"Bi-national regions are emerging as key environmental and economic units throughout the world."-US Senator Mark Hatfield, Oregon
"The Pacific Northwest and western Canada may come to be known as the economic 'nation' of Cascadia if some enterprising United States and Canadian visionaries have their way-and that dream is slowly becoming a reality."-The Christian Science Monitor, July 20, 1992
"Cascadia" is perhaps the most interesting case study in regionalism and transnational interdependency in the context of NAFTA and the growing tendency towards what has been called 'glocalization' in Gabriel Grant's introductory section of the Task Force. If certain regional lobbyists and cross border groups have their way, Cascadia may prove to be the first 'glocalized' area of North America, where services, technology, people, capital, and information circulate across borders and communities in an increased and interdependent fashion. These lobbyists offer new regional planning that seeks to build an economic powerhouse in the northwest based on an integrated economy that is commercially diversified and trade oriented, able to maximize its position as a North American gateway to and from the markets of Asia.
This region has become a case study in North American 'glocalization' in large part due to its geographic location. British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon are located across the continent from their respective capitals, creating "a certain bemused antipathy toward the two national capitals." This has caused many people to coddle regional ties that are more natural than national alliances to the eastern seaboard. This regionalism should not be misunderstood as a possible threat to either nations security, but rather seen as a convergence of powerful trans-border ties that seeks to use existing local and regional advantages for growth as a world economic competitor.
Despite a growing tendency towards regionalization in Cascadia, it is important to note that these economies, unlike the highly integrated regional economies of the Great Lakes Region (see Chapter 1 by Michelle Wolters), have traditionally been competitors in many aspects of economics, sports, music, and culture. The sea ports, airports, and railways serving the region compete as gateways for international traffic to North America and Asia. With parallel resource bases, many of the region's products are similar, and competitive, in sectors such as forest products, agri-food, wines, and seafood. A challenge for Cascadia has been to integrate these traditionally competitive markets into a unified regional market that is powerful enough to compete on a global level with other nations or globalized regions such as the European Union.
With the 1988 implementation of the Canadian US Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) and the 1994 implementation of NAFTA, the region is becoming so interdependent that cooperation rather than competition is becoming a necessity for future economic growth predicated on free trade. Planning is currently underway to better integrate Cascadia along economic and environmental lines based on a regional 'glocalization' project that combines trans-border resources and capital. This would create comparative industrial advantages in the region that would assist competitiveness in a growing world market. In this way, lobbyists hope that competition will be replaced by an interdependency that maximizes this regions potential as a global competitor in many commercial sectors.
This chapter is concerned with issues of interdependency and efforts towards 'glocalization' in Cascadia. Very specific examples will be used to demonstrate how this region is undergoing a slow economic, social, and environmental transformation from previous methods of organization such as the nation state and the post Cold War order towards glocalization as a strategy for future regional growth. While rhetoric is currently far ahead of reality with regards to efforts towards regionalism in Cascadia, this region is establishing many interdependent links that provide a foundation for greater future 'glocalization' in the Pacific Northwest.
The information regarding these slowly developing links will be presented in the following manner. First, issues of successful economic interdependency in Cascadia will be examined to document how this region is responding independently to the relatively recent national reorganizations towards free trade. Then, other issues of trans-border importance such as border cooperation, sea and airport cooperation, transportation links, and tourism will be analyzed in order to understand other major issues of regional growth within the framework of interdependency. Finally, the failures and obstacles of integration will be looked at in order to determine areas where this region has been hindered and unsuccessful at 'glocalizing'. These failures of integration will be critical in defining new planning and policy measures that meet the demands of a 'glocalizing' continent. (see Chapter 6 by Colin Johnson)
For purposes of this chapter, Cascadia will be defined as the coalition of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. Instead of including the peripheral surrounding areas of Alaska, Yukon, Alberta, Montana, and Idaho as part of Cascadia, I feel that this area is better defined as the hinterlands of Cascadia, where natural resources and commodities are transported effectively to and from the regional periphery. For the purposes of policy making and the development of new regional growth strategies, it seems better to focus on the "main street" economies stretching primarily up and down the I-5 corridor from Portland to Vancouver, BC. (see Map 1.1 and 1.2).
Map 1.1
These economies play the greatest role in both "free trade" and interaction with other large players in the world economy as a whole such as the growing economies of the Pacific Rim and APEC. They constitute this image of 'glocalization' and need to be looked at critically in order to define regional goals and planning for a more integrated future vision that accounts for growing interlinkage on both sides of the border.
This region represents one of the most interesting opportunities for unified, transnational growth ever seen in North America. As a region, Cascadia boasts the tenth largest GDP in the world at 250 billion dollars per year. The Cascadian border registered 17 million crossings in 1995/1996, making it the third busiest crossing along the Canadian/US border. Traffic at the border is often backed up for up to three hours, with stints of four hours not uncommon. A massive exodus of people, commodities, capital, and information occurs each and every day at the Blaine/Surrey border crossing where the Peace Arch celebrates the longest undefended border in the world with the words, "Children of a Common Mother." Washington State ranks No. 1 in the Unites States in value of per capita trade with Canada, exporting 2.6 billion dollars worth of goods in 1993. Washington's trade with British Columbia alone accounts for 53% of that states trade with all of Canada, documenting how important regional trade is in Cascadia. (see Table 1.3 and Table 1.4)
Growth projections suggest that Cascadia will be home to some 20 million residents by the year 2000. It is also estimated that over ten million people will inhabit "main street Cascadia" by the year 2000, making this corridor more populated than many of the megalopolises of the eastern seaboard. "Today, if you look at a satellite map taken at night from 250,000 miles up, you will see two corridors of light in the US. One corridor is a bulging block between Boston and Washington, DC. The other corridor, albeit more slender and elegant, is between Vancouver, BC and Eugene." Over the past ten years, regional growth has persisted at an astonishing average of 13.7%, while national growth in Canada and the USA leveled at around eight percent. The population growth has been derived from an unrelenting growth in regional labor demand. For instance, regional employment has grown by 20% in the last ten years. Even in years such as 1991, when national labor demand was down, regional demand remained on the rise. All of this goes to show the growing regional importance of Cascadia with regards to the US and Canadian economies as a whole under NAFTA.
Cascadia is also the gateway to the growing economies and markets of APEC. Japan is currently the second largest trading partner to both Canada and the United States, using the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, Portland, and Vancouver as important entrance and exit points for its goods and services. Also, the newly industrialized countries (NICs) of South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore have led the world in economic growth rates, providing valuable markets for North American products and investment. A major challenge to Cascadia is to increase its competitiveness in relation to these aggressive and maturing economies of East Asia.
This development and regional success has not come without substantial growing pains. Conflict seems to be inevitable between the incredible standard of living within the beautiful natural surroundings and the growing secondary and tertiary sector industries that demand labor and urban development. As magazines such as Forbes name as Seattle the most livable city in the United States, population swells become inevitable. Many industries and individuals choose to reside in the Pacific Northwest in order to enjoy the flourishing natural environment. Without it, both industry and standard of living issues may be threatened. The costs of reduced commerce are high. But so are the costs of a depleted environment. Thus, the critical issue for Cascadia seems to be with regards to sustainable future growth that incorporates the regional newcomers and the 'glocalization' scenario without harming the environment that has always been a staple hold for Cascadian culture. For as this region grows and develops, inevitable trade-offs between commercial growth and environmental protection arise that have significant effects on the populations of this region. While interdependent business councils and politicians push for regional economic integration and interlinkage, their environmental counterparts are engaged in a somewhat bitter struggle to regain the frontier atmosphere and the fresh, unmolested tie to nature that has always been important to residents of this region. (see Chapter 4 by Amy Kaestner)
The major challenge in Cascadia is to integrate the commercial success of the region into a globalized powerhouse that increases its trade capacity within North America and beyond while engaging in collaborative efforts that establish rules and regulations respecting the environment on both sides of the border. The successes and failures of Cascadia to establish intelligent and organized growth policies in the commercial realm will be looked at critically in order to provide better future options that deal with regional growth issues. Then, in the next chapter, Amy Kaestner will look at the environmental concerns and linkages in order to show clearly how in many ways the two visions of Cascadia are at odds with one another in the current realm of sometimes inefficient policy making. At times it seems that the new economic and environmental lines brought out in this region by both CUFTA and NAFTA are not well represented by the current inefficient political lines and policy making of the region.
Many strategic alliances have been formed between the economies of Cascadia in order to use maturing regionalism as an accelerator of commercial growth and trade. While much of Cascadia's promise and interlinkage still resides in rhetoric rather than reality, there are significant instances of interdependency that show growing regionalism in the Pacific Northwest. There are currently hundreds of proposals and initiatives fostered by different groups in the region for economic and other types of unity. Many of these proposals have lofty ambitions or lack practicality, but there have been a number of projects showing cooperation and promise for future growth in a limited number of areas. These proposals do develop slowly into interdependencies; however, the region will never be fully 'glocalized' until the governments on each side of the border develop better long standing goals and initiatives towards critical funding for infrastructure and for a development which unites the work of the smaller regional groups.
The basic goal of regionalism, 'glocalization' and interdependency is to find specific ways for businesses to collaborate and develop a network of communication that increases their global competitiveness without removing their existing commercial base. This allows the region of Cascadia to be marketed as a whole package rather than local, individual techniques that fail to recognize the growing alliances in this region's commercial sector. As a regionalized zone, Cascadia would develop global comparative advantages in specific industrial sectors that maximize commercial growth and provide for future endeavors in the secondary and tertiary levels of production.
One example of a regional initiative that provides specific ways for businesses in Cascadia to develop regional alliances and collaborative efforts is the Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER). PNWER is a regional association, whose primary membership includes state and provincial leaders from Alaska, British Colombia, Alberta, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana, with staff based at a Seattle headquarters. This group spearheads a governmental vehicle for regional economic cooperation. By 1996, PNWER had established nine specific groups for regional interdependency: agriculture, environment, export, forest products, government procurement, recycling, telecommunications, tourism, and transportation. This type of cooperation also led to the formation of a program named CATALIST in 1994. CATALIST buys and acquires trade leads for businesses in Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia, maintaining computerized databases with information regarding how to access bid documents, find support people, and establish regional joint ventures. PNWER and CATALIST provide important connections in the region that need to be further utilized and funded on greater levels by both national governments in order to organize Cascadia towards free trade.
Another initiative in Cascadia working towards regional interdependency was the Pacific Northwest Economic Partnership (PNEP). PNEP was formed between Washington State and British Columbia in 1988 in order to ameliorate the communication of ideas and information in specific industry sectors such as biotechnology, environmental technology, and computer software. This initiative led to amazing commercial growth, especially in the biotechnology fields. This relatively young industry, which is engaged in sophisticated scientific research and product development, has an established base of small and medium sized firms throughout the region that have complex linkages with partners world-wide. PNEP helped use regional alliances to buffer an industry that relies on size and collaboration, putting Cascadia ahead of New York City as the sixth largest biotech region in the Americas. Aside from biotech gains, PNEP also assisted communication between universities in BC and Washington State, increasing cross border cooperation and sharing important knowledge in numerous other areas.
Cascadia also has developed much needed alliances in the realm of venture capital. According to a twelve month survey by the accounting firm of Price Waterhouse, Cascadia is very weak with regards to attracting vital venture capital that is used to start up new industrial bases. Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia attracted just $39 million in venture capital from July 1994 to June 1995, according to the survey. At the same time, San Diego received over five times as much. The San Francisco Bay Area lead all regions with nearly $1 billion last year. Western Investment Network, which is supported by several venture capitalists in Cascadia is currently trying to link new businesses with private investors to keep them going until they become large enough to get better venture capital. Another division of Western Investment Network, Cable and Howse, has started the Cascadia Fund, a $50 million to $75 million limited partnership designed to channel money into life science and information science companies in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. Most recently, Cable & Howse played a key role in getting some of the areas most prominent medical technology companies the venture capital needed to get off the ground. Another group helping out with venture capital needs has been PACE. The Pacific Corridor Enterprise Council (PACE) is a private sector regional organization in Cascadia formed by 200 managers and entrepreneurs from Canada and the United States that encourages closer business, trade, and tourism. It has formed committees on venture capital and financial services.
Overall, it appears that the new alliances and initiatives are very slow in using regional alliances to create a boom in the commercial sector. However, it also seems that these alliances are being developed on a very small level that fails to integrate state, provincial, or national governments into the equation. Without a cohesive plan that utilizes all the available human resources, financing, and infrastructure, from local to national levels, progress will continue at a slow pace that fails to transform Cascadia efficiently from traditionally competitive local economies in the raw material and small manufacturing export sectors, to a 'glocalized' block economy in the service and tertiary sectors.
NAFTA has crippled the borders in the Pacific Northwest region. As stated before, the Blaine/Surrey border is the third busiest point along the Canada/US border. It is traditionally congested with the automobiles of shoppers, tourists, trucks, trains, and border patrol agents. Previous delays of two hours swelled to four hours with the implementation of NAFTA. Other issues, such as a US congressional bill that called for taxes of $3 per person and $5 per car crossing the border created further tension at the longest undefended border in the world. In order to maximize the potential of this region as an interdependent, 'glocalized' hub of information, capital, and commerce it is of the utmost importance to maintain an efficient border that adjusts for the growing pains of free trade. With that in mind, the local governments in Blaine, WA and Surrey, BC called for the Shared Border Accord Agreement:
Canada and the United States are more than neighbors. Sharing a common past, many interests and objectives, we have become friends, allies, and economic partners...We already have the longest undefended border in the world. We now need to create the most efficiently managed border in the world.-from the Shared Border Accord between Canada and the US, 1994
One of the main goals of Cascadian planners is to facilitate the movement of people, commodities, and services across the borders without significant delay or hassle. After all, what good is free trade if the borders are so busy that products cannot pass? The borders and sea ports have a significant impact on the circulation of products and services in this export led economy. If traffic and transport become too significant a factor, foreign companies and investors will seek to do business in a more advantageous atmosphere where they are less hindered or delayed. The region's ability to deal with the growing trade and tourism from NAFTA at the borders and seaports will in a large way determine future regional growth. Groups on both sides of the borders are currently working on making the borders and sea ports more effective and time efficient. Also, new infrastructure planning with regards to a high speed train between Vancouver, BC and Eugene, and new trucking lanes on the I-5 corridor represent new regional alliances set to deal with issues of transport and border maintenance.
The Cascadia Project of Vancouver, BC attempts to overcome "the significant problems and barriers that exist" on the way towards a "hassle free border". They formed a Cascadia Border Working Group that was co-chaired by the mayors of the two most significant border cities, Blaine, WA and Surrey, BC, where over 17 million border crossings were registered in 1992. This group was part of a conference held in May, 1994 that discussed the impact of border issues and called for more action dealing with border issues by both Canada and the United States. The result of this conference was the "Accord on Our Shared Border" and subsequent "Action Plan" that set four major objectives for border maintenance: First and foremost was the promotion of international trade with regards to the NAFTA agreement. Second was easing the movement of people. Third was the reduction in costs for all parties involved. The fourth objective was an enhanced protection against illegal movements such as drugs, illegal immigrants, and black market goods. These objectives were slowly met, but not until conflict with the US government was resolved with regards to a proposed border crossing fee of $5 per car and $3 per individual that eventually failed due to regional lobbying techniques in Cascadia by PNWER and the Discovery Institute of Seattle.
Many new changes at the border have helped reduce the growing traffic problems. A frequent commuter lane for faster border crossing was added on the Washington side and dedicated to PACE. The same lane was also added on the British Columbia side and called CANPASS. For a small fee, people who frequently cross the border can purchase a distinct sticker that allows them to use a special lane when passing through customs. Other initiatives include efforts for improving approaches to the borders, improved technology for commercial clearance, and new commercial facilities. Most of these border initiatives are also being implemented at other smaller Cascadian border corridors in order to reduce and eliminate forms of congestion.
The sea ports and airports of Vancouver, Seattle, Tacoma, and Portland have traditionally competed as access points to North America and the largest consumer market in the world. With the passage of NAFTA and the rise of regionalism and interdependency, these ports have been engaged in serious planning that attempts to unify this transnational region in order to increase business at all of the port of entry cities. This section concerns port alliances and interdependencies used to increase the success of these regional ports against Californian ports of entry. Traditionally, much tension has existed between the ports. The 500,000 person per year Alaskan cruise industry has historically been dominated by Vancouver due to US maritime legislation that prohibits flag carriers (cruise ships) from operating between two US ports. Seattle is currently pushing counter legislation through Congress that would allow cruise ships to sail from Seattle. Also, intense competition for containerized cargoes has created subsidization and tax related controversies regarding port management and future growth issues. Despite these issues of regional competition, several potential areas have been identified for better cooperation and interdependency.
Initiatives are being proposed that attempt to increase business competitiveness in all Cascadian ports through a capital investment in infrastructure, including container terminals, cruise ship facilities, airport expansions, dredging programs, and ship repair terminals. There is also hope that increased rail and roadways in the region will attract new clients. This capital investment allows for aggressive marketing campaigns that attract new carriers seeking to utilize Cascadia's position as an intermediary between Asia and the Economies of North America and Europe. Situated at the half way point between the Pacific Rim economies and the European economies, Cascadia is a central point of air and sea transport for commercial goods and natural resources. This capital investment in the ports demonstrates one of the few instances of port collaboration and alliances to attract regional business rather than to compete locally.
Another interesting instance of the ports cooperating in a regional framework was the "Tri Association" meeting held in New Westminster, BC in 1993. The "Tri Association" is composed of most of the ports from Oregon, Washington, and Vancouver, BC. They addressed an agenda that included operational issues, such as Electronic Data Interchange and port development, economic issues such as NAFTA and the forest industry, environmental challenges, such as public process and environmental audits, and Cascadia regional developments, such as the Georgia Basin Initiative (see Chapter 4 by Amy Kaestner) and the Cascadia trade corridor. The ports also discussed sharing information and working cooperatively in order to solve common operational and environmental problems, such as the disposal of dredge material, disposal of ballast water by vessels in port, and the establishment of common agricultural inspection procedures. Other issues discussed were a little more vague, including planning support for infrastructure lobbying and international marketing ventures that sough to attract new business to Cascadia.
. . . At a time when Europe, our chief competitor in many markets is pulling together, we should not be pulling apart, program by program, into a loose confederation of states that lacks the ability to deliver to the American people the benefits that we can only realize as a Nation.-US Secretary of Transportation, Rodney Slater
The most discussed aspect of Cascadia may be the prospect of a high speed rail corridor that connects the "main street" economies from Vancouver, BC to Eugene, OR.
The High Speed Rail Act has congressionally designated the trade corridor from Portland to Vancouver as the only international high speed rail corridor in the US. The US government plans to spend 30 million dollars on the development of certain trade corridor infrastructure over the next ten years. This is a long term plan that would eventually replace existing Amtrak rail with a Japanese style bullet train that would reach speeds between 150 and 200 miles per hour. This project is important in that it would reduce congestion at borders, increase access to all of Cascadia, and create an environmentally sound method of transport that eliminates pollution. (see Chapter 4)
In the short term, little has been accomplished for this project outside of the realm of planning and lobbying. The rail service between Vancouver and Eugene was renewed in 1995 with ridership levels at over 90%. Plans are currently underway to increase the service from one trip per day to three along the corridor. Amtrak and the Cascadia Project are working on public programs that establish regional forums and a citizen network that lobbies for increased rail funding and remodeling. Lobbyists argue that full high speed rail through the Cascadia "main street" corridor would provide a valuable transportation link that would assist other forms of regional economic integration making the corridor more accessible to businesses, tourists, and commuters. Currently, Amtrak's service in the northeastern United States garners a larger market share than any airline, and it seems logical that expanded train service would also benefit Cascadia.
It is recognized that in order to realize a lofty goal like the high speed rail link, bi-national cooperation and funding from the federal and local levels will be of the utmost importance in order to finance and authorize the program. Funding sources, budgetary constraints, and alliances or trade-offs with other areas of the transportation departments will be crucial for realizing this goal. It is estimated that a high speed rail for the Cascadia region with the Japanese style bullet trains connecting Vancouver to Portland would cost between 9 and 12 billion dollars. There is a great deviation between the estimates depending on what costs are included in the budget proposal such as costs for remodeling stations and creating new intermodal Facilities to fully implement the service. Stan Suchan, a rail analyst for the State of Washington's Public Transportation and Rail Division had this to say regarding the possibility of implementing the new rail project: "Basically, as it stands right now, Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia would have to take every single dollar from the highway repairs budget and place it on top of current rail funding for the next twenty years in order to even consider such a project." In the 1997-2003 Six Year Agency Request Proposal for the Washington State Department of Transportation, total improvements in the rail division over six years total only $481 million for the current system, compared to $785.6 million for road repairs and development. Freight rail received only $6.7 million over the next six years to develop and maintain the infrastructure that is vital to moving large goods for import and export.
Federal funding for the project has also been minimal despite the initiation of Rodney Slater as the new United States Secretary of Transportation. Slater offered rhetoric calling for "a revitalized partnership with the states and local governments, giving them unprecedented flexibility to invest federal funds in projects that best meet their community needs." Slater also spoke strongly against "those who call for the federal government to abandon its role in surface transportation." He said "at a time when Europe, our chief competitor in many markets is pulling together, we should not be pulling apart, program by program, into a loose confederation of states that lacks the ability to deliver to the American people the benefits that we can only realize as a Nation." These strong words apparently lack the funds and work necessary to develop a more sustainable and environmentally friendly method of transport in the Pacific Northwest. Currently the federal government has combined with Cascadian states to establish a ten million dollar fund for studying the preliminary rail work, but this is notably short of the funding needed. The Department of Transportation also gave 150,000 dollars to Seattle to study the possible renovation of the King Street Station as a new intermodal station. Currently federal rail funding is lagging across the board, receiving only three percent of the total federal transportation budget compared to the ninety percent given to highways and roadways. This minimal funding will not establish rail as an alternative to motorways, going against federal rhetoric that proposes being ". . . open to innovative ways to meet the challenges of the 21st century."
Many new approaches have been considered for funding the high speed rail in lieu of the near insurmountable costs and lack of needed federal support. US members of the Cascadia Project are seeking government and private support to explore a possible bank similar to the NADbank of the southern border, while in BC the Cascadia Institute has approached the Ministry of Western Diversification to work on common infrastructure funding issues. (See Chapter 5) Members of the Seattle based Discovery Institute are currently pushing for a new gas tax, tire tax, heavy vehicle tax, and a truck/trailer sales tax in order to raise nearly 1 billion dollars for the rail project. These tax increases would raise gas tax from 18.3 cents per gallon to 22 cents per gallon, tire tax from 15 cents per pound over 40 lbs. to 17.5 cents, and a 7 percent tax increase on heavy vehicle use and truck and trailer sales (please see Table 1.5 and 1.6).
Despite these steps toward achieving the rail project goals, Cascadia still is lacking in the necessary support to implement this rather lofty goal. According to Mary Pearmine, the commissioner of Marion County, Oregon, much of this support needs to come from a rather quiet public sector. "We're hearing from our senators that they aren't getting the support they need to sell this train back east. If people are supportive, they need to get out and show it or write letters to politicians and organizations."
Another legislative framework, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), has provided a framework for regional responses to north/south trade corridor issues. In the context of NAFTA, ISTEA requires that two studies relating to international trade be undertaken. Recently, one of these reports to Congress, titled "Assessment of Border Crossings and Transportation Corridors for North American Trade", was released. The studies were motivated by the lengthy delays at the border and a growing concern that the increased trade from NAFTA would cause too much stress for the current modes of transportation across the borders. ISTEA projected that in order for the current modes of transportation to deal with the growth in trade and circulation from NAFTA, new infrastructure planning must be sought that is bi-national in its nature. They projected that trade in Cascadia was set to increase 16-24% on the US side of the border, and 24-34% in Canada. They also noticed that "communities adjacent to busy border crossings face problems of congestion, air pollution, and safety; border states have not allotted sufficient funds to these communities for border crossing approaches; new funding sources and improved allocation systems are needed." Other causes of crossing delay according to ISTEA are complex inspection and clearance procedures at customs, inadequate traffic management, a shortage of inspectors and staff, and a general lack of coordination at the borders.
Therefore it is obvious that effort and progress needs to be made in order to establish the infrastructure necessary to fully integrate the economies of Cascadia in a way that avoids long border delays and further enhances the commercial attractiveness of this region to the global economy by providing successful new modes of transport. As Amy Kaestner will analyze in the next chapter, this rail link would also avoid the current trend towards increased car pollution in the region. Progress in this area has been slow, showing how governments seem unwilling to invest large amounts of funding into a long term, bi-national project. This problem is congruent to many of the organizational problems in the region that leave smaller lobbying organizations on both sides of the border independently taking on large projects that need to be organized and funded by federal planners. By providing federal organization and funding options, the independent regional groups would form into a more cohesive unit of NGO's and smaller government groups bound by common goals and policy options on the federal levels. Despite these noticeable problems, this trade corridor is developing substantial support and interest from many people, institutions, and government officials. Perhaps future federal planning and funding will eventually yield infrastructure that makes this trade corridor the heart of trade along North America's Pacific Rim.
Tourism is the fastest growing economic sector in Cascadia. Able to offer a "two nation vacation" Cascadia expects that tourism will soon be the largest employer and generator of currency, reaching regional revenues of over 20 billion dollars due to the over 100 million people that visit the region annually. Puget Sound alone projects to make nearly 290 million dollars in 1997 on tourism. Hotels in Seattle are running with occupancy levels averaging over ninety percent. These statistics and projected revenues have influenced regional leaders to capitalize upon Cascadia's unique position for international tourism markets. The region offers a wide variety of travel experiences, with beautiful natural scenery, historic sites, professional sports teams, alpine skiing and snowboarding, year round resorts, access to Alaska cruising, and wonderful national forest lands. The tourism goals in Cascadia revolve around alliances that use regional attractiveness rather than local attractiveness as a unique advertising effort.
The first instance of interdependency in this industry was provided by PNWER. In 1992, a PNWER group consisting in 26 legislators, public program administrators, researchers, and private citizens commissioned a "California Tourism Study" in order to identify tourist travel plans. Cascadian travel agencies and the US National Forest Service funded the California Office of Tourism's market research survey in six of the top Californian markets with regards to destinations in Cascadia. One of the principle findings was that California's image of the Pacific Northwest was limited to Washington and Oregon, and that British Columbia is not perceived as part of the regional attractiveness. The report, completed in 1993, was used by the participants in their individual marketing programs to improve advertising techniques.
Joint tourism projects were also researched. In 1994, Vancouver's Cascadia Institute received a grant from Tourism Canada to research regional tourism opportunities. The main findings of the group were that more advertisement and marketing was needed for regional success and the propagation of areas such as "The Golden Triangle" areas including Whistler resort and Blackcomb Mountain, Alaskan and Yukon cruising, and the Seattle/Victoria connection. By using joint marketing techniques, regional attractiveness would attract greater amounts of capital from tourists who remained for longer amounts of travel time in the area.
A Cascadia tourism survey was initiated in the summer of 1994 to determine whether groups were interested in forming an interdependent alliance that used joint marketing strategies. The response level was high, leading to the development of special advertising techniques such as the "two nation vacation" poster (see table 1.7), a touring guide to Cascadia, the development of a regional logo, a general marketing concept, and rules providing a tourism mission statement for the region.
Another major accomplishment was reached in joint marketing alliances with the production of the biannual tourism magazine, Cascadia, by Key Pacific Publishers of Victoria.
Due in a large part to these smaller successes, a larger conference was held in Seattle during June of 1996. The conference was hosted by public and private groups including the Port of Seattle, the Washington Department of Community, the Victoria Clipper, Tourism Vancouver, Tourism Victoria, Grayline, the Oregon Tourism Commission, the Seattle/King County Convention and Visitors Bureau, and the Cascadia Project. With over 180 delegates in attendance, this group formed a powerful alliance in a growing industry sector. The goals of the conference were to:
The impression gained from researching tourism in Cascadia is that the business and industry groups have been phenomenal in orchestrating alliances that market tourism to the region rather than to individual locations. The groups in British Columbia seem to be more interested in cross border ties than groups in Oregon or Washington. Perhaps this is due to the fact that Vancouver's second largest revenue source is tourism. Business leadership, especially on the US side, must continue to demonstrate even greater interest in developing future cross regional ties that better serve the commercial futures of all of Cascadia in this industry sector. Perhaps growing tourism links and their subsequent commercial gains will yield future interdependencies in other areas such as the rail link that are lacking the necessary support and activity.
Cascadia is currently working on a bi-national project alliance that seeks to bring the 2008 Olympic summer games to the area. This would be the first truly international Olympics, with events stretching from Portland all the way up "main street" Cascadia to Vancouver. Combined, the three cities would be able to compete with any city on the face of the globe that is lobbying for the Olympic Games bid. With three domed stadiums in Seattle, Tacoma, and Vancouver, the 72,000 seat Husky Stadium, three 16,000 seat facilities in Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver, several Olympic qualified pools, three bicycle velodromes, plenty of waterways for boating events, some of the world's best cross country and bicycling courses, hundreds of hotels, and ample scenic backdrops for a worldwide television audience, Cascadia is making a strong case for the games.
It may take an estimated 1.2 billion dollars for this transnational region to host the 2008 games. Funding would come from a variety of public and private sources. Organizers were heartened by the results of a 1995 poll showing that 75 percent of respondents in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties favored having the Olympics in the area. Half of all the respondents were concerned about traffic congestion during the games, but 73 percent disagreed that the inconvenience to local residents would be too great. A surprising figure, given the regional tendency against taxing, was that 40 percent of those polled favored new taxes to bring the mega event to the area. It seems as though the colossal Goodwill games of 1990 were an enjoyable and prosperous experience for the community. Even with this extra tax money for the event, much more money would need to be raised from television sponsorships, merchandising, and other Olympic revenues. "The financing for the games would not be as huge as it may be in other areas lobbying for the games," said Bruce Agnew of the Seattle based Discovery Institute's Cascadia Project. "The local infrastructure is already well prepared for the needs of the Olympics with regards to stadiums, especially now that the Mariners are building that new ballpark. Usually, areas such as Barcelona, Spain, had to spend immense amounts of capital on facilities. Instead, in Cascadia, we could reinvest that money in beautifying the cities or on other regional infrastructure." This extra capital could prove vital for many of the regional infrastructure goals that have been unattainable due to a lack of proper financing.
Trans-border alliances regarding the 2008 bid are spearheaded by the Discovery Institutes Cascadia Project. Agnew, the leader of the project, says that he works closely with colleagues at Vancouver's Cascadia Institute and government officials such as Seattle Mayor Norm Rice, Washington Governor Gary Locke, and Washington State Senator Slade Gordon. Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland seem equally enthusiastic regarding this proposal. Cellular One has given 50,000 dollars in seed money. Also, the law firm of Perkins Coie and the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen have offered free help sorting out the legal and financial complexities of the bid. The announcement of the location for the 2008 Olympics will occur in 2001. Other cities in competition for the bid are Bejing, China, Cape Town, South Africa, and Boston, Massachusetts. One promising note about a Cascadian Olympics in 2008 is that Canada, as a commonwealth country, can bring some 40 votes to the International Olympic Committee.
Despite the many regional success stories that demonstrate alliances and a tendency in the region towards transnational integration, many barriers to integration remain that slow the process of regionalization. While a poignant example of a leading edge trans-border corridor, Cascadia still needs much development to catch up to the rhetoric and vision of those who support interdependency and the concept of regionalism. The remainder of this chapter will attempt to outline areas where Cascadia needs further work in establishing policies and projects that genuinely seek to commercially integrate Cascadia for 'glocalized' success.
The main failure of Cascadian integration concerns the different visions and ideas outlined by competing interest groups. For instance, many bioregionalists have a completely different idea for the region of Cascadia than the economic planners analyzed in this chapter such as PNWER, the Cascadia Institute, and the Discovery Institute. While in some ways the economic and environmental visions for the region will have to interconnect, current issues may lead one to believe otherwise due to the stratification of ideals and lack of constant, organized government support. Thus, while their is no lack of support or interest among groups and institutions, regional coordination and organization have failed to organize the groups into a better functioning unit with common goals and resources. This was aptly noted by the Northwest Policy Center of the University of Washington:
In many ways there are an impressive array of cooperative efforts in the region...Yet, in many ways, the Northwest has made progress where progress came easy, not where it was most needed...Intergovernmental efforts have limited their potential by limiting size and scope. They fail to seek out lessons from others' experiences and apply the best of them across borders and departmental lines. They don't harness existing organizations to help foster new initiatives. There is no shortage of groups interested in economic policy in our states, provinces, cities, countries, reservations, tows, and neighborhoods...But few regional organizations attempt to coordinate the activities of the diverse groups.
A major obstacle to regional political coordination has been the fact that there is little political payoff for politicians who work on bi-national regions. While one could argue that the economic gains from such work would increase a politician's constituency, this does not seem to be the case. Cascadia is a far-sighted, long-term project that is not beneficial to those who seek local projects that allow for quick political gains. This was noted by Congressional representatives John Miller of Washington and Ron Wyden of Oregon who tried to piece together a bi-national corridor commission dedicated to organizing issues and institutions important to Cascadia. A matching bill was brought about in Canada by Robert Wenman of BC, which promoted a study of mechanisms for cross border cooperation. This bill, despite support on both sides of the border, was never fully funded, showing how Cascadia has little priority in the local and regional government's year to year budget. Therefore, as the governments fail to assist the wide variety of Cascadian institutions "a number of Cascadians are recognizing that the traditional sources of government are no longer effective in responding to the challenges of an increasingly interdependent region." Thus, a major obstacle to effective integration that meets the goals established as a national priority in the NAFTA, has been a government that does not internalize the goals and aspirations of regional, trans-border interdependency. If Cascadia is truly to be an area of free trade and integrated national economies, new government approaches need to be applied to the region that promote alliances rather than separation or competition. Once new governmental approaches are implemented, the resources of the individual groups and lobbyists of the regions can be better harnessed in a cohesive fashion that efficiently works towards 'glocalization'. (see Chapter 6)
Trade and resource disputes have also hindered the formation of true and complete regionalism in the Cascadia corridor. Despite NAFTA and the FTA, nationalistic responses are more powerful than regional institutions when there are disputes regarding wheat, salmon, apples, lumber, and electric power. The realm of shared resources dispute resolution has a long way to come. For despite the generally cordial and integrated nature of Cascadia, arguments still occur, and no government organization has been formed to deal with concerns in a traditionally competitive natural resource area. Some sort of institutional entity needs to be developed to mediate resource disputes. Amy Kaestner will address these issues with more clarity in the following chapter.
Another hindrance to full regional development and integration has been a long standing fear of US domination in Canada. While CUFTA and NAFTA promote increased contact and trade with the states for Canadians, many fear that this agreement will result in the tainting of Canada's culture and society with an overexposure to American ideals and trends. Currently, successful Canadian films and music either move towards US markets and become transnational themselves, or they remain obscure, overrun by other more popular North American trends that tend to come out of larger US markets. In order for 'glocalization' to grasp hold in Cascadia, a new mentality of reciprocity must be internalized in the population that generates a new energy regarding the possibilities of integration. For as it now stands:
The fear of domination was dramatized by the reciprocal free trade agreement between the two countries prior to the American Civil War, the Canadian National Policy of the late 1870's and the 1911 Canadian election, the key issue of which was reciprocity. Thus, the loud, free trade debate of 1988 is part of a historical and ongoing dialogue about the connection between economic integration and political union. The discussion about the absorption of Canada into the US is historic, it has been carried out for more than a century; and it will continue...the multiplication and accumulation of transactions does not add up to the integration of the two societies.
Although it seems that documents such as NAFTA and the rise of globalization or 'glocalization' propagate a notion of the fall of the nation state in favor of regionalism and interdependence, in many ways local desires for sovereignty can undermine existing alliances in the relationship by removing organized government and successful funding measures from the equation. The lines drawn by NAFTA in favor of trans-border trade regions and free trade do not correspond to the old socio-political divisions of the past. That is why federal policy makers need to develop consistent, congruent policies that help to sort out many problems that are only magnified and worsened by competing local forces on both sides of the border. Until a more cohesive plan is developed that uses a positive sum equation of development that utilizes all available infrastructure for the cause, only slow progress can be made.
In looking at both the successes and failures of Cascadia as a transnational border region transformed by NAFTA and new economic alliances, it seems that much future planning and cooperation will be necessary to interlink the economies of this region in a way that maximizes regional productivity with regards to trade and development. This region is one of the most important corridors for US/Canadian trade and also for interaction with the growing pacific rim economies of APEC. As the fastest growing population in the world, APEC represents opportunities for Cascadian interaction with over 2 billion people and some of the richest investors in the world. While Cascadia may be the most developed example of a trade corridor in North America, it still has a long way to go in order to utilize the many gifts and possibilities that this region holds, especially with regards to trade, high tech development, and investment.
In planning for future development in this interdependent region it is important to realize that the world of the 21st century will be a world of cities. The world's population of 5.8 billion in 1994 is expected to reach 6.3 billion by the year 2000 and 8.3 billion by the year 2025, when over 5 billion of those people will be living in urban settings. As one of the first growing transnational megalopolises, Cascadia faces serious decisions regarding how to manage and interact within situations of regionalism and trade alliances in an area where the political lines, economic lines, and environmental lines often cross over one another. Will the governments of this region take steps towards sustainable development and increased interaction, or will they be content to let the market and private enterprises dictate planning in this realm? What is going to happen to the shared resources and environment of this growing region? These questions will be looked at in Chapter 6, where Colin Johnson provides policy recommendations for northern border regions, and also Chapter 4, where Amy Kaestner examines environmental interdependencies in Cascadia and their interaction with the growing socio-economic concerns