Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Economic development and opportunities vary regionally around socio-economic indicators and industrial potentials: metros with strong manufacturing bases differ fundamentally from service-oriented metros when compared along incomes, unemployment, skills distribution, GDP, etc. Weaker regions attempt to catch-up through policies and strategies to attract talent and business. They seek to compensate for deficits by upgrading their knowledge base and improving skilled labour. Yet, do these lagging regions eventually catch up with leading metros, or do differences persist at higher levels years later? What conditions are necessary for regions to increase their economic development and prosperity? To illustrate these developments, eight metropolitan types defined by economic sector dominance are compared in Europe and the US using quantitative data and two case studies per type over several decades. Over time, most slower metros reach higher development levels comparable to what stronger regions showed decades earlier. However, strong metros also continue to advance, widening the distance from slower metros. This shows that (1) metropolitan type can describe and partially predict a metro's trajectory and opportunities. Metros rarely shift from manufacturing-based to knowledge-based economies. (2) Weaker metros, though progressing, often lack the complete innovative arrangements and networks typical of stronger metros, leaving them comparatively less competitive.
Yasmin M. Hilpert (Sun,) studied this question.