts • Theory: inter-industry trade; facts: intra-industry trade (it’s not “cloth for wine” anymore)

  10. Manufacturing intra-industry trade; 1988-2000, selected countries

  11. NEG 3 Key Insights (II) • Krugman (1979): introduce internal increasing returns to scale • Model of imperfect competition (Dixit and Stiglitz, 1977) • Rationale for (intra-industry) trade, but no role for geography yet……..

  12. Average costs under increasing returns to scale

  13. NEG 3 Key Insights (III) • Krugman 1980: add transport costs to IRS • Assume two countries, a and b: Sa >Sb (market size S for A larger than B); • And assume transport costs T>0; if α>(T x Sb), then locate firm in larger market • “Home market effect”: geography matters • But: why should Sa>Sb to begin with????

  14. NEG 3Key Insights (IV) • Krugman (1991): 1st NEG model: add factor (=labour) mobility to T and IRS • Also external IRS (pecuniary or market size externality) • Big Q: where will footloose firms&workers locate? • Answer: it depends……………

  15. NEG 3 Key Insights (V) • ……..it depends on relative strength of agglomeration and spreading forces • Agglomeration forces: home market effect, price index effect • Spreading forces: competition effect • “Tug of War”: key model parameters, notably level of transp. costs, T [Where’s the novelty of Krugman 1991?]

  16. So basically, α+T+λ give us………. ………….a very happy economist on October 13th 2008

  17. NEG after Krugman (1991) • Reception of NEG in- andoutsideeconomics • NEG after 1991: Theory?Extensions of core 1991 model? Empirics? Real test of underlying model? Policy Relevance? General vsspecificpolicies?

  18. Reception……. • Economics: initial wave of research; NEG has done its job, no longer separate sub-field of research? • Outside economics: Not new, bad economics and real lack of geography • Krugman (2011): Middle-aged NEG does not look too well??

  19. What happened? (I) • THEORY: focus on mix of agglomeration and spreading forces, but too little progress? (n-region problem?, simulations?) • EMPIRICS: outburst of NEG inspired empirical research, but where’s the real test of NEG?

  20. What happened? (II) • Empirical research: focus on short run instead of long run version of NEG!!! • “Krugman (1980) beats Krugman (1991)” • Market potential/access: not relevant on regional level??

  21. What happened (III)? • POLICY RELEVANCE? (see THEORY+EMPIRICS): • General conclusion: policy in a lumpy world, role of threshold effects (Baldwin et al, 2003) • Specific policy conclusions rather difficult or based on “wrong” version of NEG model (main example: World Bank, World Development Report 2009)

  22. The Wiggle Diagram

  23. Lessons (Not) Learned • Lack of theoretical progress & wrong focus in empirical research: main message of NEG got lost!! • So what? [assuming(!) mainstream economics can add to understanding of spatial interactions] • Example: Urbanization in China (to show comparative advantage of NEG)

  24. Two background papers for our example • Bosker M, S Brakman, H. Garretsen & M Schramm: • “Adding Geography to the New Economic Geography”, Journal of Economic Geography, 10(6), pp. 793-823, 2010. • “The New Economic Geography of Prefecture Cities in China: The Relevance of Market Access and Labor Mobility for Agglomeration”, mimeo, February 2012

  25. Behavior of NEG models in n-region case • Does “real world”with many regions which are not equi-distant and differ in size resemble anything like the “Tomahawk” or “Bell-Shaped Curve” from the 2 region NEG models? • Answer: (qualified) YES

  26. Transport costs and the long run equilibrium when distance matters, n=194

  27. Transport costs, distance, initial conditions, n=194

  28. Motivation for Chinese cities study • Are Chinese cities too small? (despite rapid urbanization)…. • … if so: does China, does not benefit fully from agglomeration economies? • Main culprit: Hukou system (restricted interregional labour mobility) • What will happen with increassed labour mobility? • Krugman (2011): China=NEG; “what if” questions

  29. Set up of analysis • NEG model (extensive mix of agglomeration and (!) spreading forces (housing rents)) • Use wage equation to estimate structural model parameters (notably “freeness of trade”) • Model simulations (with real migration dynamics)

  30. Initial (2000) distribution

  31. Conclusions based on China example • Use strong (and novel) points of NEG approach: agglomeration is endogenous; NEG provides answers to “what if” questions • Comparative advantage of NEG, but this advantage is not used very well

  32. Final words…….. How toproceed? • Economicscanbe of greateruseto analysis of EG/spatialinteractions, • Make betteruse of NEG whilerecognizingitslimitations • More collaboration or debate? (today’slecture……) Crediblemodels in EconomicGeography at large? (Garretsen& Martin, SEA, 2010)

More Related