Evaluating Regional Development Initiatives: an EU- Australian

Comparison

Regional Policy in Australia

11UNIV01Associate Professor Paul Collits

University of Southern Queensland

The Core Questions of Regional Development

• How do we define success (or, what is the problem?)

• Who is responsible?• What drives regional growth and decline?• What works in terms of strategy and policy?• When should governments intervene?• Where? • How much?• Which activities should we grow?

Australia’s Economic Geography 101

• Continental USA in size, half is desert, only six states• Highly coastal, highly urbanised development• Cities developed first• Agriculture is family oriented, export focused, on very large

holdings, often in marginal country and tough climates• Hence, no need for dense settlement• Very few middle sized cities• Population growth driven by OS migration• Cities have great locational advantages for households and

businesses• A key current debate is over mining, land use and economic

development

Regional Policy in Australia• Three levels of government – national, State, local• All involved in regional development• BUT... no “regional” government really• AND... no clear constitutional allocation of responsibilities• Hence regional governance is problematic, chaotic• Shifting emphases and foci• Peaks and troughs of political interest in regional development• There are many, often uncoordinated interventions across all three

levels of government• Spatial or place based policy is generally a peripheral concern of

government, well below macro-economic policy and even industry policy

• Despite this, a motherhood commitment to regional Australia

Key Features of Regional Policy Interventions

• A long term focus on non-metropolitan Australia, considered as a single entity

• Less on “regions” as such• The provision of adequate services to non-metro

regions has been an ongoing policy objective• Interventions have been limited in scope and

financial commitment• Policy fashions, eg leadership, competitive

advantage, localism

How Regional Policy Has Evolved

• Policy has evolved in a number of specific ways, as well as reflecting peaks and troughs of interest

• From top down to bottom up, reflecting general OECD experience

• A downscaling of policy reach and ambition• Neo liberalism and globalisation in the 1980s• Abandonment of decentralisation as a policy objective in the

late 1970s• Increased recognition of local knowledge but no matching

resourcing• A multiplicity of programs that “cover all bases”

Contrasting Australia with EU• Less focus, smaller $ commitment• Arguably, fewer large regional disparities• Less clearly defined, historically recognisable regions• Less commitment to interventionist government• Inter-regional convergence is simply not a policy objective of any consequence• The Aust Federation is a compact among States rather than economic regions• A less clear sense of regional policy objectives• No consistency in either approach or $ commitment over time• Certainly there is no real culture of evidence based policy and of policy evaluation• There is little and insignificant devolution of responsibility for regional policy in

Australia to local/regional actors• Fewer formal collaborations between theory, policy and practice

Lessons from Europe for Australia• There is much to learn, whether or not one accepts the high EU LEVEL of

intervention• The EU, admirably, has serious discussions about how to DO regional

development, and forums for doing this• The EU looks for evidence of what works and why it works• There is a research/evaluation culture• There are abundant mechanisms for collaboration between theory, policy

and practice• The EU does subsidiary/devolution seriously• The EU more fully “get” regions in their complexity, moves beyond

endless and simplistic debates over the city/country divide• Nothing like EU Open Days has been contemplated in Australia!