Human Resources Development

1. Human Resources Development • Human Resources Development is a response to the tendency in the United States to invest more in income support (welfare) than human skills development… although this changed in the mid-1990s. • The overarching goals of human resources development are: 1) Training and education (training) 2) Job placement (placing workers) 3) Client-oriented job creation (creating jobs for certain skills) 4) Job maintenance (keeping existing jobs that are a “good fit”) • Unlike the other approaches that are geography-based (locality and community development) or business-based (business development), this approach is grounded in developing the skills and capabilities of individuals; it is a people-based approach. • It is often overlooked that people are the greatest resource in a community. While businesses, location, and local institutions all play a role in local economic development, it is usually the local citizens that make or break local economic development efforts. Human resources development is aimed at providing the skills, knowledge, and preparation for a group of people so that they are better able to respond to opportunities.

2. Human Development: Approaches • Blakely discusses several different approaches to “Human Resource Development”. These include:-Workforce Investment Boards -First-Source Agreements -Employment Maintenance -Skill Banks -Training Programs -Self-Employment Initiatives -Job ladders -University-Industry Technology Transfer • What is each of the above approaches? • What individuals are the focus of each approach? • How is each approach expected to contribute to local economic development? • What is the role of the local government in each approach? • Examples?

3. The Baltimore Context • The national perception of Baltimore is that it has succeeded in the postmodern economy where other cities (Buffalo, Detroit, Cleveland, etc.) have failed. Imbroscio et al argue that this is not true. • What are the major problems that Baltimore continues to face? --Shift from industrial/manufacturing to a service economy --“Secession of the successful” --Government downsizing --Strong government unions --No allies at the state level as the only major city in the state --Successful physical redevelopment has not translated into greater incomes or many more “living wage” jobs • As a consequence, Baltimore has experienced: --Greater poverty levels (1 in 6 Baltimore residents live in poverty) --Continued loss of population/jobs Pop: 950K in 1950 650K in 2000 --High unemployment (80-100% greater than suburban rates) --Higher social stresses (teen pregnancies, crime rates, etc.) --Poor education system --Decreasing political influence in the state

4. Baltimore’s Human Investment Approach Baltimore’s Human Investment Approach included the following: • Preschool Programs--Head Start--City-Sponsored Child Care • Education to Work Programs --“Guarantee of Opportunity” Program --“Last Dollar Grants” college tuition programs --Guaranteed interviews program 3) Welfare to Work Programs --JOBS (Job Opportunities and Basic Skills) Program --Newer, Federally Funded Programs --What were the effects of these programs? How successful were they? --Why were some of these programs successful? --Why were other programs not as successful?

5. Learning from Baltimore Baltimore’s experience with a human investment approach has much to teach economic developers. What lessons can be learned? • Head Start is a massive success and Federal funding should be provided to support ALL eligible children. • Subsides for “wrap around” care (all day day care) should be provided to help working parents. • Availability of funds for suburban and central cities needs to be equalized somehow (revenue sharing, perhaps). • Resources (money, connections, mentoring) from the private sector can be effective in stimulating interest in college. • Revise federal requirements for programs to reflect the reality of human investment programs. Quality-centered programs are better than Quantity-centered programs. • Extend benefits to insure that people can successfully move from welfare to work.

6. Community-Based Development • This approach to local economic development came about due to the failure of the other approaches to address neighborhood-level needs. In addition, specific groups not aided by these approaches (minorities and/or inner-city residents, for example) have organized to help themselves using this approach. • Community-Based Development is oriented towards the following goals: 1) Generate employment for local workers 2) Gain more control over the local economy 3) Inspire a “help yourselves and each other” local attitude 4) Provide alternative opportunities in the local economy 5) Promote democratic management and control of enterprises • Community-based development strategies are somewhat similar to business and locality development, except that they are aimed at a much smaller geography and towards very specific aims; “socially useful, labor intensive projects”. • “In general, these initiatives have social objectives strongly underpinning economic ones.” They are organized and aimed at the neighborhood-level, rather than at the general economy. The beneficiaries are explicitly intended to be local residents and new/existing businesses.

7. Community Development: Approaches • Blakely discusses several different approaches to “Community Development”. These include:-CDCs (Community Development Corporations) -Community Cooperatives -Local Enterprise Agencies -Employee/Worker Ownership -Marketing Community/Neighborhood Assets • What is each of the above approaches? • Who or what is the focus of each approach? • How is each approach expected to contribute to local economic development? • What is the role of the local government in each approach? • Examples?

8. The CDC Approach • CDCs were originally intended to accomplish bottom-up, comprehensive redevelopment by: --Helping the community to determine their future and get a stake in the local community, and --Empowering the entire community to address declining physical and social conditions. • CDCs are intended to address three free market shortcomings: 1) the inability of potential investors to see opportunities in certain markets, 2) profit maximation that prevented socially conscious investing, 3) social/legal restrictions on investments in certain areas.

9. Limits to the CDC Approach • Stoecker, however, characterizes CDC proponents as “good people with bad theory”. CDCs are, in theory, about community empowerment and political activism. • The Problem: CDCs accept and operate in the supply side and free market capitalist model/philosophy. They are attempting to generate social/physical redevelopment and community transformation from the bottom-up while operating within an economic system that is not supportive of this approach. • CDCs have had to give up this idea of “directive capitalism” and “accommodate themselves to, rather than redirect, the course of the free market”. • Their goal has shifted from transforming society to extending the benefits of the American economic mainstream to those that are left out. • CDCs have had to learn to work with the rules of the game, rather than to expand the rules to socialist concepts like the community control of businesses, housing, etc.

10. CDCs in a Market Economy • What the CDC model doesn’t recognize is that there is a contradiction between capital and community. Communities want to preserve neighborhood space for their “use values” while capitalists want to convert these spaces because they see their exchange values. • At the intersection of capital and community lie CDC’s. They are rentiers and renters. They are part owners and part proletariat. • CDCs manage many projects, but also must act like profit-savvy businesses to be successful. CDCs are the internalization of the capital-community contradiction. • The result of the above is three key problems: 1) There are Limits to Comprehensiveness 2) The Myth of Community Control 3) The Development of Disorganization What does Stoecker mean by each of these problems?

11. Stoecker’s CDC Model Stoecker offers a CDC model that centers on the disentanglement of the “community” and the “capital” goals. 1) Community-Controlled Organizing/Planning Put in place an entity centered on the goal of community organization and planning. Community-based planning is valuable because it: 1) Builds a sense of community 2) Educates residents on resources and threats 3) Builds community power 4) Helps residents plan for the ideal 2) High Capacity Multi-Local CDC to Pursue DevelopmentDevelopment should be achieved through a conglomeration of CDCs at a larger geographic level. --Able to get more money because a larger market--Likely to be more stable, more successful