The government should stop tying essential infrastructure projects to job creation. Essential infrastructure is that which is necessary to enable other development. Examples include water, electricity, transport and sewage.
Here’s an example to illustrate the point.
A
city’s water supply is crumbling and needs to be renovated and expanded
before any new opportunities can be opened up. You can’t build new
houses, your local education institutions are under threat of closing,
businesses are closing and not being replaced.
The
government supplies funds and stipulates that at least 30% of the
budget must be spent on local contractors to help stimulate the local
economy and create skills.
The
trouble with this policy is it creates a perverse incentive to fail. By
requiring local contracting, it encourages awarding of the contract to a
contractor who is open to corrupt awarding of local contracts to
patronage networks. That becomes the goal, rather than awarding the
contract to the contractor most able to deliver.
Short-term, a lot of jobs are created and everyone is happy. But
this is where the perverse incentive comes in. Because the
infrastructure is essential, if the project fails, it has to restart,
creating more opportunity for bribes, kickbacks and rewarding patronage
networks. Worse, with the failure of the project, there is no other
economic game in town so the incentive to get on the next-round gravy
train of the restarted project is even bigger.
Taken
to the extreme, you kill your entire local economy – even future
repeats of the failed project, as there becomes no point to the
repeatedly failed project once there is no local economy to serve. Job
creation? Short term. Then you go into decline and have a massive net
job loss.
If this is done country-wide, the end result is an economic death spiral as the tax base contracts and new investment dries up.
Much
better: remove the requirement for local investment from essential
infrastructure, the kind that cannot be allowed to fail. Use the money
you save by not having multiple disastrous repeats to create jobs in
areas where failure will not have a knock-on effect. And allow the
improved infrastructure to do its thing: stimulate new housing, new
business, growth in public institutions.
I wholeheartedly agree. To use the analogy of a farm. Infrastructure is the soil. It forms the foundation on which the rest of the operation occurs. The only investment into it should be to keep the soil healthy and to shape it according to the needs of the operation. It is not for anything else.
ReplyDeleteThey are foolish to use it for job creation. True viable job creation relies on it's function and stability.