The Center for Innovative Governance Research is hiring a Director of Research for our Charter Cities Program. Founded in 2017, the Center is a fast-growing nonprofit building the ecosystem for charter cities around the world. We work with entrepreneurs, new city projects, investors, policy experts, and government officials to make charter cities a reality.
The Center has three programs:
- Research: We produce original research to help decision makers on the ground.
- Events: We host summits to bring together various stakeholders in the charter city ecosystem.
- Application: We work with new cities developments interested in becoming charter cities.
The Director of Research will be responsible for developing the research program of the Center for Innovative Governance Research as well as the legal framework for charter cities. Specific responsibilities include:
- Drafting white papers and related research for charter cities
- Writing RFPs and reviewing submissions
- Working with governments and new city developments to create the legal framework for charter cities
- Writing grant applications
- Coordinating with multilateral institutions and other partners to develop the institutions to govern charter cities
- Helping to plan events to engage the scholarly community on charter cities
Qualified applicants should possess:
- PhD in Economics/Political Science with a focus on international development
- Five years’ experience working in international development including:
- Working with governments and multi-lateral institutions
- Drafting documents to influence policy decisions
- Building out a team
- Raising money
- Experience working in a small, fast paced office
- Willing to relocate to Washington DC
Competitive salary. Applicants should send their resume and cover letter to Mark@InnovativeGovernance.org.Read More
The Center for Innovative Governance Research is pleased to announce our Charter Cities Business Plan Contest. First-place prize is $25,000 and second place receives $10,000.
Urbanization, poverty, and poor governance are among the greatest challenges facing the 21st century. Charter cities—new cities with a special jurisdiction that grant them a blank city in commercial law with which they can adopt commercial best practices—address all three. Taking advantage of the rapidly growing urban population, charter cities create opportunities for residents by implementing quality governance to sow the seeds for long term economic development.
Charter cities are both business projects and political projects. To be successful, charter cities must be profitable, but they also require legislation to create the special jurisdiction that allows for substantive improvement in the business environment.
The purpose of this contest is to identify capable teams to build charter cities. We will provide ample oversight and guidance to the winning teams and introduce them to investors, policy experts, and other individuals or groups necessary for their success. We expect the winning team(s) to form a company to build a charter city.
Applications should include:
- Business plan detailing the team’s strategy to build a charter city
- Deck which provides a high-level overview of the business plan
- 5-minute video to introduce the founders and explain the business plan
Core Business plans should answer the following questions:
- Team: Who are you? Why do you want to build a charter city? Why are you capable of building a charter city? Important considerations include the team’s relationships to the host country and team experience.
- Host country: Why is the host country a good place to build a charter city? What are the relevant political considerations? How stable is the political system? What is the urbanization rate?
- Location: Where will the charter city be built? Why is it a good location?
- Land acquisition strategy: How will the team acquire land?
- Anchor tenant: What is the ideal anchor tenant? How will you attract them? What is your competitive advantage?
- Investments: Which investors will you raise money from? When and how?
- Financial: How is the charter city profitable? Included project financials.
- Legislation: What are your relationships with the host country? Do you have access to government officials necessary to pass charter cities legislation?
- Governance: What is the governance structure for the charter city? What are the constraints to success in the host country? How will those constraints be changed in the charter city?
The initial submissions are due August 15th at 12pm EST. Please send your submissions and any questions to Mark at InnovativeGovernance.org. Before selecting winners, we will conduct interviews with the top applicants. The first-place winner will receive $25,000 (USD) and second-place will receive $10,000 (USD). The winners will be announced at the Inaugural Charter Cities Conference in Johannesburg on October 2nd and 3rd, for which the Center will cover the costs of airfare and accommodations.
We will host a Zoom webinar on June 4th at 10am EST and June 11th 10am EST to answer your questions. Please use this link to access the webinar.
Noah Smith recently asked me on Twitter to compare charter cities to Millennium Villages. While there are some important similarities—namely, they’re both comprehensive attempts to create the conditions for sustained economic development and poverty alleviation— they differ in their ideas about how to alleviate poverty. This difference turns out to be significant.
Millennium Villages, first pioneered by Jeffrey Sachs, offer an integrated approach to fighting rural poverty. The idea: circumvent the poverty trap by simultaneously improving access to clean water, primary education, basic health care, and sanitation, plus other science-based interventions such as introducing improved seeds and fertilizer. The theory was that such a coordinated approach could create villages that would “end extreme poverty.”
Millenium Villages attracted tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions (Wikipedia doesn’t give a total number), of donated dollars. George Soros alone donated $50 million to the effort. But Millennium Villages weren’t designed as a randomized control trial, which makes it difficult to judge the results.
Most estimates of the Millennium Villages efforts report at best, mixed results. Michael Clemens and Gabriel Demombynes found that “comparing trends at the MVP intervention sites in Kenya, Ghana, and Nigeria to trends in the surrounding areas yields much more modest estimates of the project’s effects than the before-versus-after comparisons published thus far by the MVP.” Michael Clemens tweeted that as a result of the article the Millennium Villages project threatened to sue him for defamation, which perhaps speaks to how those running Millennium Villages interpreted their results.
A Lancet article found that “substantial effects were seen in agriculture and health, in which some outcomes were roughly one SD better in the project villages than in the comparison villages. The project was estimated to have no significant impact on the consumption-based measures of poverty.” Another analysis found that for Millennium Villages in Ghana, “incomes did increase, but that this did not result in increased consumption. Instead, people appear to have viewed any income rise as a temporary phenomenon, with some saving in the form of liquid assets (e.g. chickens, guinea fowl, goats).”
In short, Millennium Villages did not meet their lofty goal of ending global poverty.
Charter cities however, could. Now, charter cities share similarities with Millennium Villages. As I previously noted, both use a comprehensive approach to international development and poverty alleviation grounded in academic literature. However, they differ on two margins: in their understanding of the causes of poverty, and in their scaling mechanism.
The key intellectual difference between Millennium Villages and charter cities is their theory of poverty. Millennium Villages assume a poverty trap causes poverty. The poverty trap theory holds that a set of circumstances— low human capital, poor infrastructure, disease, etc— prevents capital accumulation, leading to continued poverty. Poverty traps can be escaped via a coordinated push which lifts people above subsistence, allowing them to save and create a growth cycle.
Proponents of charter cities on the other hand believe governance is the primary determinant of economic outcomes. Good governance leads to economic growth while poor governance leads to stagnation. Poor governance, meaning barriers to commerce, unpredictability of laws and regulations, and inadequate public goods provision, ensures that a population will remain impoverished. Improving governance then, is a necessary condition for economic success.
The second difference between Millennium Villages and charter cities is their scaling mechanism. Millennium Villages require substantial initial investment, usually in the form of donations. For example, the UK’s Department for International Development committed $18 million to fund five years of a new Ghanaian Millennium Village in 2012. The benefits, assuming there were any, from Millennium Villages are hard to capture, and because they require substantial amounts of donated capital, they’re even more difficult and inefficient to scale.
Charter cities also require substantial amounts of capital. Building infrastructure is not cheap. The difference is that the real estate developer captures some of the benefits of the charter city via the increase in land prices, making them able to attract investment, rather than donations. A successful charter city would generate large profits for the developer, incentivizing additional developers to build charter cities.
This is not to say that charter cities don’t require any charitable giving. I started a nonprofit because I believe it’s the most effective way to create charter cities. However, the required donation to start the first charter city is much less than $18 million and will steadily decrease over time with economies of scale. Charter cities are a mechanism for governance reform to help alleviate poverty that is designed to scale.
While there are certain similarities between Millennium Villages and charter cities, there are also important differences. Charter cities focus identify a different root cause of poverty, governance, and are built to rapidly scale. These differences are why I’m more optimistic about charter cities as a tool to help alleviate global poverty.