Re: Intra- and interregional inequality, divergence and economic development

[R.S. Wall]

 our study 
uniquely deciphers the complex centralities of major cities and countries 
within the global FDI network, and how this impacts income inequality. By 
bridging global network and inequality studies, we address the necessity to 
integrate network and territorial development. Next, by means of multilevel 
structural equation modelling, we test how intra-regional and inter-regional 
income inequalities are influenced by different types and levels of FDI network 
centrality, i.e. structural hole, closeness, clustering coefficient and 
reciprocity. 

 �

Indeed, we show that network centrality measures explain income inequality at 
the city and country level, and that global interdependency is conditional to 
territorial development. Furthermore, it is shown that network centrality can 
either increase or decrease income inequality, depending on the measure or 
level observed - hereby emphasizing that a nuanced theoretical definition is 
required. The results show that city inequality is reduced by structural hole 
strength (innovation advantage of cities) and reciprocity (mutuality advantage 
of cities). The latter reveals a non-linear relationship, in which it reduces 
inequality in developing cities, but raises it for developed cities. Also, the 
clustering coefficient (the proximity advantage of countries), increases the 
income inequality of cities. Similar results are found at the country level.

 �

*   Guimaraes, P., Figueiredo, O. and Woodward, D., 2000. Agglomeration and 
the location of foreign direct investment in Portugal. Journal of Urban 
Economics, 47(1), pp.115-135.
*   Burger M.J., v.d. Knaap and Wall R.S (2012) Revealed competition for 
greenfield investments between European regions, Journal of Economic Geography.
*   Chan, K.W., Henderson, J.V. and Tsui, K.Y., 2008. Spatial dimensions of 
Chinese economic development. In China’s great transformation: Origins, 
mechanisms, and consequences of the post-reform economic boom, T Rawski and L 
Brandt (eds.), Cambridge University.
*   Kanbur, R., Rhee and J. Zhuang (2014) Inequality in Asia and the 
Pacific: Trends, drivers, and policy implications, Routledge.
*   Larner, W., & Le Heron, R. (2002). The spaces and subjects of a 
globalising economy: a situated exploration of method. Environment and Planning 
D: Society and Space, 20(6), 753-774.
*   Coe, N. M., Dicken, P., and Hess, M. (2008). Global production 
networks: realizing the potential. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(3), 271-295.
*   Dicken, P. (2014). Global shift: Reshaping the global economic map in 
the twenty-first century. Sage Publications Limited.
*   Hughes, A., & Reimer, S. (Eds.). (2004). Geographies of commodity 
chains. Routledge.

 �

Hopefully you find these abstracts of interest to your session? We would be 
delighted to contribute.

 �

Kind regards,

 �

Ronald Wall

 �

 �

Prof. Dr. Ir. Ronald Wall

 �

Full Professor, Chair in Economic Development of the City of Johannesburg and 
Gauteng Province.

 �

WITS School of Economic and Business Sciences, Faculty of Commerce Law and 
Management (CLM), University of the Witwatersrand (WITS), Johannesburg, South 
Africa.

 �

Economic Geographer, Urban Planner 



Contact information

E:  <http://www.ihs.nl/> www.ihs.nl

E:  <mailto:ronald.w...@wits.ac.za> ronald.w...@wits.ac.za 

 �

P: + 27 (0)11 71 78085

M: + 31 (0)6 41778693

M: + 27 (0) 613093393

 �

 �

From: AAG Economic Geography Speciality Group 
 On Behalf Of Maximilian Buchholz
Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2018 7:17 PM
To: ECONOMICGEOGRAPHY-L@LISTSERV.UCONN.EDU
Subject: Intra- and interregional inequality, divergence and economic 
development

 �

Organizers: 
Harald Bathelt (University of Toronto), harald.bath...@utoronto.ca 
<mailto:harald.bath...@utoronto.ca>  �

Max Buchholz (University of Toronto), � <mailto:max.buchh...@mail.utoronto.ca> 
max.buchh...@mail.utoronto.ca
Michael Storper (LSE, UCLA, Sciences Po Paris), m.stor...@lse.ac.uk 
<mailto:m.stor...@lse.ac.uk>  

 �

Session Description:

Scholarly attention to economic inequality in the social sciences has often 
focused on individual-level inequalities, and yet, the dynamics of inequality 
are explicitly geographic in nature. After a century of regional income 
convergence in the United States, this process has been slowing down since the 
1980s (Ganong & Shoag, 2017). Similarly, strong convergence between European 
regions in the postwar period has given way to divergence since the 1980s 
(Rosés & Wolf, 2018). Intergenerational social mobility superimposes these 
processes and adds more complexity. It varies greatly across regions (Chetty et 
al., 2014) and is highly dependent on localized economic contexts 
(Goodwin-White, 2016). Altogether, these economic geographies appear related to 
social factors and to systems of values, attitudes toward difference and 
perceptions of opportunity that are all created and rec

Intra- and interregional inequality, divergence and economic development

[Maximilian Buchholz]

Organizers:
Harald Bathelt (University of Toronto), 
harald.bath...@utoronto.ca
Max Buchholz (University of Toronto), 
max.buchh...@mail.utoronto.ca
Michael Storper (LSE, UCLA, Sciences Po Paris), 
m.stor...@lse.ac.uk

Session Description:
Scholarly attention to economic inequality in the social sciences has often 
focused on individual-level inequalities, and yet, the dynamics of inequality 
are explicitly geographic in nature. After a century of regional income 
convergence in the United States, this process has been slowing down since the 
1980s (Ganong & Shoag, 2017). Similarly, strong convergence between European 
regions in the postwar period has given way to divergence since the 1980s 
(Rosés & Wolf, 2018). Intergenerational social mobility superimposes these 
processes and adds more complexity. It varies greatly across regions (Chetty et 
al., 2014) and is highly dependent on localized economic contexts 
(Goodwin-White, 2016). Altogether, these economic geographies appear related to 
social factors and to systems of values, attitudes toward difference and 
perceptions of opportunity that are all created and recreated at the local 
level (Storper, 2018; Alesina et al., 2018). At the same time as inter-regional 
convergence came to a halt in the 1980s, poverty within U.S. cities became more 
spatially concentrated, having lasting effects on the economic outcomes of 
adolescents from the respective urban quarters (Holloway & Mulherin, 2004). 
Moreover, the benefits of high-technology employment (Kemeny & Osman, 2018), 
global FDI linkages (Bathelt & Buchholz, 2018) and international migration 
(Cooke & Kemeny, 2017), all appear to be distributed in ways that contribute to 
both inequalities between and within regions.

Geographers have made important contributions to our understanding of intra- 
and interregional inequality, yet we believe these discussions still need to 
invoke a broader response in the discipline. And we believe that the conceptual 
and methodological tools put us in a strong position to go much further to 
better understand and fight inequality. This set of sessions invites papers 
that provide new empirical or conceptual perspectives on dynamics of inter- and 
intra-regional economic inequalities. We welcome papers that consider forces or 
processes that contribute to both processes, but also those that treat them 
separately. Papers discussing how dynamics of inequality vary according to 
gender, race, citizenship status, and other demographic characteristics, or 
that take historical approaches to spatial inequality are welcome. We hope to 
stimulate increased attention to the dynamics of inequality, divergence and 
uneven development in economic geography.

References:

Alesina, A., Stantcheva, S., & Teso, E. (2018). Intergenerational mobility and 
preferences for redistribution. American Economic Review, 108, 521–554.

Bathelt, H. & Buchholz, M. (2018). Outward Foreign Direct Investments as a 
Catalyst of Urban-Regional Income Development? Evidence from the United States. 
SPACES online, 2018-02. Toronto & Heidelberg: 
www.spaces-online.com.

Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Kline, P., & Saez, E. (2014). Where is the land of 
opportunity? The geography of intergenerational mobility in the United States. 
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 1553–1623.

Cooke, A., & Kemeny, T. (2017). The economic geography of immigrant diversity: 
Disparate impacts and new directions. Geography Compass, 11, 1–14.

Ganong, P., & Shoag, D. (2017). Why has regional income convergence in the U.S. 
declined? Journal of Urban Economics, 102, 76–90.

Goodwin-White, J. (2016). Is social mobility spatial? Characteristics of 
immigrant metros and second generation outcomes: 1940-1970 and 1970-2000. 
Population, Space and Place, 22, 807–822.

Holloway, S. R., & Mulherin, S. (2004). The effect of adolescent neighborhood 
poverty on adult employment. Journal of Urban Affairs, 26, 427–454.

Kemeny, T., & Osman, T. (2018). The wider impacts of high-technology 
employment: Evidence from U.S. cities. Research Policy. Advance online 
publication.

Rosés, J. R., & Wolf, N. (2018). Regional Economic Development In Europe, 
1900-2010: A Description Of The Patterns. Working Paper 278. London: London 
School of Economics and Political Science Department of Economic History 
Working Papers.

Storper, M. (2018). Separate worlds? Explaining the current wave of regional 
economic polarization. Journal of Economic Geography, 18, 247–270.

--
Maximilian A. Buchholz
PhD Student Geography, University of Toronto
max.buchh...@mail.utoronto.ca