110 likes | 205 Views
This paper explores the concept of non-market governance as a framework of analysis for economic decision-making in North America. It examines the diffusion of authority from the national level to local institutions, highlighting the role of non-market economic governance at the local level. The study delves into the Austin MSA's transformation as evidence of comprehensive governance, showcasing coordinated efforts in economic adaptation, firm activities, social integration, urban infrastructure, and workforce development. The research investigates key actors, institutional determinants, and governance actions, emphasizing the importance of multi-level and multi-actor engagement in contemporary economic governance practices.
E N D
GOVERNING WITHOUT A (NATIONAL) RUDDER: Prepared for: The 6th Annual Innovation Systems Research Network Conference Vancouver May 15, 2004 Tijs Creutzberg Ph.D. Candidate,Department of Political Science, University of Toronto A LOOK AT A MULTI-LEVEL AND MULTI-ACTORED MODEL OF CONTEMPORARY ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE IN NORTH AMERICA
CONCEPTS • Non-market governance: • definition: the means of coordination through which decisions are made in the allocation of economic resources, other than by the price mechanism of markets • Governance as framework of analysis
CONTEXT • Diffusion of authority from national level • Local institutions increasingly important in economic governance • Opening of space for non-market economic governance at the local level
EVIDENCE OF COMPREHENSIVE GOVERNANCE • Locally coordinated economic adaptation • economic: firm recruitment, expansion, and creation; R&D • non-economic: social integration, urban infrastructure, environment workforce development • Informal coordination process • organized across different levels of government • involvement of various associations, private sector actors • task specific, self-scaling
VARIABLES UNDER STUDY CG = f (ACTORS {Associative (local(civic entrepreneurs, leaders, sector, regional, civic society, business, Higher education), Regional(sector), federal(sector)), Government (local, regional, federal)} • FORMAL INSTITUTIONS {Local (policies), Regional (Higher education, policies, programs, Federal (macroeconomic, Tax policies, programs} + • INFORMAL INSTITUTIONS {civic identity, social capital} • KNOWLEDGE SECTOR {character, size, % subsidiary firms, local dominance } • REGIONALISM {size, jurisdictions} • FEDERALISM + ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION)
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS I: KEY ACTORS • Key actors are local, non-state • recruitment organizations • regional associations • civic entrepreneurs • United by common vision • Engage different levels of government by necessity • multilevel integration from below
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS II: INSTITUTIONAL DETERMINANTS • Federal R&D spending • State • university • incentives • R&D Programs • Local • tax abatement policies
SUMMARY OF COMPREHENSIVE GOVERNANCE ACTIONS Social integration Training Environment • Econ. Dev. • Firm expansion • Firm formation • Firm recruitment Urban Agenda Workforce development R&D National Associations ACTORS Higher education Recruitment org. Industry/sector organizations State / prov Civic Society org. Federal Local gov. Civic entrepreneurs Regional org. Federal regulations Federal programs State / prov programs INSTITUTIONS
GOVERNING WITHOUT A (NATIONAL) RUDDER: Prepared for: The 6th Annual Innovation Systems Research Network Conference Vancouver May 15, 2004 Tijs Creutzberg Ph.D. Candidate,Department of Political Science, University of Toronto A LOOK AT A MULTI-LEVEL AND MULTI-ACTORED MODEL OF CONTEMPORARY ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE IN NORTH AMERICA