Sarah Bui

Executive Summary

Quantitative evidence supports the contention that Wyoming’s housing market is constrained, to a greater degree than many other parts of the US. Prices are persistently above expectations given economic fundamentals in most parts of the state, and the supply of new housing in Wyoming is on average less responsive to price increases than in other US counties. This has undermined natural population growth and contributed to a low amount of population density close to city centers in Wyoming, as compared to other US cities with comparable population levels. Importantly, this phenomenon is not simply the result of pandemic-era economic frictions. The evidence shows that these constraints have durably persisted in Wyoming. 

This housing constraint weighs heavily on the broader Wyoming’s economy, and chokes off growth in new industries that could add to the Wyoming economy beyond its natural resource base. Businesses consistently report a lack of access to workforce as a leading problem that ultimately results from a lack of housing. Some businesses have even tried to create their own housing for employees, and news reports abound of teachers and nurses who secure jobs in Wyoming communities but then have to leave because they cannot find housing.

Key problems behind Wyoming’s housing constraints include excessive regulations concerning housing density and insufficient investment in arterial infrastructure. For example, there is evidence that over-regulated minimum lot sizes in Wyoming are blocking the creation of supply to match free-market demand for houses with smaller amounts of land. Other areas of over-regulation include those concerning allowable housing types, building height, parking spaces per dwelling, and the housing approval process itself. This may be seen as surprising given Wyoming’s reputation as a low-regulation state, but Wyoming maintains restrictions that other states and countries have discarded as outdated and highly counterproductive. Besides outright restrictions on housing development, we find that the most common cost driver undermining the housing development has to do with low public investment in needed arterial infrastructure, especially water systems. Land supply as well as material and construction costs are not primary constraints to housing development across the state, but may matter for select communities.

We suggest a portfolio of policy changes for the state of Wyoming to explore in order to solve its housing constraints. One category of changes is regulatory, and focuses on deregulation, reducing bureaucratic overhead, and shifting from veto-cratic to democratic housing approval procedures. Another category is focused on investment on infrastructure to support housing, and exploration of state-local funding structures to facilitate continuous infrastructure improvement. If implemented, these changes will not only help to solve Wyoming’s housing constraints but also facilitate housing development in a way that combats urban sprawl, and in doing so protects open spaces outside of cities that Wyomingites value.

The Colombian Amazon faces the dual challenge of low economic growth and high deforestation. High rates of deforestation in Colombia have led to a perceived trade-off between economic development and protecting the forest. However, we find little evidence of this trade-off: rising deforestation is not associated with higher economic growth. In fact, the forces of deforestation of some of the world’s most complex biodiversity are driven by some of the least complex economic activities, like cattle-ranching, whose subsistence-level incomes are unable to meet the economic ambitions for the region. All the while, the majority of the Amazonian departments’ population works in non-forested cities and towns, at a distance from the agriculture frontier that forms the “arc of deforestation.” The relative urbanization of the Amazonian departments, despite the vast land mass available, recognizes that prosperity is achieved through close social-economic interactions to expand the knowledge set available to be able to produce more, and more complex activities. Achieving economic goals therefore relies on creating new productive opportunities in non-forested, urban areas.

The risk of deforestation reduces incentives to improve the connectivity of Amazonian departments with major cities and export markets. The remoteness of these departments increases the cost of ‘exporting’ goods to markets outside the departments. Poor connectivity contributes to the low economic complexity of the departments. In turn, the low complexity reduces incentives to coordinate new investments that would generate returns to greater connectivity. Coordination failures, which occur when a group of economic actors (e.g., firms, workers) could achieve a better outcome but fail to do so because they do not coordinate their actions, are widespread in all three of the Amazonian departments studied. This limits the creation of new capabilities and productive diversification to generate new jobs and higher incomes.

We posit that economic growth in the Colombian Amazonian is limited by a “connectivity trap” whereby the lack of external market connectivity restricts economic complexity, and, in turn, the low complexity fosters the coordination failures that limit returns to new diversification. Ultimately, low returns to diversification further reduce incentives to improve connectivity. Underpinning the connectivity trap is the belief that limiting the connectivity of Amazonian departments with large Colombian cities and the broader global economy will limit incentives for deforestation. Yet, deforestation has accelerated in recent years, despite the continued poor connectivity. We argue that Colombia must create a new national law to curb deforestation by eliminating the financial incentives for land speculation. Reclassifying forested lands under the control of national protection systems with severe restrictions on economic activities and strengthened enforcement, as detailed in an accompanying report, provides the needed legal clarity regarding land formalization. Within the law to eliminate incentives for deforestation, the national government should create a new development approach for the Colombian Amazon. This approach must move beyond a natural resource-based approach to the region, to center on the productive potential of its urban areas, and the carbon markets and tourism potential of its forested areas. One pillar of this approach is to build new public sector capabilities to coordinate investments into new, targeted productive sectors to create new national-local mechanisms of investment promotion. A second pillar is to improve connectivity to external markets through road and air investments between Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo and major cities and ports.

La Amazonía colombiana enfrenta un desafío doble: bajo crecimiento económico y alta deforestación. Las altas tasas de deforestación en Colombia han llevado a que se crea que el desarrollo económico no puede tener lugar si se protege la selva. Nosotros no encontramos evidencia que sustente esa dicotomía: el aumento de la deforestación no está asociado a un mayor crecimiento económico. Las fuerzas detrás de la deforestación de una de las áreas con mayor biodiversidad en el planeta se sustentan en algunas de las actividades económicas menos complejas, como la ganadería extensiva, cuyos ingresos son incapaces de cumplir con las ambiciones económicas de la región. Al mismo tiempo, la mayoría de la población de los departamentos amazónicos trabaja en ciudades y pueblos desprovistos de selva, lejos de la frontera agropecuaria que forma el “arco de deforestación”. La relativa urbanización de los departamentos amazónicos, pese a la gran masa de tierra disponible, constituye un reconocimiento de que la prosperidad solo se logra mediante interacciones socioeconómicas que expanden el conjunto de conocimientos disponible para que se pueda producir más, y mediante actividades más complejas. Por lo tanto, para alcanzar las metas económicas hay que crear nuevas oportunidades productivas en las áreas urbanas sin selva.

El riesgo de deforestación reduce los incentivos para mejorar la conectividad de los departamentos amazónicos con las grandes ciudades y los mercados de exportación. El carácter remoto de estos departamentos aumenta el costo de “exportar” bienes a mercados que están fuera de estos departamentos. La conectividad precaria de la región contribuye a su baja complejidad económica, que a su vez reduce los incentivos para coordinar nuevas inversiones que podrían generar retornos a partir de una mayor conectividad. Las fallas de coordinación - que ocurren cuando un grupo de actores económicos (como empresas y trabajadores) podrían lograr un mejor resultado, pero no logran hacerlo pues no coordinan sus acciones respectivas - son extendidas en los tres departamentos amazónicos bajo estudio. Esto limita la creación de nuevas capacidades y la diversificación productiva que podrían generar nuevos empleos y mayores ingresos.

Planteamos que el crecimiento económico en la Amazonía colombiana está siendo limitado por una “trampa de conectividad” donde la falta de conectividad con los mercados externos restringe la complejidad económica, y a su vez la baja complejidad alienta las fallas de coordinación que limitan los retornos de una nueva diversificación. A fin de cuentas, los bajos retornos de la diversificación reducen aún más los incentivos para mejorar la conectividad. Como trasfondo de la trampa de conectividad está la creencia de que limitar la conectividad de los departamentos amazónicos con las grandes ciudades colombianas y el resto de la economía global limitará también los incentivos para la deforestación. Pero la deforestación se ha acelerado en los últimos años, mientras que la conectividad sigue siendo muy mala. Nosotros argumentamos que Colombia debe crear una nueva ley nacional para frenar la deforestación que elimine los incentivos financieros de la especulación con tierras, al reclasificar las áreas selváticas bajo control de los sistemas nacionales de protección para que tengan severas restricciones sobre las actividades que se puedan emprender en ellas, y se refuercen las labores de cumplimiento de la ley, como se comenta en detalle en el reporte siguiente. Con una ley que elimine los incentivos para la deforestación, el gobierno nacional debe crear un nuevo enfoque del desarrollo para la Amazonía colombiana. Este enfoque debe trascender el basado en los recursos naturales y centrarse en el potencial productivo de las áreas urbanas, así como en los mercados de carbono y el potencial turístico de las áreas selváticas. Un pilar de este enfoque es la construcción de nuevas capacidades en el sector público, que le permitan coordinar inversiones en nuevos sectores productivos específicos, para crear nuevos mecanismos locales y nacionales de promoción de inversiones. Un segundo pilar es la mejora de la conectividad con los mercados externos, mediante inversiones en carreteras y transporte aéreo entre Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo, y las grandes ciudades y los puertos.

¿Hay que sacrificar la selva para traer prosperidad económica a la Amazonía colombiana? Según este compendio de investigación compuesto por una serie de estudios sobre esa región, la respuesta es “no”: la percepción que hay un dilema entre crecimiento económico y protección de la selva es una falsa dicotomía. Los factores que impulsan la deforestación y la prosperidad son distinguibles entre sí, y tienen lugar en sitios diferentes. La deforestación ocurre en la frontera agropecuaria, donde uno de los entornos con mayor complejidad biológica del mundo está siendo destruido por algunas de las actividades económicas menos complejas, en particular la ganadería extensiva. En cambio, los motores económicos de la Amazonía son sus áreas urbanas, que en su mayoría están ubicadas lejos del borde de la selva, como es el caso de las áreas localizadas en el piedemonte y que no cuentan con un bosque denso. Estas ciudades ofrecen mayor complejidad económica con su acceso a un rango más amplio de capacidades productivas en actividades de mayores ingresos, con poca presencia de las actividades que favorecen la deforestación. Tal vez la cara menos notoria de la vida en cada una de las tres regiones amazónicas estudiadas, Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo, es que la mayoría de la gente vive en áreas urbanas. Este hecho dice mucho sobre la geografía económica de esos lugares: incluso en las partes más remotas de la Amazonía, la gente quiere vivir cerca de los demás, en áreas densamente pobladas. Esto además corrobora los hallazgos de nuestra investigación global en las últimas dos décadas: para traer prosperidad hay que expandir las capacidades productivas disponibles a nivel local y así diversificar la producción de ese lugar hacia más actividades y que posean mayor complejidad.  

This report sets out to understand if the economy of the State of Wyoming is positioned to grow into the future. To do this, the report begins by investigating the past. To know where the state economy could be headed, and how that direction may be improved, it is critical to understand how the state developed the economic structure and drivers that it has today. Thus, Wyoming’s economic trajectory is explored over the long, medium, and short term. From this investigation, we find that Wyoming faces an overall growth problem, but we also find a high degree of variation in economic engines and growth prospects across the state. The problem that this report identifies is that the composition of economic activities is not positioned to sustain a high quality of life across all parts of the state.

“Across all parts of the state” is an essential part of the problem statement for Wyoming. While some local and regional economies in the state are growing and bumping up against identifiable constraints, other local and regional economies are experiencing sustained contractions and will require new sources of growth in order to retain (or expand) population and high quality of life. Since economic dynamics vary significantly across the state, analysis is conducted in as much geographic detail as possible. By combining historical and geographic dimensions of growth, this report aims to inform pathways for sustained and inclusive prosperity across the of Wyoming.

Related project: Pathways to Prosperity in Wyoming

Does economic prosperity in the Colombian Amazon require sacrificing the forest? This research compendium of a series of studies on the Colombian Amazon finds the answer to this question is no: the perceived trade-off between economic growth and forest protection is a false dichotomy. The drivers of deforestation and prosperity are distinct – as they happen in different places. Deforestation occurs at the agricultural frontier, in destroying some of the world’s most complex biodiversity by some of the least economically complex activities, particularly cattle-ranching. By contrast, the economic drivers in the Amazon are its urban areas often located far from the forest edge, including in non-forested piedmont regions. These cities offer greater economic complexity by accessing a wider range of productive capabilities in higher-income activities with little presence of those activities driving deforestation. Perhaps the most underappreciated facet of life in each of the three Amazonian regions studied, Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo, is that the majority of people live in urban areas. This is a telling fact of economic geography: that even in the remote parts of the Amazon, people want to come together to live in densely populated areas. This corroborates the findings of our global research over the past two decades that prosperity results from expanding the productive capabilities available locally to diversify production to do more, and more complex, activities.

This report aims to answer the critical but difficult question: "What will it take for Jordan to grow?" Though Jordan has numerous active growth and reform strategies in place, they do not clearly answer this fundamental question. The Jordanian economy has experienced more than a decade of slow growth. Per capita income today is lower than it was prior to the Global Financial Crisis as Jordan has experienced a refugee-driven population increase. Jordan’s comparative advantages have narrowed over time as external shocks and responses to these shocks have changed the productive structure of Jordan’s economy. This was a problem well before the country faced the COVID-19 pandemic. The Jordanian economy has lost productivity, market access, and, critically, the ability to afford high levels of imports as a share of GDP. Significant efforts toward fiscal consolidation have further constrained aggregate demand, which has slowed non-tradable activity and the ability of the economy to create jobs. Labor market outcomes have worsened over time and are especially bad for women and youth. Looking ahead, this report identifies clear and significant opportunities for Jordan to strengthen new engines of export growth that would enable better overall job creation and resilience, even amidst the continued unpredictability of the pandemic. This report argues that there is need for a paradigm shift in Jordan’s growth strategy to focus more direct attention and resources on activating “agents of change” to accelerate the emergence of key growth opportunities, and that there are novel roles that donor countries can play in support of this.