Study scope. 13 MENA countries: Morocco, Algeria,

Transcription

1 Rich Place, Poor Place How MENA will overcome spatial disparities Publication due April 2010 Study scope 13 MENA countries: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, i Libya, Egypt, West Bank and Gaza, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Djibouti. Not including resource-rich, labour-scarce: very different problematic. Publication due April

2 The World Development Report principles 1) Spatially blind policies everywhere: institutions. 2) Spatial connectivity to link a portfolio of metropolises, cities, towns and villages: infrastructure. 3) Spatially targeted interventions where divisions i i prevent migration to leading areas: incentives. How can one apply these principles to MENA s efficiency, social and political concerns? Applying the World Development Report to MENA and applying MENA to the WDR. 2

3 Plan of presentation A. Spatial disparities as a policy issue in MENA (interactive) ti B. Spatial disparity diagnostics for MENA C. Spatial development policy challenges in MENA D. A way forward. A. Spatial disparities as a policy issue in MENA (interactive) 3

4 Les disparités spatiales des revenus des ménages dont mon pays sont The spatial disparities in household earnings in my country are 0 of Trop petites/too small 2. Appropriées comme incitation à la migration / Appropriate as incentives for migration 3. Trop grandes / too large 33% 33% 33% Le rythme d urbanisation dans mon pays est The speed of urbanisation in my country is 1. Trop lent / Too slow 0 of Adapté au développement du pays / Appropriate to the country s development 3. Trop rapide / Too fast 0% 0% 0%

5 L équilibre spatiale de la provision des services publics dans mon pays The spatial balance of the provision of public services in my country 1. A toujours été approprié. 25% 25% 25% 25% 1. Has always been 2. A toujours trop favorisé la zone métropolitaine au dépens des zones péripheriques. 3. A trop favorisé la zone métropolitaine dans le passé, mais ceci n est plus la cas. 4. A toujours trop favorisé les zones péripheriques au dépens de la zone métropolitaine. 0 of appropriate. it 2. Has always favoured the metropolitan area at the expense of outlying areas. 3. Has favoured the metropolitan area too much in the past, but this is no longer the case. 4. Has always favoured outlying areas at the expense of the metropolitan area. Dans mon pays, l allocation spatiale des dépenses publiques se fait principalement selon des critères In my country, the spatial allocation of public spending is principally done according to considerations 1. Considérations d efficience / efficiency considerations 2. Considérations sociales / social considerations 3. Considérations politiques / political considerations 33% 33% 33%

6 B. Spatial disparity diagnostics for MENA Spatial Disparity Diagnostics for MENA. 4 empirical questions with policy implications 1) Is there really a major spatial component of inequality? Rural-urban disparities a significant component of inequality? Inter-provincial disparities a significant component of inequality? To what extent are disparities explicable by household characteristics? 2) Is the lagging area a low-density fringe or a high-density pocket? 3) Is internal migration mitigating disparities fast enough (or is there division?) 4) Does the lagging area have unrealised locational potential? 6

7 So MENA s agglomeration indices already at industrialised levels*. Mid-20s: Yemen 40s: Djibouti, Tunisia i (Denmark) 50s: Algeria, Morocco, Syria, West Bank and Gaza (Greece) 60s: Iran, Iraq (Portugal, Poland) 70s Jordan, Lebanon (USA) 80s Libya (UK) 90s: Egypt (Japan) *Except Yemen Rural-urban disparities of vast significance in some countries, negligible in others. Africa East Asia and Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean MENA Yemen Syria Morocco Jordan Egypt Djibouti 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Rural-urban disparities in consumption as % of maximum Morocco s rural-urban divide is a key component of inequality. Jordan s is not. P:/ /sommeiller ELMO Nov08.xls 7

8 Inter-provincial disparities of vast significance in some countries, negligible in others. Yemen Syria Morocco Jordan Egypt Djibouti 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Inter-provincial disparities in consumption as % of maximum Egypt s inter-provincial divide is a key component of inequality. Syria s is not. P:/ /sommeiller ELMO Nov08.xls Share of spatial disparities explained by household characteristics Rural-urban per capita expenditure differences explained by differences in household size, and gender, age and education of household head: 100% 80% 60% 40% Unexplained Explained 20% 0% Jordan Egypt Morocco Djibouti Jordan s spatial inequality is explained by household characteristics. Djibouti s is not. 8

9 Is internal migration eroding disparities? % of population in poorest 50% of provinces Tunisia Iran Before After Tunisia s internal migration is eroding interprovincial disparities. Iran s is not. MENA s special geography: population density linked to water availability 9

10 So Low-density fringe vs High-density pocket pocket pocket fringe C. Spatial development policy challenges in MENA (i) Ccorrecting historical metropolitan bias in institutions (ii) Efficient use of existing connectivity infrastructure (iii) Shifting targeted development interventions from subsidisation to catalysis. 10

11 C(i) Correcting historical metropolitan bias in institutions The politics of proximity, confirmed by cross-country econometrics: low political l accountability accelerates spatial polarisation and urbanisation. The perceived politics of proximity: Yes, as I said, the regions where important responsibles reside, are the ones developed. Centripetal public expenditure systems and patterns: >20% of public spending on fuel subsidies (2007) An unequal business environment: Morocco: differences in quality of institutions more important for productivity than agglomeration economies. Health, education, social protection: disparities in access and outcomes. Levelling the playing field ( institutions in WDR language) From commodity subsidies to targeted social transfers; Social service provision: systems, accountability and sometimes resources. Monitoring and adjustment of subnational business environments. 11

12 C(ii) Efficient use of existing connectivity infrastructure With clustered settlement patterns, MENA s trunk road density is not a major issue 9.5 Road density (km of paved road/1000 people) MENA average Libya Romania Turkey Algeria Iran Lebanon Djibouti Iraq Thailand Jordan WB&G Tunisia Morocco Pakistan Chile Egypt Syria Yemen but there is scope to improve connectivity software : road maintenance funding border procedures commercialisation of public transport and freight sectors 12

13 and feeder roads Rural Access Index, by World Regions (2004) (% of rural population with access to all-season road) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% EAP ECA LAC MNA SA* SSA** C (iii) Shifting targeted development interventions from subsidisation to catalysis. Report will summarise lessons from OECD, Sapir report, SIt S.Italy, E. Germany, Ireland, Tanger Atlantique, ti Tunisia i centre-east, Iran free zones, Egypt new cities, model industrial estates. Most targeted development interventions fail. Success stories have common features: the national regulatory environment is favourable. the lagging area already has density. the lagging area has a locational l market access advantage. effective government coordination within itself and with anchor investors. conditional on prior private engagement. provision of investment incentives to the private sector, if any, is limited. 13

14 D. Lagging areas in MENA Diagnostics..& Policy Package Major spatial component of inequality? yes Is migration making fhe problem disappear fast enough? no yes Low density fringe area? no High-density, low-potential skirt area? no High-density, high-potential pocket area? yes yes ( Institutions ) ( Infrastructure ) ( Incentives ) Level the playing field for development Level the playing field for development Level the playing field for development Improve efficiency of infrastructure use Improve efficiency of infrastructure use Catalytic intra-governmental and public-private development coordination 14