Peculiarities and Factors of St. Petersburg Metropolitan Area Spatial Development in Post-Soviet Period
We study how administrative boundaries and tax competition among asymmetric jurisdictions interact with the labor and land markets to determine the economic structure and performance of metropolitan areas. Contrary to general belief, cross-border commuting need not be welfare-decreasing in the presence of agglomeration economies that vary with the distribution of firms within the metropolitan area. Tax competition implies that the central business district is too small and prevents public policy enhancing global productivity to deliver their full impact. Although our results support the idea of decentralizing the provision of local public services by independent jurisdictions, they highlight the need of coordinating tax policies and the importance of the jurisdiction sizes within metropolitan areas. © 2015 Elsevier B.V.
The article discusses the development of agglomerations as "points of growth" as applied to the modern economy of Russia, analyzes approaches to the management of the process of agglomeration growth. SWOT-analysis was carried out in the formation of agglomerations in the Russian Federation. It is shown that the state encourage the development of agglomerations can be implemented within the overall strategy of spatial and economic development of the country by creating objects of the innovation economy, improve regional cohesion and quality of life, infrastructure development.
In Soviet period absence of market prices led to extremely inefficient land use and spatial development of cities. Centralized planning system was not flexible and responsive to changing demand, preoccupied with minimization of construction costs and characterized by very low density of land use. In 20 years after the beginning of market economic reforms and mass privatization of real property the situation in land use and spatial development of Russian cities didn’t change much. Main reasons of this are: unclear, non-specified and often not registered property rights; quasi-monopoly of the state on urban lands; absence of clear distinction between federal, regional and municipal lands; high transaction costs and administrative barriers for developers; still very much administrative approach to planning and land use regulation, absence of real dialog with community development groups and NGOs. In this legal and institutional environment regional and/or local authorities often act in interests of big and influential investors and developers, scarifying interests of community as well as of small private owners and tenants. As a result we can see a further worsening of the urban environment, decreasing of green areas, disappearance of historical character of whole parts of city centers, sprawl developments in suburbia etc.
To measure transaction costs and administrative risks in urban development and construction, a survey of developers, builders and real estate agents was undertaken in St Petersburg and Leningrad region, the results of which are presented in the paper.
The article presents an analysis of the development of metropolitan areas in Mexico and in the State of Hidalgo.