Infrastructure Provision (infrastructure + provision)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


Infrastructure and Rural Development: US and EU Perspectives Infrastruktur und Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums: Perspektiven aus den USA und der EU Infrastructures et développement rural : Perspectives aux États-Unis et dans l'Union européenne

EUROCHOICES, Issue 1 2008
David Blandford
Infrastructure and Rural Development: US and EU Perspectives Infrastructural development remains a cornerstone of rural development policy in both the United States and Europe. It is evident that rural development objectives differ, but similar policy measures are used. The economic rationale for infrastructure development centres on efficiency and creation of competitive advantage. Policy intervention is justified because of the added costs of infrastructure provision in remote, sparsely populated areas. Although this policy focus does not guarantee success, regions leading in economic development typically have better physical infrastructure. In the United States, policy must adapt to challenges posed by an ageing rural infrastructure and demographic change that will increase demands on social infrastructure such as housing and health facilities. There will be greater local responsibility for funding, and expanded use of public/private partnerships. In the European Union, the major challenge is in redirecting resources to new member states, where there is urgent need for both large new investments in transport networks and small investments to improve local access. Although two current options for funding these diverse needs focus on European policies only, investments in non-farm physical capital and public infrastructure cannot be sustained without active national policies to complement the European efforts, perhaps through co-financing requirements. Infrastructures et développement rural : Perspectives aux États-Unis et dans l'Union européenne Le développement des infrastructures demeure un pilier de la politique de développement rural aux États-Unis comme dans l'Union européenne. Les objectifs de développement rural diffèrent bien évidemment mais des mesures semblables sont employées. La justification économique du développement des infrastructures repose sur l'efficience et la création d'avantages concurrentiels. L'intervention publique est justifiée par les coûts supplémentaires des infrastructures dans les zones éloignées à population clairsemée. Bien que ce type de politique ne garantisse pas le succès, les régions en avance de développement économique ont en général de meilleures infrastructures physiques. Aux États-Unis, la politique soit s'adapter aux défis que posent le vieillissement des infrastructures rurales et l'évolution démographique qui va augmenter la demande d'infrastructures sociales telles que les services de santé et de logement. La responsabilité du financement local va augmenter et les partenariats public/privé vont se développer. Dans l'Union européenne, le principal défi est de réorienter les ressources vers les nouveaux pays membres qui ont un besoin urgent de nouveaux investissement d'ampleur dans les réseaux de transport et d'investissement de plus faible ampleur dans l'amélioration des accès locaux. Deux options actuelles de financement de ces divers besoins se concentrent sur les seules politiques européennes, mais les investissements dans le capital physique non agricole et dans les infrastructures publiques ne peuvent pas se poursuivre sans des politiques nationales actives complémentant les efforts fournis au niveau européen, peut-être à travers des mécanismes de co-financement. Infrastruktur und Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums: Perspektiven aus den USA und der EU Bei der Entwicklung der Infrastruktur handelt es sich nach wie vor sowohl in den USA als auch in Europa um einen Eckpfeiler in der Politik zur Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums. Es ist offensichtlich, dass sich die Ziele bei der Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums unterscheiden, die Politikmaßnahmen ähneln sich jedoch. Die wirtschaftliche Begründung für die Entwicklung der Infrastruktur zielt auf die Effizienz und das Schaffen von Wettbewerbsvorteilen ab. Politikeingriffe sind gerechtfertigt, da die Bereitstellung von Infrastruktur in entlegenen, dünn besiedelten Gebieten höhere Kosten verursacht. Obgleich dieser Schwerpunkt der Politik den Erfolg noch nicht garantiert, verfügen die wirtschaftlich am weitesten entwickelten Regionen typischerweise über eine bessere physische Infrastruktur. In den USA muss sich die Politik an die Herausforderungen anpassen, welche eine in die Jahre gekommene Infrastruktur im ländlichen Raum und der demografische Wandel mit sich bringen, und wodurch neue Anforderungen an die soziale Infrastruktur, wie z.B. Wohnungsbau und Gesundheitseinrichtungen, gestellt werden. Bei der Finanzierung werden die Kommunen stärker in die Verantwortung genommen, und öffentlich-private Partnerschaften werden an Bedeutung gewinnen. In der EU besteht die größte Herausforderung darin, Ressourcen zu den neuen Mitgliedstaaten umzuverteilen, wo sowohl neue Großinvestitionen in die Transportnetzwerke als auch kleinere Investitionen zur Verbesserung des lokalen Zugangs dringend benötigt werden. Obwohl sich die beiden im Moment vorhandenen Optionen zur Finanzierung dieser vielfältigen Bedürfnisse ausschließlich auf europäische Politikmaßnahmen konzentrieren, können die Investitionen in außerlandwirtschaftliches physisches Kapital und in die öffentliche Infrastruktur nicht ohne wirksame Politikmaßnahmen auf nationaler Ebene (z.B. die Pflicht zur Kofinanzierung) als Ergänzung zu den Bemühungen auf europäischer Ebene aufrecht erhalten werden. [source]


Infrastructure Financing and Operation in the Contemporary City

GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, Issue 1 2010
PHILLIP M. O'NEILL
Abstract The provision of large economic infrastructure in Australian cities is widely seen to be in crisis. This paper examines the reasons why crisis has arisen in the urban infrastructure sector and what might be done to redress this. The analysis and the argument are based on a resuscitation of the ideas and ideals of infrastructure provision and how these have been eroded. The paper shows how these ideas/ideals once underpinned the formulation of state role, governance and regulation systems, financial arrangements, and even community need and expectation. Critical to this was an acceptance of the ideals of universality, access, bundling and free positive externalities, and the belief that these should be assembled necessarily as part of any urban infrastructure roll-out. This package became instinctive in post-war economic and urban management. Yet this instinct has been lost as governments shift from models of infrastructure provision to infrastructure procurement where a major role for the private sector is now common. While such an involvement has its benefits, there are concerns for the urban condition when privatisation of infrastructure construction, delivery and operation becomes dominant. Citing Graham and Marvin (2001), the paper argues that, where once infrastructure was the key device for integrating the elements of the city and its people, the way it is now being delivered produces a splintered urbanism. There is an urgent need, then, to re-think what infrastructure means in today's urban context and thereafter to re-assess the criteria for deciding what infrastructure is to be provided, in what form it should be provided, who should provide it, who should pay, and who should operate it. [source]


Trade facilitation, regulatory quality and export performance,

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, Issue 6 2007
Tomasz Iwanow
Abstract The objective of this paper is to quantify the potential gains in trade performance from the implementation of trade facilitation reform. The study applies a gravity model augmented with trade facilitation, regulatory quality and infrastructure indicators to assess the impact of trade facilitation and other trade-related constraints on export performance. Quantitatively, our results suggest that a 10 per cent improvement in trade facilitation would yield an increase in exports of about 5 per cent. Identical percentage improvements in the regulatory environment and in the quality of infrastructure provision would result in increases of 9,11 per cent and 8 per cent, respectively. The results confirm that while trade facilitation can contribute to improved export performance, improvements in the quality of the regulatory environment and the basic transport and communications infrastructure are equally or more important, in facilitating export growth. The conclusion is that trade facilitation alone is unlikely to result in a significant improvement in export performance. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]


INFRASTRUCTURE, LONG-RUN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CAUSALITY TESTS FOR COINTEGRATED PANELS

THE MANCHESTER SCHOOL, Issue 5 2008
DAVID CANNING
We investigate the consequences of various types of infrastructure provision in a panel of countries from 1950 to 1992. We develop new tests which enable us to isolate the sign and direction of long-run effects in a manner that is robust to the presence of unknown heterogeneous short-run causal relationships. We show that while infrastructure does tend to cause long-run economic growth, there is substantial variation across countries. We also provide evidence that each infrastructure type is provided at close to the growth-maximizing level on average globally, but is under-supplied in some countries and over-supplied in others. [source]