PERTHECTION

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Which economies are more robust?

Ask this question of states that are either capital dominant (their capital city is the largest city in the state) or capital recessive (the capital city is not the largest city). There are marked developmental differences (in the long term) between these two structures.

First the Numbers: I've chosen three states from each camp. In terms of notable cities and population, do you spot a trend?

Visually represented: Have a look at the same six states' population densities. In the coloured maps, red represents high population density. In the black and white map of Western Australia, Perth metropolitan area (the only metropolitan area in the state) is circled in red. Capital recessive states demonstrate multiple major metropolitan areas.

A country of capital dominant states: Of Australia's 5 largest cities, ALL are state capitals exhibiting some of the most extreme examples of capital dominance (aka City Primacy) in the world.

Conclusion: The economic development of a state is more strongly influenced by the physical structure of government administration than by its own natural resources. In other words, the "Invisible Hand of the Economy" is restricted in capital dominant states and other incentives and objectives take precedence.

Dominant cities cannot be moved, but centres of government administration can and have been in the past. The first Australian state to relocate its capital will see tremendous economic benefit.

Moving the Star: Lookin' good Albany!