Yesterday, GLDPartners held a national webinar entitled Post-Election Federal Briefing on Transportation and Economic Development GLDPartners Webinar: Post-Election Briefing on Transportation and Economic Development. This was the first in a series of programs that the firm will produce for our clients and friends to monitor direction of the incoming US Administration as related to our project focus – which is the intersection of infrastructure, transportation and economic development. The next webinar on this subject will be held on February 15, 2017 where we’ll review the new Administration’s evolution in both policy and budget that will impact infrastructure and economic development projects related to freight, airports, seaports, railroads and multimodal freight movements.
In large part, with the exception of the interstate highway system designed in the 1950’s and 1960’s, the US has largely not had a strategic national plan in place for supporting a countrywide system for commerce and freight movement. Privately owned and developed, the US does have an elaborate and complex web of rail infrastructure but in the modern age of multimodalism, that network requires new strategic investments. In large part, the country’s airports are owned and operated by local or state governments or their instrumentalities – and yes, as has been said by some politicians in Washington in some cases the infrastructure is well-behind where it should be. The nation’s seaports are also largely controlled by local governments or instruments of local government and operate not as a system but as (local) government-sponsored competitors. Most of our seaports require resources for infrastructure upgrading and development.
Now, it’s painfully obvious that in many areas of the US transport system, infrastructure upgrade and expansion isn’t optional but required. In order to compete in what is becoming a far more complex and more competitive global trade environment, the US is falling well-behind. Other countries are investing in new purpose-built trade assets, allowing for seamlessness between manufacturing, distribution and global transport.
In the hands of local public sector bodies, in many cases there aren’t the kind of resources necessary to do the job. As important though, is a more strategic approach to what and where the public invests from a national perspective. More investment everywhere in a haphazard manner will be wasteful and highly inefficient. We’ve witnessed over recent years that the federal government has grown to see itself as having an increasing role in developing a more efficient and strategic national freight system. At the same time around the US at the State level and in regional transport planning organizations, there has been interest to intersect transportation and economic development.
All of this is healthy, but much of the strategic thinking is still really in its infancy – in other words we’re headed in the right direction but we have a long way still to go. That said, the US will soon have a new Washington Administration that will have new ideas and will undoubtedly introduce new priorities. It is very possible that the new Administration will not be as interested in moving toward national strategy as the current Administration seemed to be. There is little doubt that the federal government will attempt to wrestle with the larger issues of infrastructure funding and ways to funnel more private money into the national infrastructure, and we’ll wait to see how that goes. We have heavy doubts about simplistic solutions to complex problems – but yes, absolutely private risk capital represents an important part of the solution.
Given how government powers are structured in the US, it is likely that states, local governments and metropolitan planning organizations will need to continue to be the main regional strategists and project implementers, hopefully adding up to a logical national framework. We do see that the new Administration will follow the path of a more strategic investment policy, probably for now through using a national freight framework from which to offer competitive grants – like FASTLane and TIGER. That said, we’d like to see far more emphasis on multi-state, super-regional and national economic development and transport systems.
What’s been missing to a great extent in all of this is the strategic plan for supporting economic growth. Though loosely structured, the US is slowly moving toward an improved national freight movement freight system. What has received almost no attention is a directly-connected companion effort to support national trade and economic competitiveness. With little federal-level support, we encourage economic development leaders at the state and regional levels to become full partners in developing a project system that enables competitiveness. This is difficult and extra-curricular as it is in no one’s job description, but just think of the rewards!
It’s a very dynamic time in the US and a time where shifts in public policy will make a dramatic difference. If you are interested in participating in the next webinar, please send us an email ([email protected]) and we’ll put you on the invitation list.
