Identifying Spatial Efficiency–Equity Trade-offs in Territorial Development Policies: Evidence from Uganda
研究乌干达基础设施投资的空间分配，发现投向现有集聚区（如坎帕拉和金贾）经济回报最高，而投向其他地区则面临效率与公平的权衡。
In many countries, place specific \n investments in infrastructure are viewed as integral \n components of territorial development policies. But are \n these policies fighting market forces of concentration? Or \n are they adding net value to the national economy by tapping \n underexploited resources? This paper contributes to the \n debate on the spatial allocation of infrastructure \n investments by examining where these investments will \n generate the highest economic returns "spatial \n efficiency", and identifying whether there re tradeoffs \n when infrastructure coverage is made more equitable across \n regions "spatial equity". The empirical analysis \n focuses on Uganda and is based on estimating models of firm \n location choice, drawing on insights from the new economic \n geography literature. The main findings show that \n establishments in the manufacturing industry gain from being \n in areas that offer a diverse mix of economic activities. In \n addition, availability of power supply, transport links \n connecting districts to markets, and the supply of skilled \n workers attract manufacturing activities. Combining all \n these factors gives a distinct advantage to existing \n agglomerations along leading areas around Kampala and Jinja. \n Infrastructure investments in these areas are likely to \n produce the highest returns compared with investments \n elsewhere. Public infrastructure investments in other \n locations are likely to attract fewer private investors, and \n will pose a spatial efficiencyequity tradeoff. To better \n integrate lagging regions with the national economy, lessons \n from the WDR2009 "Reshaping Economic Geography" \n calling for investments in health and education in lagging \n areas are likely to be more beneficial.