This is a "classic"; I've seen it cited everywhere.
Rubin has excerpts from interviews with many economic development practitioners (municipal e.d. directors, chamber execs, etc.)
He is trying to get at the answer to the question: Why are cities "willing to make concessions to business that seem to have little economic impact?" (p. 236)
He suggests that isn't because of the power of some ruling elite or corruption, but rather because of system bias that causes the public sector to favor business interests.
System bias occurs when public adminstrators, in an attempt to make their jobs more manageable, make ordinary decisions that systematically favor one interest group over another. (p. 236)
So, uncertainty -- in many manifestations -- is the cause; efforts to achieve certainty -- at some level -- is the result.
Uncertainty -- it comes in various forms
Uncertainty about "fate control." Does anything they control actually affect the local economy? There is so much out of their control: the overall economy, decisions by businesses, the community's location, etc.
Uncertainty about their tools. Do they know if any of the programs at their disposal actually have an effect? Perhaps they have to attempt whatever they can -- whether it works or not -- because doing something is better than doing nothing. They say that businesses don't even want to tell you why you won or lost.
Uncertainty about cooperation they will receive from the community. Local citizens may create difficulties. Lack of cooperation or outright opposition from local businesses. Board members are often local business people and may have conflicts of interest.
Uncertainty about cooperation from local government. Local government may have antibusiness attitude. Different time horizons -- for local politicians, long-run is the next election. Economic processes (a plant location decision, for example) often have longer time frames.
All this uncertainty contributes to, among other things, career isolation on the part of the e.d. practioner. They feel isolated in that very few people in the community know or understand what they do. [It seems to me that this can be partly a result and partly a cause of some of the uncertainty described above.]
Uncertainty in their role. The fact that they serve as linkage persons between the public and private sectors contributes to the uncertainty. They are working with private profit-seeking firms to accomplish a public and collective goal -- community improvement.
This uncertainty can be increased if there is a public-private struggle for control over local e.d. policy (say between a city council and a chamber of commerce). Changes of form (public vs. private) may occur in response to perceived e.d. failures.
The role uncertainty can be compounded if the e.d. person fills additional or overlapping roles. Some of the other positions may have roles that conflict with the e.d. role (regulatory vs. promotional or advocacy roles).
A search for certainty
At times, practitioners portrayed their work and the expectations of their bosses as an effort to "shoot anything that flies, claim anything that falls," that is, to look for credit, no matter what their real role was in bringing about the change.
...Still, most of the respondents are professionals at their tasks and know full well how much they can actually accopmplish. (p. 243)
[But who likes to admint that, at best, they aren't sure if anything they do does -- or even can -- help?]
That is why they would rather be judged on effort and on the process tasks that they do control and not on outcomes.
Rubin also says that e.d. practitioners get satisfaction by being part of an "inner group" -- that they like identifying with the business people because the business people knwo what they want and present more coherent goals than local govt officials. Those "goals provide a focused set of tasks to perform." (p. 244)
Credit Claiming and Proceduralism
If success is difficult to achieve and the link between effort and outcome is uncertain (as outlined above), then there is a temptation to claim credit for whatever good that happens.
If you did all these tasks that are purported to bring development and development happens, then it must have been what you did. Right?
E.d. practitioners claim they get pressure from local officials to engage in ineffective techniques. Often because some other community is doing it.
[I call this "monkey see-monkey do" economic development. If the town down the road has an enterprise zone, the mayor here will want one, too.]
Eventually, you set up incentive or other programs to show that you are doing something.
In practive, they often will deflect credit for success to others, the business and/or elected officials. This is partly due to a realistic self-assessment of their contribution vs that of the capital investors (crediting the business) and partly to maintain political support (crediting the officials).
Idealism and Professionalism
Some practioners express idealism in that the collective goals -- more jobs, etc. -- are worthy. But as noted, results are often outside their control, so they often take pride in the quality of their procedures.
Working with Business and Government
Who do practioners work for? They are working to achieve public good (more employment, larger tax base). But the governments are often rule-bound and press for ineffective activities.
But if they can get the business what it wants, they get a chance to claim success. The businesses are more flexible, willing to deal and take risks than govt.
Rubin notes that e.d. practitioners gain prestige by being seen working with business leaders.
All this contributes to a systematic bias in favor of business.
Rubin summarizes:
The practitoners find the tasks they confront and the technologies to solve the problems uncertain and that business seems to know what it wants more so than does government. Though realistically cynical about the efficacy of their activities in bringing about local economic development, they undertake probusiness activities anyway. And, to make such activities psychologically easier, either as cause or as consequence, they sem to identify with the leaders of the business community.
In their efforts to cope with an uncertain and difficult job, the economic development practitioners, as reasonable people facing administrative uncertainty, make decisions that tilt the system toward the business community.
Rubin, H.J. (1988). Shoot anything that flies, claim anything that falls: Conversations with economic development practitioners. Economic Development Quarterly, 2, 236-251.
Posted by Chip on June 09, 2004 at 06:19 AM | TrackBack