Economic Geographers and the Limelight: Institutions and Policy in the World Development Report 2009

abstract

The reaction of economic geographers to the World Bank’s World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic Geography has so far been a corporatist turf-protecting exercise. The report has been dismissed as the work of economists who completely ignore a rich tradition of work by “proper” economic geographers. However, this negative response has prevented geographers from engaging constructively with the World Bank’s analysis and proposals. In this article, I argue that, while the report presents an accurate diagnosis of recent development trends and should be praised for its flexibility in providing numerous policy alternatives, geographers can significantly contribute by promoting a discussion around two key issues in the report: its treatment of institutions and its recommendation of spatially blind policies.

Key Words:

• WDR 2009
• development
• institutions
• public policy

Acknowledgments

The ideas presented here have evolved as a result of numerous discussions about the World Development Report 2009 with postgraduate students at the London School of Economics, at the College of Europe in Bruges, and also with my colleagues Riccardo Crescenzi, Stephen Gibbons, Simona Iammarino, Philip McCann, Henry Overman, and Michael Storper. I hold all of them responsible for shaping my views—although some may deny this. Jamie Peck, Eric Sheppard, and the editors of Economic Geography provided interesting insights. In drafting this piece, I have also benefited from the financial support of a Leverhulme Trust Major Research Fellowship. I would also like to acknowledge the support of the Prociudad-CM program and of the program of the independent U.K. Spatial Economics Research Centre, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC); Department for Business, Innovation and Skills; Department for Communities and Local Government; and the Welsh Assembly Government. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the funders.