Commentary on “Competitors and Cooperators: A Micro‐Level Analysis of Regional Economic Development Collaboration Networks”

• Author: Christopher Hoene,Christiana McFarland,J. Katie McConnell
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02542.x
• Date: 01 March 2012
• Published date: 01 March 2012

A Micro-Level Analysis of Regional Economic Development Collaboration Networks 263

In-Won Lee, Richard C. Feiock, and Youngmi

Lee compellingly argue that competitive motiva-

tions underlie cooperative regional economic

development behaviors, a perspective that should be

welcomed and acknowledged more broadly by schol-

ars and practitioners who are interested in f‌i nding

regional solutions to policy challenges. In practice, it

is often the case that in regions well known for coop-

eration, competitiveness, and localism are dominant

features of the economic development landscape and

actually may drive regional behaviors.  e competi-

tive motivation to collaborate is a rational decision

made by local stakeholders to realize the community’s

economic development goals—local goals that only

can be met with a collaborative approach.

One example from our own work in this arena comes

from Seattle, Washington, which has one of the

nation’s leading regional ef‌f orts to promote interna-

tional trade (see McFarland and McConnell 2011).

 e Trade Development Alliance of Greater Seattle

(TDA) promotes the trade interests of the Seattle

region in both domestic and foreign markets.  e

TDA is a regional public–private partnership made up

of the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett; the met-

ropolitan King County government; the Snohomish

and Pierce county governments; the cities of Seattle,

Everett, Bellevue, and Tacoma; and the Greater Seattle

Chamber of Commerce, other business leadership,

and union leadership.  e TDA was born out of the

recognition that local partnerships are necessary to

retain the region’s future competiveness in a rapidly

changing global economy. Communities participate

in the TDA because they do not have the capacity to

pursue international trade activities on their own and

because they see the advantage of a regional identity

to enhance their local economic competitiveness.

Despite strong regional awareness and interests among

all of the key stakeholders in the TDA, there is an

innate localism driving participation. For example,

a local economic development goal of the city of

Bellevue, a thriving Seattle suburb, is to create a more

globally competitive community and to out-compete

others in the Seattle region using an international

trade strategy. However, the city does not have the

capacity to maintain international trade relationships

and relies on regional collaboration through the TDA

to support this role. In a discussion about the role

of local elected of‌f‌i cials in trade, a council member

from Bellevue commented on the importance of the

TDA in helping sustain international relationships.

“Although local elected of‌f‌i cials and staf‌f are often

best suited to initiate these relationships, sustaining

them requires more expertise and time than our local

government alone can of‌f e r.”

In addition to sustaining relationships, local com-

munities look to the TDA to help market the region

to international investors. Regional marketing and

branding is critical, particularly in an international

environment. It allows communities to leverage the

breadth of assets in the region, ref‌l ects a more stable

investing environment, and provides name recogni-

tion, which is particularly helpful to smaller, less well-

known communities. To the outside world, notably

potential investors, Seattle is one region. Despite this

unif‌i ed brand, within the region communities self-

identify in a way that is economically competitive. For

example, there are strong subregional identities, such

as the “east central technology corridor,” that drive

local economic development strategies and interre-

gional competition.

At the National League of Cities, we have engaged

many local leaders over the years who have bought

into regionalism as a best practice. Yet regional ef‌f orts,

while becoming more prevalent, still are not the

norm, particularly in the competitive f‌i eld of eco-

nomic development. So what are we missing? Local

realities suggest, as does the work of Lee, Feiock, and

Lee, that we need to change our policy prescriptions.

In practice, and within the scope of local political real-

ities, regional cooperation for economic development

is not an end in itself or strictly a means to achieve

a greater good (i.e., “the region”). Our colleague,

Commentary on “Competitors and Cooperators: A

Micro-Level Analysis of Regional Economic Development

Collaboration Networks”

Christiana McFarland

J. Katie McConnell

Christopher Hoene

National League of Cities

Christiana McFarland is program

director for f‌i nance and economic develop-

ment and manager of research in the

Center for Research and Innovation at the

National League of Cities. Her professional

interests include local and regional eco-

nomic development, global competitiveness,

business development, entrepreneur-

ship, and municipal f‌i nance. She holds a

bachelor’s degree in political science and

a master’s degree in policy analysis and

research, both from George Washington

University. She currently is working toward

her doctorate at Virginia Tech in local

economic development policy.

E-mail: mcfarland@nlc.org

Christopher Hoene is director of the

Center for Research and Innovation at

the National League of Cities, where he

oversees efforts to identify, research, and

share innovative local practices and trends

on subjects including public f‌i nance, eco-

nomic development, housing, sustainability,

infrastructure, and regional governance.

He holds a doctorate in political science

and a master’s degree in public policy

from Claremont Graduate University in

Claremont, California.

E-mail: hoene@nlc.org

J. Katie McConnell is senior associate

for f‌i nance and economic development in

the Center for Research and Innovation

at the National League of Cities. Her

professional interests include small

business development, entrepreneurship,

and workforce development. She holds a

bachelor’s degree in political science from

Saint Joseph’s University. She currently is

working toward a master’s degree in urban

and regional planning at Virginia Tech.

E-mail: mcconnell@nlc.org

Commentary

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 72, Iss. 2, pp. 263–264. © 2012 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.111/j.1540-6210.2011.02542.x.