Title: ارتباط، توسعه اقتصادی و مالی: چشم انداز ۵۰ ساله | انجمن دانیل برنهام در مورد ایده های بزرگ

امیل مالیزیا، FAICP، در انجمن برنامه ریزی آمریکا در انجمن دانیل برنهام درباره ایده های بزرگ سخنرانی می کند. این سخنرانی در ۷ فوریه ۲۰۱۳ در مرکز انرژی پروگرس برای هنرهای نمایشی در رالی، کارولینای شمالی برگزار شد. مالیزیا مدیر موسسه توسعه اقتصادی در دانشگاه کارولینای شمالی است. او تالیف یا تالیف کتاب هایی از جمله درک توسعه اقتصادی محلی و بیش از ۱۵۰ نشریه دیگر را دارد. پروفسور مالیزیا علاوه بر کار آکادمیک خود به عنوان مشاور توسعه دهندگان خصوصی و همچنین توسعه غیرانتفاعی و آژانس های دولتی نیز خدمت کرده است.

قسمتي از متن فيلم: Uh ammo malicia faicp is a professor at the university of north carolina and has been for quite some time he currently directs the institute for economic development at unc and he’s written several books including understanding local economic development and more than 150 other publications and in addition to his academic work

Professor malicia has served as a consultant to private developers as well as nonprofit development and public agencies i first got to know amel back at cornell where i was a student uh amel was a couple of years ahead of me so he became somewhat of a mentor to me uh

When i started my plan planning work there and i’ve always had enormous respect for him his work and the leadership both here in the state but also the leadership in the planning community really worldwide so amol we look forward to your comments here this evening and you are our first speaker

When i began studying city planning as an undergraduate 50 years ago was 50 years ago there were great debates that had begun about cities and planning the death and life of great american cities had been published a couple years before jane jacobs was attacking grand civic design town planning the tradition that stemmed

From daniel burnham down to robert moses i guess her nemesis so if we fast forward 50 years look at the bewildering array of threats and problems that we’re trying to deal with so it’s very timely that apa is calling on us to try to come up with some big ideas to address these

Things and tonight i’m going to talk about relevance economic development and finance actually in that order so let’s get going this is something from a recent issue of the other major publication that the american planning association supports the journal of planning education and research that lists guiding principles and what i find

Interesting about this is that there really is only one that i think is a basic guiding principle and maybe if we do nothing else tonight we can revisit what i think are three big ideas about planning these basic principles that have to do with focusing on the future applying holistic thinking the places

And promoting the public interest and on the basis of these principles we do future oriented comprehensive public interest oriented city and regional planning so maybe i can stop there but let’s come back to the cover one of the other things i see is that most of these things most of these guiding

Principles are really about process and only the last two economic development and education are about substance i think there’s been too much process in planning too much process orient and big ideas i believe are more about substance mitchell silver has asked what does the p in planning stand for

Maybe you’ve heard him ask this question hopefully you know the right answer it’s planning it’s not process and you know do you remember the late george carlin what he had to say about process we’re about to begin the boarding process process process completely useless word we’re about to get on this beep airplane

I wish you were alive so what about regaining our purpose well here’s something that you’ve all seen purpose of planning increased livability and quality of life frankly i don’t think that’s a very strong purpose i think it’s a little vague i’m not sure exactly what it means i don’t think it

Addresses basic human needs i don’t find it particularly inspiring if you have a son and daughter you wanted to bring into the field of planning and you said the purpose of planning is they’d probably go to law school but i think we had ambitious goals in the past

At the beginning of the last century we took on urban ills suburban development something we criticize a lot these days guided by comprehensive planning and regulated by euclidean zoning was actually an effective public health and safety measure for about 50 or 60 years so i think that public health and safety

Is an important part of our past that we have to reclaim and the second piece i believe is addressing basic needs the survey that apa had commissioned last march found that people think planning is pretty good thing a lot of popular support for it but they expect planners

To address basic human needs basic needs like jobs and education and paul in his perspectives piece in the august september issue i believe told us you know it’s a good time to do economic development planning and focus on building assets so what if we put these ideas together what about this

I’m not sure repurposes a word but but um my colleagues thought it was good enough to use so repurpose planning but here’s the thing city and regional planning improves public health and builds public wealth i think that’s a little bit more inspirational it certainly is clearer and it addresses basic human needs

And i hate to pick on this but i’ve been hating it for so many years so here’s a revision in our marketing slogan making communities safer healthier and wealthier now i actually think that apa has done a great job dealing with public health and safety

And what i mean by that is i believe that the work that’s gone on in the area of sustainability is addressing that here is uh a slide from sustaining places the role of the comprehensive plan written by my colleague david goddard and bill anderson who i met earlier

Came out of a very um intense effort over a couple of years and it’s a document that’s filled with great best practice advice examples and metrics about measuring progress i happen to bring a copy in case anybody just wants to peruse it so i’ll argue here that in terms of this

First part this first purpose that sustainability at the community level to me very much translates to health and safety at the individual level and so in the remaining 20 or 30 minutes i want to focus on that other piece that other piece being building public wealth when i think about sustainability in the

Economic sphere that’s to me what economic development is so if you want to build public wealth pursue economic development and if you want to know how well you’re doing use financial metrics to keep track i’ll talk first about economic development and then about financial metrics well we get into a problem here

Most people confuse economic development with economic growth economic development is not the same as economic growth more jobs and higher tax base as desirable as they may be are not metrics of economic development here i’ve tried to contrast them i think economic growth on the right column

Are terms that you’ll be familiar with bigger gen bigger gdp external investments exploitive resource use more jobs and tax base jobs and tax base are economic growth metrics but economic development is about changing structure so that industries firms even urban areas become better places there’s improvement and these improvements are internally

Based not externally imposed we have sustainable resource use and higher per capita income and less poverty become metrics of economic development so i think you can see these differences are very significant but having said that they’re also complementary and mutually reinforcing places that are trying to

Develop are better able to do so if they’re able to build on the resources draw from the resources that growth generates and places that want to grow are usually more successful if there’s a strong kind of base of economic development and both growth and development generates obviously the

Resources that pay for the public services and facilities that we as planners are very concerned about so here’s the hard part i think to foster growth and development planners and their allies have to work with economic developers and growth advocates they need to find ways to cooperate cooperate

I’m not saying who’s the planner and who’s the economic developer but the point is cooperate and i don’t underestimate how difficult this is we are in an environment where local competition is what’s emphasized rather than regional cooperation but we really just need to work together and this is made

Harder because economic developers who i’ve worked with for many many years and planners i could say the same they’re very different they’re very different they have very different orientations but i would hope that through difference there might be synergy through difference there might be creativity maybe working with people who

Don’t think like us could help us get to places that were not able to get working alone developers tend to imitate the competition i think one of the interesting things about bringing planning thanks is that planners understand the uniqueness of place and i think we’re in a better position to be innovative

Because of that there there isn’t really a silver bullet or one size fits all so if planters understand the uniqueness of place i think these unique attributes can come through and inform the economic development strategy and one of the reasons it’s so important for developers and planners to work

Together is that we really have to do this at a regional level regional planning has been an idea that’s been in planning as you know for from from from the outset but yet it’s very difficult to do when we have obviously government organized in ways that divide up the geography in in

In jurisdictional terms but this is just not some kind of concept that says regional is good the fact of the matter is that regional economies metro areas are functional economic areas labor market areas they’re places where what industries make and what people do come together these labor

Market areas are in fact the basic unit that’s competing in the global economy whether they’re counties states national boundaries it’s these functional units and they’re competing for investment they’re competing for talent they’re competing for markets and we could spend the next hour talking about this topic alone

And the book that paul was kind enough to cite is really all about this but really what i want to focus on tonight is how can we take some economic development strategies that we are able to identify at the regional level figure out what to do at the regional level

And then come down to the local level and figure out how to do these things and where to do them and i think if we do that we could have a wonderful outcome of having jurisdictions in a metro area actually working together knowing what why they’re doing what they’re doing no

Knowing how their work relates to work going on in other jurisdictions i’m not saying create regional government i’m just saying do the coordination that’s necessary to get local jurisdictions working together and when i say this i know it sounds a bit pollyannish because i know how hard this is to do

Given given the realities we all face now planners have fashioned local economic development policies and have included economic elements and community plans but i think what i’m talking about here call it cooperative coordinated regional planning bringing together economic developers and planners it would be very unusual

But i think it would also be very powerful so i want to spend a few minutes talking about how we might do this planners might do this at a local level primarily through the sort of lens of comprehensive planning as you know comprehensive plans have certain elements that are related to economic development

Things like land use mobility housing community infrastructure redevelopment energy efficiency but i’m just going to throw out some ideas fully recognizing that because of what i’ve already said about the uniqueness of place some of these things will not work in some places and also in trying to prepare this was really to

Be honest the hardest part of this talk to to figure out what would be worth your time to hear and it’s because i think we know a lot more about accommodating growth than we know about promoting economic development in in the terms that i’ve presented it tonight

So let’s use economic based theory which most of you even if you’re not an economist have some familiarity with that makes a distinction between export or basic sectors that sell goods and services outside the locality and local sectors which sell inside which i’ll talk about in a minute

The basic idea here is that we should support growth and development of basic sectors most manufacturing is in the basic sector both traditional and advanced manufacturing but in the knowledge economy obviously a lot of export industries include services i.t professional services health education research and development and so on in many places these

Sectors these service sectors are the institutional anchors that spawn innovation so we have to learn more about how to help basic industries become more competitive and i think our natural orientation being spatial being physical would be to focus on land use space use proximity those kinds of geographic concepts i suggest that treating

Uh i suggest that uh treating areas that serve basic industries like prime agricultural land or critical watersheds that are worth protecting the local sector i take a very different approach to i think here we need to do market research that forecasts commercial space needs so that we can guard against oversupply

This approach may limit competition but i think it’s far worse to squander scarce and expensive public infrastructure on projects that are not needed may not succeed or increase failures among existing businesses there’s no need to generate unnecessary competition for local markets that are really by definition limited to accommodate future demand

I would advocate redevelopment rather than new development hopefully that idea doesn’t have to be discussed a lot here i think most of us support it the reasons are fairly obvious it can be compact or increased compactness it can support the efficient delivery of public services it can lower infrastructure

Costs it can afford fewer and shorter automobile trips and also if you have functional buildings that can be upgraded that can be reused this is actually the most energy efficient way to increase space rather than building something new no matter how green it is downtown revitalization i think is particularly important

Because improvement of civic facilities along with private redevelopment enlivens the public realm and helps build social capital well-designed mixed-use projects can help revitalize downtown but urban design proposals often include far too many bars restaurants coffee shops i think you’re familiar with this if you look at the number of bars restaurants and

Coffee shops that might be part of enlivening a block you wouldn’t want to have to visit each one each day you’d probably become inebriated obese and never sleep again so we really need solutions to bring activity to the streets which is so important to get the kind of downtowns we want but

Without requiring retail space behind every facade i particularly like this last point because sometimes planners are accused of wanting to make everything pretty i come from paterson new jersey it’s not a pretty place older cheap commercial space has great value it’s a place where budding entrepreneurs who have big dreams

And need cheap space can find a home and we have to be aware of that and we have to be more in tune with that whole sector to try to promote entrepreneurship in our communities so that’s what i have on economic development and now i want to spend the last part

Talking about financial metrics at the regional local project small area levels so here’s something this is a measure of wealth in guilford county north carolina there are methods their data to do this a very reputable world bank study conducted around the year 2000 did this for 130 applied this

Methodology to 130 countries around the world i happened to do a dissertation on this topic 100 years ago uh the total wealth in greensboro or in guilford county in 2000 231 billion dollars about 550 000 per capita human capital was two-thirds of that amount essentially the present value of future earnings

Maybe some way to help us connect education to the value that it creates public land and public capital as a part of total capital was 30 percent so if someone claims that governments can’t create anything of value you can use this slide and finally one of the interesting things about the

Methodology is that total wealth is estimated by capitalizing income which kind of represents the value of the whole and then when you add up the components of wealth you get the sum of the parts so if you believe that the going concern might be different from the pieces of it

Then there might be some in intangible social assets that represent this difference and i would propose that we might consider this a way of measuring social capital turns out to be almost 12 of the total so let’s move on to the jurisdiction level the local level how about

A balance sheet for your jurisdiction a public balance sheet public sector balance sheet everything the public sector owns is an asset that includes current assets equipment as you can see land rights away etc but it owes short-term and long-term debt revenue bonds geo bonds and the difference between total assets

And total liabilities which hopefully is a positive difference is net worth or equity so imagine delivering your annual report to council on public wealth and how assets liabilities and net worth have changed in the past year do you think that meeting would be well attended so let’s move on to the

Project and small area level the common tool that’s out there that consultants use is fiscal impact analogy analysis applied at the project level but the point i want to make and it’s not an original point is that we should measure development project impacts on a per acre of land basis

And i attribute that work to joe manikosi who has been making this point and is now spreading the idea around the country we can compare financial costs and revenues more accurately on a per acre basis than with fiscal impact analysis on a project basis joe sent me some data that i’ll show to

You in a minute on two projects one was a suburban happened to be a walmart not picking on walmart happened to be a walmart and the second was a downtown infill project mixed use project and here’s a pretty busy slide but i’ll try to spend a few minutes going through it

The suburban walmart used up 34 acres the downtown mixed use 0.2 that’s a difference of 170 170 times more land so this is like the big suburban and this is like the little prius and property taxes jobs there were no residents there it wasn’t a mixed use project

The property taxes and jobs are quite a bit more on a project basis than those metrics for the downtown mixed use project but when we do it on a per acre basis that walmart is paying 6 500 an acre that downtown mixed use project is paying a

Hundred times more a hundred times more almost 634 thousand dollars per acre 73 jobs as opposed to six per acre and infinitely more resonance because when you divide by zero you get infinity right so this is a way of thinking about it because the scarce resource that you all

Have at the jurisdictional level is land and when you use it as we know it’s usually in that use for quite a long time so this is an important way to kind of get the metrics straight at the project level and finally at the small area planning level i

Can talk a lot more about this if it was too i would rather respond to questions about it because when i got in to try to explain it it just took too long but basically a lot of jurisdictions are getting into return on investment analysis there was

A very good presentation at the north carolina chapter in september that mitch and his staff did mitch silver and his staff did that talked about a small area plan where they had done return on investment analysis my point is that in addition to return on investment we

Always have to look at the risk side and i think that more attention needs to be paid to this i was writing a a book for planners press with dave gotcha on financial analysis for planners and designers and on the basis of the presentation that mitch and his staff gave at the

Planning conference we added a part of a chapter because i really thought it was important we were talking all about project level financial analysis and we had to step it up and talk some about small area plans comprehensive plans and basically we worked out a methodology that i think is quite

Straightforward and useful in assessing both return and risk in these kinds of infrastructure analyses so i’m going to stop there and just go back to these big ideas here are the three things i’ve said tonight you can decide how big they are the purpose of city and regional

Planning is to improve public health and build public wealth planners should be the stewards of public wealth planners should take a cooperative regional coordinated approach to economic development and use local comprehensive plans to implement regional strategies finally planners should use proper financial metrics to measure wealth and the risk

And return on public investments thank you wow foreign

ID: fmruYMAW1Gc
Time: 1365799182
Date: 2013-04-13 01:09:42
Duration: 00:30:24

منبع