No abstract

With regard to regional development, two possible approaches to promote the role of infrastructure and economic interaction are available, placebased policies and people-centred policies. These policy options have been detailed in the publication of the World Development Report (WDR) 2009 (Garretsen, Roberts et al. 2011) and separated into three policy instruments for reshaping economic geography: 1) spatially blind institution, 2) spatially connective infrastructure and 3) spatially targeted 1.4 Research Framework To produce the framework, four groups of works and its deliverable in a series of papers, these and the associated research questions are outlined as one Context Paper, one Background Paper, three Working Papers and, finally, one Policy Paper (Figure 1.1 Research Framework). Chapter 7 establishes a decision support framework to recommend where and when a "place-based" or "people-centred" policy for equitable infrastructure development should be applied. This chapter synthesizes all finding into a decision support framework, Equity Based Resources Location-Allocation Simulation (EQLAS), for integrated infrastructure development.

No abstract

To simultaneously address social equity and spatial equity, we develop a new type of preference modelling to distribute infrastructure resources that takes into account neighbourhood inequity effects. We compare this so-called spatial preference modelling (SPM) with the more common non-spatial preference modelling (NSPM) in terms of their compliance to two distinct perspectives of welfare theory, i.e., utilitarian and non-utilitarian welfare theory. With respect to utilitarian theory, we apply a total utility equality approach, whereas for non-utilitarian equality, we conduct a curve dominance analysis to evaluate the effect on (1) pro-poor policy, (2) inequity and (3) prosperity. A case study for the Special Region of Yogyakarta in Indonesia is used to show the difference in the effectiveness of SPM and NSPM in resolving resource allocation problems in the fields of transportation, electricity, telecommunication and freshwater infrastructures, four fields of infrastructure that differ in terms of their typology (point, linear, plane and space), initial level of development and spatial inequity. The results confirm that SPM complies better with both welfare theories than NSPM. Moreover, the curve dominance analysis reveals that infrastructure characteristics and the level of development contribute to model effectiveness. Hence, the findings can contribute to a more effective policy for equitable growth.