Cities are generally a micro cosmos that synthesizes much of the reality as well as the complexity or the scope of public action in the country they belong to. Also, they are a place where constant interaction of different levels of authority and relevant actors for local development takes place daily. Public policies in cities are thus a good example of the capacity a country has to promote coordinated efforts aiming to provide good public services and promote overall development.
In Mexico, the governments of the cities have played a strategic role in the advancement of daily democratic practice. It has been the country’s city councils the ones that have had to face new dynamics in their dialogue with citizens. They have been the first ones in need to imagine new strategies for public action based on the generation of consensus, the creation of diverse social networks, and the construction of new government frameworks.
Unfortunately, the innovative experiences considered successful have not been able to maintain a positive impact longer than a three or six-year term. In fact, in some cases, hardly any of the new distinctive features were able to be institutionalized. In a longitudinal analysis covering the management evolution through a decade – including a three-year period prior and three years after an innovation comes up-, it can be observed how sometimes new styles of leadership rapidly disappear; in some cases the citizen’s participation system enter stages of apathy and discouragement and in other cases the advances in administrative systems themselves suffer setbacks. That is to say, the innovations and their positive effects can disappear at the same speed as they appeared.
The above situation has been one of the main obstacles in regards to the promotion and projection of the cities from their own governments. Because of this, it is necessary to look for, discuss and analyze public policies which can better promote competitiveness in the cities.
The idea of competitiveness has been incorporated in the governmental speech within the international ambience and even in the academic work, and generally it alludes to the generation and diffusion of competencies, as well as the capacity of certain enterprises and nations to perform successfully in the globalized world. That is to say that in principle it is a notion that is reserved to be applied to the behavior of enterprises or countries.
But cities compete in the world market in a different way that corporations or countries do; they do not compete by adjusting interest or exchange rates, or by recurring to restrictive or collaboration practices. Cities compete by offering an environment suitable to the development of economic activities.
The competitiveness then becomes a determining factor for the economic urban and regional development, which in turn could even make cities compete directly with each other, through actions and policies that the local authorities implement in an autonomous way with regards to the national governments they belong to. It is generally a public-private action because the cities or the regions are a collective subject formed by local authorities, entrepreneurs and economic and social organizations that can act as promoters of their own economic development.
Furthermore, it has to be said that, in the framework of economic globalization processes, the competitive space can be wider or narrower than the political- administrative limits of a city or a municipality. There are even transnational or bi-national economical spaces like the case of Ciudad Juarez-El Paso, but in the interior of an urban region there can be territorial “clusters” (i.e. Guadalajara) that are formed by groups of corporations that benefit from local externalities and share geographical proximity, qualified labor forces trained for particular activities, access to inputs and specialized infrastructure, ties to universities and technological innovation centers that allow them to built an efficient network.
Cities are therefore spaces that can offer competitive advantages based on the different attractions they possess. In this sense, there are usually two types of competitive advantages that can be identified:
* Static, which are those that derive from geographical concentration or agglomeration and vertical disintegration.
* Dynamic, which are those that come from innovative capacities and that are created or built by companies or local governments, associations or city networks. In this type, the concept of competitiveness must be integrated with cooperation.
The static competitive advantages come mainly from the following elements or city assets:
* Location and geographic concentration
* Availability of infrastructure (soil, office buildings, communication and transportation systems)
* Acceptable environmental standards.
The dynamic competitive advantages exist when a city can offer an environment with:
* Qualified human resources (universities, research centers, culture)
* Low labor force costs
* Technological and business innovation capacity
* Cooperation between enterprises
* Local governments promoters of economic development
* Favorable institutional environment (quality of regulations)
* Network of cooperation among cities and governments.
In the case of Mexican economy, one of the most decisive competitive elements that the metropolitan areas offer is the large supply of labor force usually less costly than the one offered in developed economies or even in other developing economies. It is also important to mention that it is not about increasing competitiveness by lowering workers remunerations, but by creating better conditions through labor force training, increasing productivity and offering better urban-environmental and institutional conditions, especially in terms of basic and communications infrastructure, quality of specialized services, technological innovations, sustainable environment, transparent institutions, quality of regulations, combat to crime rates and the promotion of social cohesion.
A city is an agglomeration of population and economic, social, cultural and political activities. But in the case of large and medium cities, metropolitan areas and capital cities, the conditions of competitiveness are created not only by geographical location, but also by the sum of conditions of production and exchange of assets and services that can be built or created not only in the municipality or in the central city, but in the surrounding municipalities that form the region. This strengthens the notion of the importance of a central and a peripheral ambiance built to attract investors and promote economic activities.
Considering the above, the definition of public policies agenda, the analysis of different solution proposals, the discussion for the election of a possible alternative, its operation and its evaluation are phases of the public policy process which in terms of cities, must find ways to be as consensual and efficient as possible through forums and inclusion mechanisms. The development by means of local competitiveness can then be the motor for a more sustainable and homogenous development.
