Positive Discrimination, Spatial Targeting, and Urban Policy

Abstract

Many programs dealing with urban distress direct resources into limited inner-city areas. The United States and Great Britain have both pursued such policies of spatial targeting or positive discrimination. Major problems of targeting include inequities, unanticipated secondary impacts, and the inappropriate scale of targeted efforts. Arguments for targeting include the presence of positive spatial externalities, increased program efficiency resulting from concentration, and the possibility that targeting may better meet the most severe needs. The contrasting experiences of the two countries aids in the formulation of policies that may involve spatial targeting.

Targeting Jobs to Local People: the British Urban Policy Experience

“…Typical years (Ottensmann, 1987); in Britain this arguments in favour of the spatial targeting has ranged from a very basic initial con-of urban employment policy have incern over the desirability of such policies cluded : administrative convenience (Edel, to more recent concern over whether they 1980) ; efficiency in distributing scarce reactually successfully delivered policy to sources (Stewart, 1987) ; the need to tackle those most in need . Indeed, the success of deteriorating urban infrastructure, requirBritish inner-city policies in generating ing an area-based approach (Edwards, jobs for inner-city residents has increas-1984) ; the collective deprivation resulting ingly been called into question in recent from a localised concentration of poverty years (Hausner and Robson, 1985 ; Lever, adding to the individual disadvantages 1986 ; Robson, 1988) .…”

“…As few as 17 per cent experienced (HMSO, 1977) ; local interdeof jobs created under initiatives in the pendencies creating a situation where the inner cities are said to go to inner-city total impact of policies is greater than the residents, the remainder being taken up by sum of the parts, creating efficiency (Cox, in-commuting workers . 1973 ;Holtermann, 1978 ; Ottensmann, The rationales for spatially targeted ur-1987) ; allowing greater community particiban employment policies are diverse, over-pation in the process of urban regeneration lapping and often far from proven (see and making it easier to make local people Ottensmann, 1987, for a good review of aware of the existence of assistance programmes (HMSO, 1977 ;Holtermann, 1978); and, finally, increasing the visibility of results from public investment programmes is easier in small areas with concentrated spending (Nabarro, 1980), which is politically valuable both in justifying expenditure and, possibly, in winning inner-city votes. Counter-arguments have emerged from both left-and right-wing perspectives, and are equally diverse .…”

Social justice and planning policy: the provision of sewerage infrastructure in Jakarta, Indonesia

“…Campbell, 2007;Carey & Crammond, 2017;N. Gilbert, 2017;Mkandawire, 2005;Ottensmann, 1987). The universal approach applies the principle of '…'equal' treatment of different groups (be it men, women, different ethnicities or religious groups), by treating all individuals as the same' (Carey & Crammond, 2017, p. 304).…”