How should public policy address the spatial dimensions of poverty? This paper reviews policy documents and eight country cases to identify how the spatial dimensions of poverty are reflected in development policies. Lessons include the need to: 1) balance universalism and targeting; 2) manage the form and processes of integration in the economy; 3) use both short-term and longer-term policies; and 4) respond to different scales and settings of spatial poverty traps.
Despite progress on economic growth in a range of countries, increased disparities between regions and areas represent a prominent trend. The spatial dimensions of poverty and development were highlighted by the World Bank’s 2009 World Development Report. It noted uneven economic development at local, national and international levels, which is associated with major disparities in well-being, as a major development challenge. Controversially, however, the report argued that economic growth will always be unbalanced and that efforts to redress spatial inequalities will only discourage further economic development.
The prevailing opinion, however, remains that inclusive growth should still be a goal of development policymakers and practitioners. Indeed, a review of existing policies and practices shows that national governments, even more than donors, are acutely aware of the importance of addressing the spatial dimensions of poverty. The WDR’s position should be reconsidered:
- While it may be impossible for governments to deliver totally smooth development, it should not be implied that governments are absolved of responsibility to spread economic development.
- The WDR’s reasoning entails dangerous assumptions about sequencing, which may allow uneven growth to influence the later structure of the economy in a way that is difficult to reverse.
- The suggestion that incomes diverge as a country develops, but then converge again later in the development process, is widely accepted. But this notion fails to consider the unique contexts and dynamics of developing countries. For example, it emphasises the role of urban agglomeration, but agglomeration in and around the capital can increase inter-area disparities. The growth of a single mega-city with few dispersed growth poles and limited links to national hinterlands would make spatial poverty traps inevitable.
Attempts to increase economic growth need to be combined with concerns as to how the benefits of growth are distributed. Traditional policy instruments, which seek to address poverty pockets and spatial poverty traps singly through universally applied sectoral policies or vertical programmes, are inadequate. They need to be complemented by geographically-based approaches that consciously seek to address context specificity. This would involve a layering of policy instruments, seeking to address the needs of specific life-cycle groups (e.g. children, youth, older people) overlaid with those focusing on the needs of other categories or groups (e.g. pastoralists, micro entrepreneurs, slum dwellers, people living with AIDS) and those in specific socio-economic categories (e.g. the destitute, the unemployed). Such a layered approach to policy would enable governments to reduce both within-area and between-area inequality. Policymakers need to:
- Strike a balance between universalism in inputs and universalism in outcomes. To do this, spatially targeted policies and programmes may be required. Experiences of implementing universal education policies in Ghana and Uganda, for example, suggest that such policies may fail to achieve truly universal outcomes if they do not take spatial poverty traps into account.
- Be aware that attempts to support economic integration might need to be balanced with policies to promote development in spatially disadvantaged areas. Solutions to spatial poverty traps are likely to involve: supporting the connection of spatially disadvantaged and productive areas; ensuring that adverse impacts and opportunities from integration are managed/supported; and developing and implementing policies that tackle the causes and implications of disadvantage in spatial poverty traps.
- Combine shorter-term policies that address immediate deprivations with longer-term policies addressing the structural issues that cause poverty.
- Respond to different scales and settings of spatial poverty traps. This involves understanding context and working at a sufficient level of disaggregation to identify areas or pockets of spatial disadvantage. Spatial poverty traps will be found within regions and cities as well as within countries.
