Why do some areas have all the jobs, nice places to live, and loads of opportunity while others have none? Why does Sweden have the highest standard of living while clean water is hard to find in Nepal? These questions weave the fabric binding two books we have read by Gunnar Myrdal. In An American Dilemma, Myrdal set outs to understand what he calls the Negro Problem, a moral problem found in the minds of whites in early twentieth century America. In Rich Lands and Poor, he offers both descriptions and guidance toward explaining the economic disparities found between developed and developing nations. To espouse some insight toward regional studies or regional policy formation, basically how to answer similar question to those posed above, we should take a closer look at various aspects of Myrdal’s work.One of Myrdal’s main contributions is his theory of the vicious circle. He presents his theory in the third chapter of An American Dilemma. Sparked by white prejudice, the American Negro had little economic opportunity. They were trapped in poverty by a history of white dominance. Without access to jobs or options for earning decent wages, blacks had to live in cheap or inadequate housing, usually with no access to schooling or health care. This led to health problems, depression, and overall symptoms of lethargy. Myrdal calls it a vicious circle because seeing this condition only reinforced white prejudice, giving blacks even less opportunity to escape poverty. They were heading in a downward spiral perpetually reinforced by their own poverty. Myrdal offers this theory, that causes accumulate and reinforce themselves, as one explanation for uneven development.
In An American Dilemma, Myrdal approaches the notions of racial preferences across two regions, north and south. In his second book, international borders bound regions. These are both fairly macro-sized regions compared to commuter zones. Myrdal’s point was not geographic scale, but how beliefs, resources, and opportunities varied across society. For example, let’s look at an area of downtown Cincinnati, Ohio affectionately called Over-The-Rhine. Some might not call it a region, but a regional planner might because it stands out as an area mired by poverty surrounded by thriving communities. Businesses know not to invest in this area because it has a history of violence and theft where most customers would have little money to spend in their shop. Here Myrdal would find cumulative causation alive and well. Whether or not this community is in a stable equilibrium of a downward spiral is interesting theoretically, but of little help to those on the city council trying to plan this area’s future.
Cincinnati has also experienced heavy racial tensions. These were caused initially by a predominately white police force involved in the shooting deaths of many black suspects. This occurred mainly in the Over-The-Rhine area and major riots took place during the spring of 2001. Much journalist ink was spilled over the possible causes and eventual effects of these “race riots.” Today many businesses have left the downtown area, and those left living in the community are suffering. The policy prescription: denial.
Rather than deny the causes that led to these riots, we might apply Myrdal’s cumulative causation theory. Perhaps, city policy could focus on directing the trajectory of cumulative causation. This is where Myrdal offers the idea of an external shock changing the direction of the downward spiral. Whether it is World War II, which Myrdal has unbridled optimism for, or a policy set by the local planning board, an external shock would offer greater opportunities and break the vicious circle of events.
Policymakers have the choice of either applying band-aids to symptoms of inequity, addressing the underlying attitudes and beliefs as causes, or both. It would be relatively easy for policy to fix institutional segregation, like Jim Crow laws, but it’s much harder to influence perceptions of a specific group.
I think Myrdal’s main precept toward managing uneven development is his outlining of underlying dynamics. He states policymakers need to understand both the historical dependence of a region, and the dynamic nature involved in its development, or lack thereof, to guide proper policy prescription. It is clear that one of the reasons for the lack of economic progress in black communities for most of the last century is because of white prejudice trapping blacks into a poverty spiral. What we can learn from this approach is that every region has some history, some set of beliefs, or basic perceptions that might have contributed toward their impoverishment. People and places are linked. In the US today, is race still a defining characteristic of those in poverty? If not, what community characteristics have historically influenced its lack of development? These are the questions Myrdal would want us to ask.
Geography Classes [all categories]
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted 02-27-2004 01:42 PM
