Podcast appearances and mentions of mark lutter

"One of the biggest strengths is the past of cities."Are you interested in the connection of economics and cities? What do you think about superstar cities and their agglomeration? How can we utilise cities' pasts as their strengths? Interview with Mark Lutter, Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute. We will talk about his vision for the future of cities, agglomeration in superstar cities, innovation and technology, the urban history, and many more. Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, a non-profit focused on building the ecosystem for charter cities, and the Founder and CEO of Braavos Cities, a charter city development firm. He earned a PhD in economics from George Mason University and has been featured in the New Yorker, Financial Times, and the Atlantic. Charter cities, innovative urban projects with superior legal systems, aim to revolutionize governance in the 21st century. Mark has worked globally on their development, engaging in fundraising, strategy, and planning to attract investment and drive economic growth.Find out more about Mark through these links:Mark Lutter on LinkedInMark Lutter website@MarkLutter as Mark Lutter on XCharter Cities Institute websiteCharter Cities Institute on LinkedIn@CCIdotCity as Charter Cities Institute on X@ccidotcity as Charter Cities Institute on InstagramCharter Cities PodcastBraavos Cities websiteConnecting episodes you might be interested in:No.090 - Interview with Professor Matthew McCartney about the connection between economy and citiesNo.294 - Interview with Erick A. Brimen about new city building and governance structureNo.317RWhat was the most interesting part for you? What questions did arise for you? Let me know on Twitter ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WTF4Cities⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or on the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠wtf4cities.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ website where the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠shownotes⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ are also available.I hope this was an interesting episode for you and thanks for tuning in.Episode generated with ⁠⁠⁠Descript⁠⁠⁠ assistance (⁠⁠⁠affiliate link⁠⁠⁠).Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Lesfm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pixabay⁠

Are you interested charter cities? Summary of the article titled Building resilient cities: The role of charter cities in promoting resilient urban development from 2024, by Eva Klaus and the Charter Cities Institute, published on the Charter Cities Institute website.This is a great preparation to our next interview with Mark Lutter, the founder and executive director of Charter Cities Institute in episode 318 talking about charter cities and their role in urban futures. Since we are investigating the future of cities, I thought it would be interesting to see how the charter cities concept can enhance urban resilience. This article introduces charter cities as new cities with new rules and the opportunities within climate adaptation and sustainable growth.Find the article through this link.Connecting episodes you might be interested in:No.074R - Resilient urban planning: major principles and criteriaNo.090 - Interview with Professor Matthew McCartney about the connection between economics and citiesYou can find the transcript through ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠th⁠i⁠s link⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.What was the most interesting part for you? What questions did arise for you? Let me know on Twitter ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WTF4Cities⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or on the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠wtf4cities.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ website where the⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠showno⁠t⁠es⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠are also available.I hope this was an interesting episode for you and thanks for tuning in.Episode generated with ⁠⁠⁠⁠Descript⁠⁠⁠⁠ assistance (⁠⁠⁠⁠affiliate link⁠⁠⁠⁠).Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Lesfm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pixabay⁠

Are you interested in the connection of economics and cities? What do you think about superstar cities and their agglomeration? How can we utilise cities' pasts as their strengths? Trailer for episode 318 - interview with Mark Lutter, Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute. We will talk about his vision for the future of cities, agglomeration in superstar cities, innovation and technology, the urban history, and many more. Find out more in the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Episode generated with ⁠⁠⁠Descript⁠⁠⁠ assistance (⁠⁠⁠affiliate link⁠⁠⁠).Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Lesfm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pixabay⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

In this episode of the Freedom Cities Podcast, Mark Lutter is joined by Patri Friedman, a pioneer in the new cities movement. As the founder of the Seasteading Institute and Managing Partner at Pronomos Capital, Patri has spent the last two decades pushing for new approaches to governance through the creation of innovative urban developments. They explore why Africa represents the most promising frontier for urban innovation, how autonomy and special economic zones can drive development, and what it takes to make new cities work in practice. The episode also addresses key challenges, including financing, talent, and how to build trust in unproven governance models. For listeners interested in the intersection of economics, cities, and systems change, this episode offers a unique perspective from someone who has been at the forefront of the movement to rethink how and where we live.

  On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib talks to Mark Lutter. Lutter is an urban development expert known for his work on charter cities—new urban areas aimed at fostering economic growth and progress. He is the Founder and Executive Chairman of the Charter Cities Institute, a nonprofit dedicated to building the ecosystem for charter cities, as well as the CEO of Braavos Cities, a charter city development company. He holds a PhD in economics from George Mason University, and a BS in mathematics from the University of Maryland, College Park. His interests span progress studies, governance, social dynamics and institution-building, with a belief that creating new cities can spark cultural and economic advancements similar to historical periods like the Renaissance or the Dutch Golden Age. He has been published or quoted in outlets like the Financial Times, The New Yorker, and The Chicago Tribune. Lutter and Razib discuss diverse topics, from the difficulties of the Prospera project in Honduras, to the possibility of developing San Francisco's Presidio into an Asian-style super-city. They explore the various pitfalls and possibilities faced when attempting to create new jurisdictions in developing nations in the Caribbean and Latin America, along with the major obstacles to urban innovation in the USA. Lutter outlines the economic case for charter cities, along with the normative values that undergird their creation as bastions of liberty and laboratories of cultural experimentation. Finally, they discuss the Trump administration's openness to the idea of the “Freedom City” in the Presidio, along with local opposition to the project.

Mark Lutter is the founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute.Find Mark:https://x.com/MarkLutterhttps://chartercitiesinstitute.org/Mentioned in the episode:https://www.palladiummag.com/2025/01/17/build-the-presidio-freedom-city/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jake-auchincloss.htmlhttps://zanzalu.org/ This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.fromthenew.world/subscribe

In this conversation, Kurtis discusses his transition from CCI to establishing the Africa Urban Lab at the African School of Economics in Zanzibar. He highlights the urgent need for new universities in Africa to harness the continent's demographic potential and improve education quality. The conversation delves into the challenges of setting up a university, the focus on practical skills in the curriculum, and the strategic advantages of Zanzibar as a location. Kurtis also outlines the vision for the Africa Urban Lab and the broader goals for CCI in the coming years. In this conversation, Kurtis and Mark delve into the complexities surrounding charter cities, particularly in Honduras, discussing the political risks, the importance of local integration, and the lessons learned from historical transformations. They explore the role of institutions in economic growth and the challenges faced by societies with fragmented ideologies. The discussion culminates in a reflection on the strategies for economic development, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of institutional frameworks and local contexts.

Mark Lutter of the Charter Cities Institute and Braavos Cities discusses focusing on tangible, actionable research to help make better decisions for developing charter cities. Lutter explains the significant challenges in city development, including the necessity of political buy-in and complex stakeholder coordination amidst increasing global uncertainty. He notes that younger, growing populations often drive city growth. Alongside Jarrad Hope, they explore topics such as urbanization patterns, financing mechanisms for low-income housing, and economic development strategies essential for successful charter city projects.JOIN THE COMMUNITYLogos TwitterLogos Discord TIMESTAMPS:00:00:31 Who Is Mark Lutter and What Led Him to Charter Cities?00:04:31 What Is the Connection Between Urbanization and Economic Growth?00:07:55 How Do Charter Cities Address Urban Migration?00:09:04 What Are the Key Elements for Effective Urban Governance?00:12:03 What Infrastructure and Governance Are Needed for New Cities?00:15:45 How Did Mark's Journey Lead to Founding the Charter Cities Institute?00:17:51 How Has Increasing Global Uncertainty Affected Charter Cities?00:18:27 What Are the Stages and Challenges of Starting a Charter City?00:21:21 Why Do Charter Cities Have a Controversial Reputation?00:22:31 How Do Charter Cities Compare to Special Economic Zones and Other Models?00:25:15 What Are the Risks and Rewards of Entrepreneurial Communities?00:27:53 How Can a Charter City Develop Its Economy Intentionally?00:31:04 What Lessons Can Be Learned from Real-World Charter City Projects?00:36:21 What Role Do Productivity and Markets Play in Poverty Alleviation?00:37:42 What Criteria Determine the Location of a Charter City?00:39:24 How Do CCI and Bravo Cities Differ in Their Approach?00:40:46 What Is Happening with Charter City Projects in Zanzibar?00:43:59 What Types of Research Facilitate the Development of Charter Cities?00:45:02 Why Is Regional Influence Increasingly Important for Charter Cities?00:45:29 How Can One Get Involved or Learn More About Charter Cities? Logos Press Engine includes Logos Podcast and Hashing It Out. Hashing it Out dives into the mechanisms and hardware of the technology that aid in making sovereign communities.

How do you take the positive aspects of Silicon Valley, and apply it to a radically different context like developing charter cities? Today, Jeffrey Mason, Head of Research at the Charter Cities Institute (CCI), is joined by Mark Lutter, Founder and Executive Director of CCI, and CEO of Braavos Cities, to discuss how the charter cities ecosystem has evolved over the past few years and what he's learned about building successful coalitions. Mark tells us about the circumstances that motivated him to found CCI, and what it's been like combining key features of Silicon Valley, (like entrepreneurial spirit, disruption, and innovation) with the challenging work of creating a coalition of different stakeholders — some of whom are likely to be relatively conservative. We discuss the broader ecosystem that CCI has been building, and how it can act as a force multiplier for other cities, before learning more about CCI's most recent projects, including their endeavors in Zanzibar and how they are contributing to development there. Mark also expands on his new company, Braavos Cities, their long-term goals, and the work that they are doing in the Caribbean. We wrap up our conversation with an overview of exciting developments to pay attention to in the charter cities space, from Zanzibar to California, and how to gain momentum in politically challenging environments. Be sure to tune in for a deep dive into the evolution of charter cities and their broader ecosystem!Key Points From This Episode:Welcoming back Mark Lutter, executive chairman of the Charter Cities Institute (CCI).An overview of the factors and events that motivated Mark to found CCI.How CCI has adapted the positive aspects of Silicon Valley to the context of charter cities.Lessons from working with multiple stakeholders, including policymakers.Generating buy-in at the elite level of policymakers and other powerful constituencies.CCI's goal to build a broader ecosystem that can act as a force multiplier for multiple cities.Key successes CCI has experienced over the past two years.Takeaways from their conference in Kigali during November 2023.Mark's thoughts on recent news concerning celebrities and charter cities.An overview of the development project in Zanzibar and how CCI is contributing to it.What CCI is doing to increase the funnel of talent to Zanzibar.An outline of what they hope to achieve in Zanzibar over the next 25 years.Unpacking viable economic opportunities in Zanzibar and how they can diversify.Mark's new company, Braavos Cities, and the work that they are doing in the Caribbean.How they get projects across the finish line in politically challenging environments.Advice on engaging with politicians, heads of government, and investors.Key insights on Braavos Cities, their goals, and what they are currently working on.What developments you should be paying attention to in the charter cities space.Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:Mark LutterMark Lutter Charter Cities InstituteMark Lutter on XMark Lutter on MediumBraavos CitiesJeffrey Mason on LinkedIn

Can a city hold the key to unlocking economic prosperity on a grand scale? In this episode, we sit down with Brooke Bowman and Mark Lutter to discuss charter cities and their role in addressing economic development challenges. Mark is a visionary thinker invested in progress, governance, social dynamics, and the concept of new cities. He is the Founder and Executive Chairman of the Charter Cities Institute and CEO of Braavos Cities, a pioneering charter city development company. Brooke is the founder of Vibecamp, a community that aims to foster connections and personal growth. Join us as we delve into the intricacies of community-building, economic development, and cultural influence. We unpack the concept of charter cities as a way to address economic development challenges and the importance of facilitating genuine connections with people through city developments and fostering community and co-living without excessive overhead. Tuning in, you'll discover the value of creating spaces where like-minded individuals can gather and interact and how the intersection of co-creation and play drives culture and innovation. To learn how to unlock the potential of charter cities and create vibrant, sustainable communities with a focus on culture, innovation, and positive societal impact, don't miss this conversation!Key Points From This Episode:Introducing Mark, his background, and his interest in charter cities.The concept of Charter Cities and how they can alleviate poverty.Mark and Brooke's experience of a pop-up community experiment called Zuzalu.How community gatherings help drive innovation in a society.Explore creating a sustainable community with a vibrant culture.The Neighborhood project and how it helping to build communities.What role the internet plays in facilitating the formation of real-life communities.Details about the governance structure of the Próspera development.Incorporating families and children into Vibecamp communities.Insights into how long communities will take to grow to scale.Why mimicking successful models from history is essential.The important sense of community and shared values that festivals provide.Why there is a need for economic development alongside community building.An overview of the legal mechanisms to ensure long-term success.Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:Brooke BowmanBrooke Bowman on XMark LutterMark Lutter on XBraavos CitiesVibecampThe Network State ConferenceJason BennThe NeighborhoodCabin CityCharter Cities InstituteCharter Cities Institute on FacebookCharter Cities Institute on...

Patri Friedman and Mark Lutter discuss free cities and "markets in governance" on the latest episode of Just Asking Questions.

Charter Cities Institute Founder and Chairman Mark Lutter returns to the podcast to share his perspective on network states, charter city trends, and more. Mark is also the CEO of Braavos Cities, a charter city development company partnering with local landowners and a leading organizer of Zuzalu, a new pop-up city in Montenegro. Tune in today to hear Mark's insights on existing network states and why they have either succeeded or failed. You'll also learn about some of the challenges associated with attracting appropriate talent to cities in order to facilitate growth. Mark shares his experience at Zuzalu and describes the flat hierarchical structure that was made possible there. Using the metaphor of gardening instead of carpentry, Mark illustrates his unique approach to building network cities. Hear how Mark differs from others in the charter city space on the matter of location and his analysis of the global response to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. As our episode draws to a close, Mark reveals his thoughts on restarting struggling economies, finding buy-in from local government, and more. Thanks for listening!Key Points From This Episode:An introduction to today's episode with CCI Founder and Chairman Mark Lutter. What Zuzali is and how it came together with reference to Vitalik Buterin and Balaji Srinivasan.Defining the terms ‘pop up city', ‘pop up village', and ‘network state'. How the historical failures of network-type states influence Mark's feelings.Examining the examples of Israel, Utah, Salt Lake City, and Jonestown.Considering why San Francisco is especially susceptible to cults.Why Mark returned from Montenegro and Zuzalu with optimism for network states.How the internet can behave as a giant sorting mechanism.His predictions for how sorting mechanisms will change in the future.The problem of attracting appropriate talent to cities. Why Montenegro was the chosen location for Zuzalu. Building Zuzalu whilst building local relationships.The role of the host government in the success of Zuzalu. Where the name Zuzalu came from.Flat status hierarchies in network cities and other agglomerates.How they managed to sustain a flat hierarchy at Zuzalu. What it means to think like a gardener and not a carpenter.What Braavos Cities is and what it aims to do.Where Mark differs from other folks in the charter city space on the matter of location.Two migration patterns to tap into. The greatest successes of the COVID-19 pandemic and what could have been adopted instead.Distinguishing between Charter Cities Institute and Braavos Cities.Restarting an economy through leveraging comparative advantage.Getting buy-in from local government.Job creation and investment. The Zanzibar project that Mark is excited about at the moment.Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:Mark LutterMark Lutter on TwitterMark Lutter on MediumMark Lutter EmailBraavos CitiesZuzalu

Niklas speaks with Mark Lutter. Mark is the Founder and Chairman of the Charter Cities Institute, a non-profit which is building the ecosystem for charter cities. Mark has a PhD in economics from George Mason University.Mark also has a podcast called the Charter Cities Podcast, a fantastic listen to learn about this fascinating movement.Mark and Niklas start by talking about how they both became more motivated to pursue experimentation to fix or build alternatives to government institutions as a result of the covid-19 pandemic, and how they hope charter cities can propel new technology development such as biotech and longevity or drone delivery.Mark talks about charter cities, how to finance them and the many other challenges involved in building them. First and foremost, charter cities are a political challenge and require local partnerships and buy-in from national governments.Mark believes an optimistic scenario could lead to charter cities having 3 million residents in ten years with growth rates 1-2 percentage points higher than the surrounding region. Charter cities have a very long time horizon and are up against the inherent stability of existing institutions: people typically don't move unless there is a really strong motivation such as political or religious persecution, or instability.This stickiness of existing institutions is something Mark believes is often underestimated by proponents of "network states" such as Balaji Srinivasan. While charter cities have overlaps with network states, Mark believes there is not enough migration flow out of developed countries with bad institutions - the much stronger force pressure to migrate is from developed to developing countries.Mark cautions against claiming the sacred concept of political sovereignty and instead opts for partnerships with governments. He sees the biggest potential for charter cities in Africa, because of the strong urbanization ratesMark is a key thought leader in the charter cities space, and achieved tremendous success in increasing awareness and developing the right templates through the Charter Cities Institute - it was fascinating to have Mark on to share his learnings!Infinita Discord: https://discord.gg/dwbNh7NKNiklas on Twitter: https://twitter.com/NiklasAnzingerInfinita Website: https://infinitavc.com/

Each year, tens of millions of people migrate from rural areas to cities—mostly in emerging economies, where populations are growing faster than governments can create basic infrastructure. To address the challenges of urbanization without industrialization, development experts, economists, and policymakers have proposed solutions spanning from increased immigration to better family planning.In this episode, we ask: could charter cities—a model inspired by the successes of places like Singapore and Shenzhen—be a path to accelerating growth in emerging economies?Special thanks to Patri Friedman, Mark Lutter, Mwiya Musokotwane, Isabelle Simpson, and Juan Du.For a transcript of this episode, visit press.stripe.com/charter-cities-transcriptFor more on Beneath the Surface, visit press.stripe.com/beneath-the-surfaceFollow Stripe Press on Twitter @stripepress

If I told you it's possible to deliver an extra year of ideal primary-level education for 30 cents, would you believe me? Hopefully not – the claim is absurd on its face.But it may be true nonetheless. The very best education interventions are phenomenally cost-effective, but they're not the kinds of things you'd expect, says Dr Rachel Glennerster — who we chose to introduce the problem of global poverty. Full transcript, related links, and summary of this interviewThis episode first broadcast on the regular 80,000 Hours Podcast feed on December 20, 2018. Some related episodes include: #13 – Claire Walsh on testing which policies work & how to get governments to listen to the results #18 – Ofir Reich on using data science to end poverty & the spurious action-inaction distinction #22 – Dr Leah Utyasheva on the non-profit that figured out how to massively cut suicide rates #30 – Dr Eva Vivalt on how little social science findings generalize from one study to another #37 – GiveWell picks top charities by estimating the unknowable. James Snowden on how they do it. #38 – Prof Yew-Kwang Ng on anticipating EA decades ago & how to make a much happier world And #55 – Mark Lutter & Tamara Winter on founding charter cities with outstanding governance to end poverty Series produced by Keiran Harris.

Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute. CCI's aim is to build an ecosystem for charter cities We talk about - The basic concepts of charter cities - What is the biggest misconception about charter cities? - What personality type does it take to run a non profit? --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/pradyumna-sp/message

In this Geoeconomics Podcast episode, Aleksa Burmazovic talks with Kurtis Lockhart from the Charter Cities Institute about how cities work, what governance must do to adapt, and how the next 15 years will look like in the governance and human cohabitation spaces. Don't miss the Charter Cities Handbook:https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/ Charter Cities Institute Twitter:@CCIdotCity Kurtis' Website:https://kurtislockhart.com/contact/ This podcast was produced by the Adrianople Group. The Adrianople Group is a business intelligence firm that focuses on special economic zones, venture capital, private equity, and geoeconomics. For more information, please visit: https://www.adrianoplegroup.com/     https://twitter.com/geoeconomicspod?l... This podcast is licensed under Creative Commons with Attribution #Podcast #Adrianople #AdrianopleGroup #Geoeconomics #Economics #Infrastructure #Geopolitcs #Interview #Expert #Trade #Zone #Economy #Markets #Industrial #FreeTradeZone #FreeTrade #Business #Development #Sustainable #Knowledge #Money #Regulations #Law #Legal #Governance #SEZ #Investment #Routes #China #CharterCitiesInstitute #Future #Cities #City #CitiesofTomorrow #Book #Books #CharterCity #CharterCities #NewCity #SmartCity #SmartCities #Government #2030 #Market #Institute #Study #MarkLutter 

Mark Lutter has a PhD in economics from George Mason University and is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute. He joins the podcast to talk about his vision of how privately run cities can help end poverty. The discussion includes topics such as the philosophy behind charter cities, mistakes made by the charter city movement in the past, and ongoing projects. Richard and Mark also talk about intellectual entrepreneurship, what the success of China means for American cultural hegemony, the narrowness of academic thought, and why smart young people should seek careers outside of the university. 

Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, a nonprofit building the ecosystem for charter cities. Before this he worked as Lead Economist for a fund investing in early stage charter cities. He has a PhD in economics from George Mason University and a BS in Math from the University of Maryland, College Park.

Charter cities can bring long-term economic growth through business and innovation enabled by well-functioning institutions. Mark Lutter, founder of the Charter Cities Institute, talks to OMFIF's Kat Usita about the benefits that charter cities bring and successful examples. 

Mark Lutter is the founder of the Charter Cities Institute. We find out just what Charter Cities are, why we should care about them, and how they can improve the lives of millions of humans across the globe. 

Digital technology has evolved to the point that by hitting keys and tapping mice buttons, you can literally build a city in the cloud. This viral idea was started by angel investor Balaji Srinivasan, who believes in creating cities with crowd-funded territories and governed by smart contracts. In our conversation with Balaji, we touch on many intricate topics that link to two concepts — using tech to design ideal cities and how innovation is driven by exit strategies. Early in the episode, we dive into the future of America, and the rest of the world, as we explore the country's politics, geography, military, and intellectual power. After discussing why it's so difficult to get anything done in the US, Balaji talks about why people might soon begin emigrating from America. From cryptocurrency to Indians recognizing the success of Indian immigrants, Balaji shares his insights on how exits and alternative strategies can be the leading force behind change. Following this, we begin unpacking the ideas behind Balaji's cloud city, the reasons that cities have historically been founded, and the many benefits of designing a city according to your group identity. Reflecting Balaji's ‘digital first' mindset, we chat about how innovations in the physical world can be driven through digital simulation before discussing why risk-aversion is the enemy of progress. An episode filled with carefully considered arguments and counter-arguments, tune in to hear more about Balaji Srinivasan's incredible vision of the future. Key Points From This Episode: •   Hear why podcast host Mark sees a brighter future for the US than anywhere else. •   How robotics will have a greater impact on national outcomes than demographics. •   Mark and Balaji debate the question— “Is this the Chinese decade or the Chinese century?” •   Arguments for why US power might be vastly overestimated. •   How the internet is being segmented by different nation's regulations. •   Why America can be considered an empire in decline. •   Comparing India in the 80s with present-day America. •   The benefits of seeing people of your heritage be successful within other models and areas. •   How creating successful alternative models can lead to reform. •   Balaji explains why there might be a mass exodus of people leaving America. •   Exploring the types of people who will emigrate from America. •   Using current technology to build a city in the cloud. •   How a ‘digital first' approach can bring down costs when building a city. •   The three reasons why cities are often founded. •   Benefits to physically grouping yourself in a city with other like-minded people. •   Aligning groups of people and the challenge that comes from having huge online communities. •   How people prioritize their many identity expressions to determine what's intrinsic to who they are. •   Pushing innovation in the physical world through digital simulation. •   Why risk or degrees of “Anarchy” will always come before innovation. Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/people/mark-lutter (Mark Lutter) https://twitter.com/CCIdotCity (Charter Cities Institute on Twitter) https://www.facebook.com/Charter-Cities-Institute-424204888015721/ (Charter Cities Institute on Facebook) https://balajis.com/ (Balaji Srinivasan) https://www.linkedin.com/in/balajissrinivasan/ (Balaji Srinivasan on LinkedIn) https://twitter.com/balajis (Balaji Srinivasan on Twitter) https://www.nato.int/ (NATO) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-Snowden (Edward Snowden) https://www.biography.com/political-figure/emmanuel-macron (Emmanuel Macron)... Support this podcast

What is progress, has it slowed down, and what can we do about it? Joining us today to talk about the emerging field of progress studies and how it might help us dig into questions like these, is Jason Crawford, author of the blog, Roots Of Progress. Jason opens by providing us with a definition of progress and why the active study of it might help us rekindle it in our world. We talk about how progress has increasingly dwindled next. In the late 19th and early 20th century, four major progress revolutions were occurring in fields of chemical engineering, oil, electricity, and germ theory, and today we only have one, tech. In thinking about why this has occurred, we examine the stagnation hypothesis which argues that as a culture we have come to prize innovation less, we have chosen the low-hanging fruit of previous innovations to explore rather than find new ones, and regulations have grown to the extent that breakthroughs have been throttled. Jason gives his thoughts on these arguments, and also adds a fourth reason which centers around a change in funding structures for innovation. The next part of our conversation is about how we might bring back a culture of inventiveness, past examples of cities that were hubs of invention, and what the ingredients for great innovation are. Along with this, Jason shares his thoughts on what the next big movement could be before we wrap up with a discussion on the risks inherent in progress and what an effective movement for social change might look like. Key Points From This Episode: •   Introducing Jason and the definition of progress, as well as the new field of progress studies. •   Examples of progress that occurred without progress studies – why do we need this field? •   Arguments for and against the ‘stagnation hypothesis' as a theory of slowed progress. •   Four revolutions in the late1800s to early 1900s comparable to our tech revolution: chemical engineering, oil, electricity, and germ theory. •   The stagnation hypothesis reframed as a consideration of what happened to the four revolutions. •   Critically unpacking the ‘culture', ‘low-hanging fruit', and ‘regulation' arguments for slowing progress. •   Another reason why progress might have petered out that centers around funding structures. •   The heyday of corporate research versus today's progress model: Universities and ‘tech transfer'. •   The difficulty of implementing high-level ideas that are possible and the role this might play. •   Separating science from the corporate world and the need to merge both for more progress. •   How we could bring back more of a culture of breakthroughs; new career paths and looking to the late 19th century. •   Examples of do-it-yourself invention culture from today: prosthetics, automatic pancreases. •   Why some cities are hubs of invention and what the ingredients for this creativity are. •   Jason's thoughts about why the next major revolution might be in biotech. •   Online chat spaces that allow for serendipity; inventiveness might no longer be geographically bound. •   Balancing the existential risk aspect of world-ending technology with the idea of progress. •   Technologies producing unforeseen dangers and how we are handling risk assessment. •   How social movements can collapse and whether an effective model for social change exists. •   Moving past arguments about regulation to an attitude of ‘what can actually be done.' Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: https://www.chartercitiesinstitute.org/people/mark-lutter (Mark Lutter) https://twitter.com/CCIdotCity (Charter Cities Institute on Twitter) https://www.facebook.com/Charter-Cities-Institute-424204888015721/... Support this podcast

The Charter Cities Institute has seen rapid growth in recent months, having gone from three employees in February to ten as of this week, so we decided to do something a little different on today's show. Kurtis Lockhart, Head of Research at the CCI sits down with Founder, Mark Lutter, to provide a high-level overview of the concept of charter cities, why their time has come, how the CCI fits into it all, and what the future holds. The first part of the conversation is all about charter cities, how they differ from conventional ones and special economic zones, and why they are becoming more important. From there, we move onto the history of charter cities, getting into some major recent advocates of the movement and a few examples of successful semi-autonomous cities from the post-war era and what we can learn from them. We turn our attention to some of the common criticisms of charter cities next, considering the political threat they could end up posing, how they propose to be different from the countries they exist in, and how to get people to start moving into them once development commences. Following this, we explore the implementation aspect of charter cities, discussing how the CCI is approaching six things that should be considered before building one: Governance, policies, urban planning, site selection, selecting an anchor tenant, and minimizing the risk of expropriation. The last part of our conversation is all about the CCI as an organization – Mark's research that led to its founding, the challenges and successes it has seen, and the vision it has for the future. Be sure to catch this episode for an in-depth look at the potential charter cities and the CCI have to change the world for the better. Key Points From This Episode: •   A high-level definition of charter cities and why they are important. •   How charter cities differ from conventional cities and special economic zones. •   Four aspects of charter cities that enable them to spur long-term economic development. •   How the CCI's version of charter cities would be governed and set up through public/private partnerships. •   Why governments would invite developers to build and collaborate on charter cities. •   The amount of master plan cities being built globally and range of their value propositions. •   The advantages of a charter city over a master-planned one and a regular one. •   Ideal environments to build charter cities in; openness, rapid urbanization, and more. •   Why now is a time where charter cities seem more valuable than ever. •   Reinvigorating liberalism and the cosmopolitanism of trade cities using charter cities. •   How charter cities fit into the effective altruist framework of tractability, neglectedness, and scalability. •   Conceptions of scalability and the work being done to enable charter cities to scale. •   A history of charter cities and how the CCI is building on Paul Romer and Patri Friedman's work. •   Early examples of cities built using a degree of planning and their modern influence. •   Problems with unplanned and planned cities and the ‘slow feedback loop' of cities. •   Lessons to be learned from successful, semi-autonomous cities in the post-war era. •   Common criticisms of charter cities and how they are based on misunderstandings. •   How to get people to move to a charter city; reasons why people start and move to cities. •   Why governments might expropriate their charter cities; the political threat they could pose. •   Issues around building charter cities in upper or middle-income countries. •   The role of incentives in charter cities being less prone to their host... Support this podcast

Mark is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, as well as the host of the Charter Cities Podcast. He is also the Co-Founder and Chief Strategy Officer for the Victoria Harbour Group, a firm that is building a new city for the Hong Kong people. Mark has a PhD in economics from George Mason University where his research focused on charter cities. Charter cities are cities which are granted special jurisdictions to create new governance systems. Through his work, Mark is helping pave the way for more of them in the future. -- Thank you for listening to Pod of Jake! All shares and reviews are appreciated! If you enjoy this podcast, you might like reading blogofjake.com If you prefer listening over reading, you might prefer Blog of Jake's blog on tape, available through any of your favorite podcast providers. Website: podofjake.com Twitter: @blogofjake Email: jake@blogofjake.com Call: superpeer.com/jake Support: patreon.com/blogofjake Bitcoin: 3ESGQxrJZmGqd2SifqCUiHPvah1uWtN1Zd

I had a wide ranging conversation with Mark Lutter covering The impact of US riots on the future of cities Mark's role in helping Hong Kong citizens find a new home Why mature societies stop building new cities Population growth in the US vs Australia NIMBYs and why they might be right (or not) Importance of culture  How to measure institutional decline and progress How you can help And much more!

I had a chat with Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of Charter Cities Institutes about the potential of charter cities to boost a nation’s prosperity and development. Our conversation touched on state capacity, why American institutions appear to be failing, and why Silicon Valley elites have no political influence.You can download or listen right in the player above - or from your favourite players and podcast providers here. You can rate us here, this helps others find the show. Reference guides by CCI for people new to the idea are here. You can also read my writings on cities (here and here). TranscriptTL: Welcome to Ideas Untrapped. Joining me is Mark Lutter. Mark Lutter is an economist and he is the founder and executive director of [the] Charter Cities Institute. You're welcome, Mark. ML: Thanks for having me on. TL: Yeah briefly, please. What are Charter Cities and what do they bring to economic development? ML: Sure, so Charter Cities are new cities with a special jurisdiction that allows them to have a more competitive business environment. And we believe they are important because, over the long run, they're a key determinant of economic performance, economic outcomes and […] governance. If you have good governance, a country will do relatively well and if you have poor governance, a country will do relatively poorly. The challenge can be that it's difficult to reform governance on a national level. There's a lot of special interests groups. There's a lot of politics that goes on that sometimes make the reforms quite difficult to implement. And, Charter Cities, because they're new cities, they can be built on Greenfield sites where there are fewer special interests and because they have a special jurisdiction, it can be politically feasible to implement deeper reforms than might be possible at the national level.So these deeper reforms are to improve the business environment combined with a new city allow for more economic development to occur than otherwise might take place. So if we look at the last 40, fifty, 60 years, we've seen cities like Shenzhen, Singapore, Hong Kong and Dubai emerge from practically nothing to become global metropolises. And we believe that success is replicable. Particularly because there are a little under 80 million new urban residents annually, so urbanization is growing extremely rapidly across Africa and across Asia, and we believe it's quite important to make sure that we get things right now because it's much harder to change governance, It's much harder to change infrastructure once a city is already built. And so we believe that if we can help set up this sort of right institutions now, the right set up now, the right layout of new cities now, it can basically save a lot of headaches over the next fifty [to] hundred years, and help lift tens of millions of people out of poverty and make things better for economic development. TL: Yeah, so, obviously, I'm not new to this idea and we've talked a couple of times about it. Thinking about Charter Cities, it's a big project. So what do you think are the effective financing structures that make them feasible knowing the fiscal challenges that some poor countries face?ML: Sure, so the way we think about Charter Cities is as Public-Private Partnerships with the host country. So we're not asking the host country to build the city, we're asking the host country to help create a governance framework that can make the Charter City more competitive. And we think that this is especially important now in the post-COVID world where a lot of countries, particularly in emerging markets might be resource dependent on oil and like Nigeria. Or copper, like Zambia. And prices have rebounded somewhat over the last few months, but given that they're much lower than they were a year ago, I think there is a reasonable expectation that demand will continue to be relatively low, at least, until a vaccine is discovered. And so that means these countries have big holes in their budget and will need new financing mechanisms and we view Charter Cities as potentially one of those financing mechanisms. Charter Cities, because they're new cities, they can be built on Greenfield sites where there are fewer special interests and because they have a special jurisdiction, it can be politically feasible to implement deeper reforms than might be possible at the national level - ML The Charter City would have a revenue-sharing agreement with the central government. It will be able to attract a lot of foreign investment, create a lot of economic activities, create a lot of jobs and then some of that wealth that is being created would be transferred to the central government that might be able to help plug the hole that is currently being left by low commodity prices. Additionally, we just think if you build a successful city, it will generate a tremendous amount of wealth. We're still in the early Charter Cities phases and the specifics for financing Charter Cities haven't all been sort of worked out, but the general hypothesis is 'look, if you create a successful, functioning city, then there will be a lot of wealth that is created and you just need to capture some of that wealth that can pay for the initial infrastructure investment that can pay for the costs associated with setting up and building a city. So, that's at least the eye level overview of how we think about financing Charter Cities.TL: The question of financing is important here because some would argue, and I think, Chris Blattman has actually made this argument that given the risks involved that these investments may not pay off, it's actually an objection to not doing it. How do you react to that? What are the big payoffs for charter cities as opposed to other development interventions like cash transfers and other forms of aid?ML: Sure, so, it's definitely possible that for one or more charter cities the investments will not pay off. That's the nature of an investment, they're not necessarily secure and so there is always risks associated with investments. The risks associated with charter cities might be higher depending on where the charter city is being built, depending on what the local politics are, depending on the sort of skill of the developer. But I think, I would, I guess, sort of, differentiate as to what we're talking about in terms of investment. So if we're talking about cash transfers. Cash transfers are not an investment per se. Cash transfers are a transfer of wealth. They are basically a donation. It is comparable to charity. And most of the evidence on cash transfers is relatively good. You give people more money, they're able to spend the money to get better things. Recent studies have suggested that this does have relatively long-lasting impact on improving people's lives, so I support cash transfers. Charter Cities, at least, the way we at the Charter Cities Institute conceive of them are led by private developers who are building the physical infrastructure themselves. So this is an investment, not a donation. The expectation is if you raise 700 million dollars to build a power plant, to build roads, to build water, electricity, etc, then you expect a return on that capital investment that can justify the risks associated with that particular project. So this is a commercial venture, not a development venture per se. And we believe that Charter Cities can pass this sort of commercial venture test where, okay, if people who are humanitarians want to get involved, that is great, but as a mechanism for social change, I think the profit motive tends to be important and can allow for more social change in a shorter period of time than asking everybody to change their behaviour out of the goodness of their heart. That being said, there is space for, I think, donations in the Charter Cities space. The Charter Cities Institute, for example, is a 501C3. We rely on donations. We are trying to kind of incubate this Charter Cities space, trying to bootstrap it, creating a network of different city developers, developing a set of best practices, things like that. But we have done at least internal calculations that we have published on the research portion of our website, where we look at GiveWell which is a well-known charity evaluator. And we look at GiveWell and the cost-effectiveness of various charities that they evaluate and based on some assumptions that we make about our own effectiveness and these assumptions, I believe, are quite conservative. We are comparable to the most cost-effective charities in the world; if not more effective than them. TL: Charter Cities, at least, as an idea, in its current framing, is not new. Paul Romer kind of reintroduced the idea a while back. And with implementation - Honduras, Madagascar - they've run into some problems. What are you doing differently at CCI, and how does your model differ from that proposition? ML: Sure, and that's a good question. So Paul Romer obviously pioneered this space but didn't have as much success as I think he would have liked. And what we've tried to do is learn from his impact and see how we could try to have a bit more success this time around. So first let me talk about differences with Paul Romer's model and our model for charter cities. The similarities are: both of the models involve cities with a special jurisdiction that allow them to have a different institutional framework than the rest of the country, an institutional framework that is more conducive to economic development, and to growth. Those are the similarities. I think the differences are that Paul Romer advocated a high-income country, for example, Canada administers a Charter City in a low-income country for example, Honduras. So Canada would help create the administrative structure, they would be responsible for it, and that is the mechanism by which part of Honduras could have good governance. We have not pursued that model for, I think, two reasons. One, we're not sure it's feasible. There is a lot of blowbacks associated with charter cities, we're sometimes accused of being neocolonialists, and I think having a high-income country act as a guarantor in a low-income country brings up some of those unpleasant historical memories that might make getting political buy-in a little bit more difficult. The second reason we're not pursuing that model is we're not sure it's the best model, even if you, sort of, assume away the political challenges of it. So looking at, for example, the response of many countries in the West to COVID, the US has had a relatively poor response to COVID. Our institutional capacity as somewhat decayed, we aren't as vibrant, as effective as we were 50, 60 years ago, there's a general lethargy in our own institutions, and I think that that lethargy would likely translate to helping to build new institutions in emerging markets. And so there is a question of 'is the high-income country the best institutional entity to help administer a charter city?' And we believe it is not. So what we do is we partner with new city developers. There are by Journalist Wade Shepherd...he estimates there are over 200 mass or fenced cities being built around the world right now. So we try to partner with these new city developers, typically private entities, sometimes they're public but we prefer our partner with the private ones because they tend to be a little bit more effective to figure out okay, they're building a new city which might have a hundred thousand residents, which might have a million residents, so we partner with them to try to improve their governance system. And this might mean working with the government to improve the special economic zone framework. If there is a relatively advanced special economic zone framework in place, we might work with the city developer to figure out okay, what does it actually mean to create this new administrative structure from scratch. So that's the difference in approach.I guess before I go into why I think we'll be effective, I think, a few other points. One, Paul Romer was quite effective at generating attention and, sort of, starting the conversation and working with governments, at least, up to a point. We're taking a bit more of what might be described as, sort of, a systematic approach. We're somewhat worried about the ecosystem of charter cities being too dependent on a single person or on a single country. So we try to diversify risk by partnering with a lot of different organizations, by working in a lot of different countries, by really helping to spread the idea of charter cities as far as possible such that if one project goes under a hard time or fails, there are other projects that we can shift our attention to make sure the momentum for charter cities is not lost. As to, I think why we think that we will be successful where he was unsuccessful, I think we've learned a lot from him; and in addition, I think the last 10 years, there's been a bit of an increased interest in charter cities. And then second, we're just seeing it on the ground. We have engaged two projects where we are helping them create these legal structures, these administrative entities from scratch to governing these cities. The projects have a degree of political buy-in. We are regularly reached out to by new city developers who are interested in improving governance in those cities. We're basically at the beginning of a charter city's moment, and I think over the next year, the next two years, it will become clear to everybody who isn't paying attention now that the charter city's moment is here, that these projects are real, people are building them, people are moving dirt, people are moving in, money is being raised, etc. that it is no longer just [an] academic discussion, but it is a matter of sort of on the ground, things happening and executing.TL: I mean, hearing you speak, I thought of a question, which is - to a layperson, like, what exactly are the channels of improvement to income and livelihoods in building a new city, for example?ML: Sure, so, If we look at a city like Shenzhen, 40 years ago in 1980, Shenzhen was a number of small fishing villages, the total population in the area was about a 100,000 residents. The average income was about $500 a year. It was a very impoverished area and currently, Shenzhen is the manufacturing capital of the world. It has a total population of around 20 million people, they have a subway system that rivals New York. It is a sort of, shiny, gleaming metropolis that really transformed in just 40 years. So while China had several sort of specific conditions that mean that the success of Shenzhen is unlikely to replicate at that magnitude. For example, China had first basically prevented urbanisation from occurring, so there was a pent up demand for urbanisation. As well as China had very stringent regulations and laws which had precluded a lot of economic development. And while Africa, for example, many countries have bad regulations, I'm not sure they were as bad as China in the 1980s. But that being said, we believe that a degree of that success is still possible even if you get half of Shenzhen, that's a city of ten million people, that sees your income rise by like 10, 20X over a 40 year period. That is a huge change. If you look in a lot of sub-Saharan Africa, for example, what's occurring now is called urbanization without industrialization. And this means that people are moving to cities. And typically when people move to cities, they become more productive, they are able to make more money, they live better lives, they leave their kids better off, and it's this virtual circle. And now, unfortunately, in some parts of sub-Saharan Africa this is not occurring. People are moving into cities but their productivity is not increasing, they're not making more money, and their kids are going to stuck at the same sort of level in income and quality of life that they are today. And what we believe charter cities can help do is to, I guess, help change that to help create these opportunities for these people that are currently being left behind by the global economy and to create this positive dynamic, this positive feedback cycle that leads to people's incomes being increased by 5 percent per year, 10 percent per year. Which because of the power of compounding interest, if your income is increasing at 5 percent per year, that means, every 14 years, your income doubles. So 28 years later, your income will be four times what it was originally. Forty-two years later, which is about the total working life of an adult (about 42 years), your income will be 8 times what it was when you started. You've seen an 8 fold increase in income, [which] is just tremendous. So if we can help create that dynamic, if we can help generate this type of growth, I think that will lead toad to a big improvement in a lot of people's lives.TL: It's interesting you talked about Shenzhen before we move into the specifics of that. Shenzhen is usually described as a special economic zone. Is that different from Charter Cities, or is essentially the same thing? ML: Sure. So, Special Economic Zones. We consider Charter Cities to be a subset of Special Economic Zones. The special economic zone is just an area that says that the laws of the host country don't apply to this area, or like some subset of the laws. But typically, special economic zones tend to be relatively narrow in their focus. They might only encompass an industrial park, they might only be a few dozen or a few hundred acres. They have a relatively set degree of difference from the host country in terms of laws, so it might have lower taxes or it might have a one-stop-shop but they don't really have this deep regulatory reforms. They tend to focus on a single industry, so maybe textile, manufacturing or maybe electronics, they aren't broad-based. Very rarely do special economic zones have residential. And lastly, they tend to be too small to generate sustained economic growth. If you have an industrial park that might be successful, that might create a lot of jobs but that's not really going to create this dynamic positive feedback cycle like a city can. Shenzhen whilst frequently described as a special economic zone, at least, according to our definition, it is more like a charter city. The jurisdiction is 320 square kilometres, so that's the size of a city. It is multi-use. They have residential, they have commercial, they have industrial. They have the sort of full dynamics that you expect to see in a city with a lot of different economic parts moving. There was a lot of authority devolved from the central government to the city government. So while many special economic zones might only have like a tax incentive, basically in Shenzhen, with the exception of military and like Mail distribution, you can almost experiment with whatever you want you on the Shenzhen city level. And that allowed for a lot more autonomy than most special economic zones allow. So while Shenzhen is sort of colloquially referred to as a special economic zone, it fits our definition and our understanding of what a charter city is a little bit more closely than most special economic zones around the world which are quite different from Shenzhen and as such haven't had the same impact that Shenzhen has had.TL: Two-part Shenzhen question here. I agree with you, Shenzhen fits better with what you are describing. I mean, there was an industrial zone in Shekou, and of course, there was the whole area that was developed for all kinds of things, tourism and the rest. Now, the first question is that there was a lot of planning and execution in making Shenzhen work. How does the administrative capacity of the host country, how does it affect the execution of a Charter City?ML: Sure, and I think this is an important point. One of the increasing discussions in economics and international development has been focusing on state capacity in which the administrative capacity of a country or a government can be thought of as - are they able to execute on tasks in a timely and effective manner? So a country with this higher state capacity would be able to build a road cheaper and more quickly than a country with a lower state capacity. And in Shenzhen it was the local government that administered the city. China has had 3000 years [of] history of statehood. So they have a lot of experience in capacity with administrating cities and they just had to adapt it the circumstances at hand. And I think one of the challenges in some emerging markets is that there isn't that long history of statehood. There isn't that long history of administrative capacity, and so the current governments are not being very effective in administering the entire country. So if they start to administer a charter city, you would see a similar type of dysfunction. To solve this problem, we are advocating a special jurisdiction with a separate administration from the host country. And so the city would remain part of the host country, it would be governed by a separate bureaucratic apparatus, it would have different standards for hiring, different standards for firing, different standards for promotion, etc, which would allow it to develop a more effective administration than the host country. And so, to this end, we're engaged in [a] sort of early-stage discussion about helping to establish this administrative apparatuses and we're beginning to think about what it means to develop a pipeline of administrators for a Charter City that would help [to] work with educational establishment to create certificates, to create courses that might help teach you how to administer a charter city. 'Cause this is sort of a monumental challenge, there are so many moving parts and you don't really want to hire people from the host country because then they bring the bad culture of the host country government, they bring the sort of, I don't know… the sclerosis that often exists in host countries' bureaucracies that leads to the need for charter cities. But you don't want to transplant that bureaucratic dysfunction to the charter city, so you would have to basically create a new administrative system and a new education system to train those administrators. TL: Yeah, so with the special jurisdiction, what guarantees continuity? I'm imagining that the government of the host country would still have some form of authority over that jurisdiction however limited. And what guarantees that another administration does not come in and say, 'Oh, yeah, well, for political reasons or whatever, we're going to withdraw our support for this.' Or is there a specific framework that you've outlined which guarantees long-term autonomy?ML: Sure. I'm glad you asked that question, that is one of the challenges for charter cities. How do you ensure that there is administrative continuity in the charter city and the host country hasn't changed their mind and limit some of the authority that they had previously granted to the charter city? We are seeing that, for example, right now in Hong Kong, where the Chinese government is passing a national security law that many on Hong Kongers believe changed the sort of terms of the agreement in 1997 when Hong Kong was transferred from the British to the Beijing government. There is no silver bullet for preventing, right? You can't do a magic trick and say 'alright, there is no risk of expropriation of the charter city' but there are a number of strategies that can be developed to mitigate that risk, and in fact, we published an outline of these strategies on our website called the Risk Mitigation Guide. It is in the reference guides. And it should give an understanding of strategies that can be taken to mitigate that risk. So basically, they're business project, they need to be profitable while obviously they're political projects as well. They need to get buy-in from the host country and so there are several ways to do that. First, you need to make sure that the development of the charter city itself has an extensive stakeholder management engagement in the planning processes. So you need to work closely with the host country at the central government, you probably want to work closely with the local government, whether it's state or provincial to make sure that you acquire the land justly, to make sure there is buy-in. You could, for example, offer the state or the national government an equity stake in the charter city to align interests of the government with the charter city itself. Second, you probably want to involve business and community leaders in the charter city. Successful institutional change requires the allegiance of the ruling elite, so making sure that there is an incentive for those people who are particularly influential in the country to align with the success of the charter city is important. Third, you probably want to attract industries that create a lot of jobs. It is politically difficult to change something if a lot of jobs are being created, if a lot of investment is being had, things like this. So, make it more difficult for the politicians to take action against the charter city by creating a lot of jobs, by making it successful, etc. Third, most countries in the world are signatories to a variety of international treaties. So if you sign a contract with the host country and they expropriate you, depending on how you draft that language, you might be able to go and sue them in the international court, and if you win to confiscate their overseas assets. This is basically a last-ditch solution. If you get to this stage you've already lost. But it might help sort of as a bit of a deterrent against host country trying to confiscate your assets by demonstrating that there is some recourse to that action of expropriation. Another strategy is to list the city on the Stock Exchange. So after 10 or 15 years after the city is successful, maybe you put a listing on the local Stock Exchange for a certain percentage of the value of the developer who has built out the city. What does this mean? Well, this oftentimes, the pension funds and other sorts of financial managers will buy that stock and so pension funds and these financial managers tend to be relatively politically powerful and therefore if their future income streams are depending on the success of the charter city, then the host country might be less likely to take actions against the charter city. And Lastly, I think just to really emphasize the first point - it's very important to make sure charter cities are integrated with the local government, with the community - that the benefits of charter cities are being widespread. The best way, I think, to ensure that there's a minimum of risk of expropriation is just to make sure that it becomes very apparent that the charter city is being successful, it's creating jobs, that everybody is being engaged and participating in the upside of a charter city. TL: The second part question is that… I mean, I'm glad you talked about local governance. In building a charter city, I imagine there are allocative decisions that the government would have to make. I compare Shenzhen to maybe some other initiative like Gurgaon in India and one thing the Chinese government had with Shenzhen is that it still maintained control over the allocation of land. And, at least in my opinion, that allowed some kind of diverse development in terms of the industrial and residential developments that took place, and also in the building of public goods, in the provision of public goods generally. But what you see, at least, I wouldn't call them charter cities, with projects like Eko Atlantic City and others of such is that, yes, they are planned but, maybe for financial reasons, the allocative decisions are made solely for real estate developments. Maybe that helps in recouping some of the investment. So, I guess what I'm asking is, where should the allocative decisions lie to create the proper incentive for a truly income enhancing city to develop?ML: Sure, yeah, and I think that is an important question and looking at Shenzhen versus Gurgaon in India. Gurgaon is quite interesting, for the listeners who don't know, basically because of this sort of historical quirk, there was no government which allowed for no zoning and land use regulations and so a lot of tech companies and sort of large companies went and built offices there, advanced infrastructure there, so it has a lot of office buildings, things like that but because there is no governing structure, the public infrastructure tends to be quite poor. So if I remember correctly, there are basically no sewers, most of the buildings have to run on generators. It allows this freedom to build but it combines that with this lack of government. While Shenzhen, the government has been relatively effective in providing public goods, at creating an open space that allows for its success. And I think if we look at all the planned cities around the world being built today, Eko Atlantic being one example, I think you capture it well in saying that they are real estate, they're not really cities. So, real estate you tend to define everything very carefully, it's 'we build a thousand houses and we sell them each for this much money and this is what the margins are' etc, while a city is evolutionary, it's dynamic. The sort of level of planning of the city government tends to be much smaller. It's not saying we're going to build an apartment building here and we're going to build a commercial district here. It's trying to create the enabling conditions for growth and for success. And what we're trying to do is trying to kind of change the conversation with some of these new city developers to focus on more of an inclusive model where it's aimed at a broader set of residents. Where right now a lot of the new cities are aimed at sort of upper middle income or above, but how can you push the price point down? So one of the projects that we're working on is a document that is tentatively called a draft master plan. What this will do is it will be a master plan for a charter city. We're thinking about having it on 30,000 acres with 1 million residents, but we're explicitly targeting an income level of $1500 annually, which is a little under, I think, the per capita income of Nigeria. It's comparable to the per capita income of Zambia, of Kenya. We're explicitly trying to develop a model where it's accessible to this broad income segment, but we're not saying these are the types of houses that people would already build, we're just kind of thinking about okay, where is the infrastructure going to be? How do we attract an anchor tenant? How do we attract residents? How do we make it dynamic such that people's incomes increase over time? It's possible to build a sort of exclusive gated community where high-income people go and live and work and they end up being quite comfortable there, and I encourage people to do that. That's just not the model that we are particularly interested in. And I think it might be a good business venture but it has limited implications for [the] broader society and what we're interested in is how we can help effect social change to generate economic development and to lift people out of poverty, and I think to do that, it's important to help make sure charter cities are inclusive, allow for all segments of society experience the benefits of living in a fast-growing and dynamic city. TL: A bit of a curveball, so to speak, here. There's a lot of planning involved in charter cities. Do you think that that's a challenge to a free-market model of development?If you look in a lot of sub-Saharan Africa, for example, what's occurring now is called urbanization without industrialization. - MLML: In a way, I mean, I'm sure some market-oriented economist might not like what we are doing. I remember when I was doing my PhD at George Mason I was chatting about this with some people, they were like: well, how do you plan? But if we remember the Keynes versus Hayek rap video, the question is 'who plans for who?' So there always need to be some level of planning, right? We do it on an individual level. We do it on a corporate level, even government does it on some level. If you're just planning for, how many police, how many courts? What should the military do? Things like that. And so we might be taking a slightly more active role in planning than some free markets economists might advocate for in terms of thinking about what the anchor tenant should be, how to attract them, how to create these sort of supply linkages. In the draft master plan that we're developing, we are thinking about basically how to create a type of industrial policy because what we want is, okay, when it starts, maybe you focus on textile manufacturing or some relatively low skilled type of employment, but how do we make sure there is skill transfer over time such that the city can move its way up the value chain, can create more jobs and can have this positive dynamic to help lift people out of poverty rather than just being stuck at textile manufacturing now and then 30 years from now? TL: That's interesting. I spoke with Garett Jones, and one of the things he proposed that developing countries [should] try to do is to become an attractive destination for high skilled labour, you know, a labour quality argument of sorts. Do you think charter cities can be a channel for such attraction of high quality, high skilled labour to developing countries which obviously has benefits?ML: Yeah, I think it can. A charter city if developed correctly will probably be more safe than the host country because the place will be more effective. The charter city will be more dynamic. There will be more opportunities and so if there is a high skilled worker who are in their early career and want to do it abroad. Or maybe their ancestors are from a country and want to sort of return and kind of give back or maybe they are first-generation immigrant and want to give back, then I think a charter city would be a probably more attractive place to live than the rest of the host country because it would be more dynamic. There will be more opportunities. It would be a more exciting place to live. That being said, I think I disagree slightly with Garett Jones on the premise...you definitely want the higher-skilled workers for the knowledge transfer. It depends on exactly what he means by this, but Dubai, for example, was able to attract a lot of high skilled workers primarily from Europe, while Shenzhen developed without that many highly skilled workers. They had a lot of investment from Hong Kong. And they had a lot of managerial talent that could come from Hong Kong. So I think it's quite important to, I guess, create these linkages with different areas, different cities that can help the skills transfer process, and then you probably also want to help high skilled workers come in to fill senior administrative positions. But I think to make sure charter cities are scalable, the vast majority of the new urban residents over the next 30 years are not going to be highly skilled. They're going to be relatively impoverished coming from rural areas. We're not going to have sort of the skills that we typically associate with the modern economy, and I think what is important is to realize that and to create systems and processes to allow them to improve their skills, to allow them to get better, to allow them to, sort of, transform the city into somewhere that they would be proud to call home. TL: I'm curious. What exactly made you, Mark Lutter, interested in this problem? Why did you choose to work on this other than teaching at GMU or writing papers and other things you could have done as an academic?ML: Sure. Well, I'm not sure I could have done that much as an academic. I'm a pretty mediocre academic, I like getting my hands dirty a little bit more. LaughsWhat initially got me interested? I heard a talk where the speaker mentioned Michael [indistinct] and who tried to start a Freeport in Somaliland. And in fact, there is now a Freeport being built in Somaliland by Dubai Ports World in Berbera. And basically, what got me interested was I saw it as an Idea that has massive potential that not that many people were paying attention to and talking about and it got me really excited and so I stayed interested in it and sort of realized that I could have a meaningful contribution to making this, I think, really exciting idea take place. And that's why I've stayed interested in it. I like things that can have a big impact and to me, charter cities are one of the things that might be able to have the biggest impact in the 21st century and so it's quite exciting to be involved. TL: So how important is geography in the development of charter cities? I know proximity to ports is very important to facilitate trade. So, but how does it really feature in your own model?ML: Sure, so geography is obviously quite important because - are you on a trading route? Is there an urbanising population that you can draw from? What are the industries that in the area that you can sort of help supplement? We typically think about locating a charter city has being independent on several factors. You probably want to be within about 2 hours of an urban centre so you can piggyback back off their infrastructure because building an airport or a port is very expensive, but if you are within two hours of them you can acquire a large enough chunk of land to build the city because one of the challenges of building a charter city is actually getting enough land to build the city itself. But if you're 2 hours away, you might be able to acquire enough land but you're still close enough that you can access their airport, that you can kind of access their labour market, that you'll allow for a bit more trade than would take place if you were in the middle of nowhere.Like, you want to be on emerging trade routes. So for example, there's a lot of activities going on in East Africa right now. A lot of people are building ports there. That might be an opportunity for a charter city there. Thinking about how new technology might change sort of migration patterns. Maybe the Hyperloop comes, or maybe supersonic jets come, how does that change human sort of spatial organization? And then can you identify opportunities to locate cities because of that? There might be [an] opportunity for a charter city, for example, in Canada or maybe in Central Asia because Siberia and Northern Canada, with global warming, are going to open up and allow for more agriculture, for more natural resource extraction, things like that. So there will be a demand for people to live there and a new city might allow for it to become sort of a gateway to those respective regions. So basically looking at how human sort of trade and human migration patterns are occurring and then trying to identify those long-term trends and then build in a place that can take advantage of those trends to become a regional hub and provide services to the broader area.TL: The reason I asked that question is this. Someone like Paul Romer I think in his paper with Brandon Fuller would say - you need to build X amount of cities to take the addition we're going to see to the number urban dwellers by the middle of the century. I think their own calculation added about 3 billion additional people living in cities. But someone like Alain Bertaud will say you may not really have that much quality location to do what you want to do, at least, to have the kind of effect that you have in mind. So does geography, giving that land is fixed...does geography limit the potential of [a] charter city in a way? ML: Yeah it could, but this is a question that I think is dependent on data. Alain says that most of the good ports have already been taken. He's probably true (right) about that too a certain extent, because humans being, sort of, social, commerce-oriented mammals will tend to live in areas that are advantageous for that. So a lot of the natural ports already, probably have some degree of human settlement there. And so many of the good locations for cities have probably or even taken, have all of them been taken? Probably not. History is weird and people make decisions based on, sort of, contextual circumstances that might have left some potential city locations just untouched because of this weird set of historical events. So this is something that I'm certainly interested in exploring more. It's a project that I would like to undertake. It's basically hire some people, and identify 50 potential locations for charter cities. Just like lookout where trade is happening, where urbanization is happening, where it is possible to acquire large chunks of land and identify basically 50 of these potential charter city locations to see, okay is the land available? Is it good? How easy is it to acquire? To answer questions like that, if any of your listeners are interested in helping out, with some donations, we can actually start getting this sort of concrete answer to that question.TL: For the audience, I’m going to put up links to the reference guides from the Charter Cities Institute on the website and every other available resource. You wrote an article recently about America's foreign policy and how charter city can play a role in its geopolitical competition with China, specifically the belt and road initiative. Do you care to expatiate on that point?ML: Sure, so I think if we look at, um... the US in some way still has a positive image even with the recent sort of killing/murder of George Floyd. We saw a global outcry of that because I think people rightly hold America to a higher standard versus the outcry that we saw of the sort of Uighur, basically, a genocide in China where people have kind of ignored that because I guess they expected [the] Chinese to do it to a certain extent. But American engagement with the rest of the world has, I think, left a little something to be desired over the last 40 years. Iraq was a disaster, Afghanistan is a disaster, Libya is a disaster, so I think there's a need for rethinking American engagement. Combined with the fact that China is pretty aggressively now pursuing their image on the global stage in terms of building infrastructure with belt and road, in terms of wooing foreign politicians, foreign leaders, to get them to be China's friend. So my article was aimed at… particularly people in the, for example, the Development Finance Corporation in The United States to hopefully get them to see charter cities as a potential way to offer a positive influence on the world. And while specifically, I think what American engagement could look like is having Americans who can help with governance, having Americans who can provide financing options if you use American contractors to help build the city, to help develop governance norms, to basically provide the supporting infrastructure for charter cities which I think are important because right now when developing countries are looking around the world, they think 'okay, what policies do we adopt? Who do we want to be like?' All of them are thinking like let's be like China. China has had tremendous economic growth over the last 40 years. They've lifted tens of millions of people out of poverty which is a great thing. Unfortunately, at the same time that's been coupled with a sort of lack of respect of human rights, with no democracy, with no freedom of speech, these things that are inimical to human flourishing, and they think because America has developed so long ago, the possibility of following a similar pattern to America's development is just outside of people's minds. And so I think what charter cities can hopefully help demonstrate is this sort of we call them American values, but I think they are universal values of things like freedom of toleration of markets really can work for everybody and can provide an alternative development model to the one that China is currently claiming. TL: Sticking with the US, I know you write about it, others write about it, are the institutional (I want to say rot. I don't know maybe that's the right word), you know, are they as bad as some analysts say it is, especially in the light of COVID-19?ML: Yeah, I think it rot is probably an appropriate word. We basically have coasted the last kind of 40 years off of existing institutions. We haven't really been challenged. We haven't updated any of our systems. Everybody is complacent. If you think about it, part of the reason is that nobody has actually helped build an institution in the US. Rather, the most dynamic part of the economy is Silicon Valley because there are people there who are building new things. So people are required, to a certain extent, to have this like very broad set of managerial competencies that you don't need to have if you grow up... and I'm not just saying in government, in government you just develop these very specific set of skills, but also in a lot of large private corporations. How many new national banks have been invested in the last 30, 40 years? And so because of that, you grow up learning a very specific set of competencies which is OK in terms of like keeping the system going, but it means that anytime you're presented with an external shock, you just don't know how to react. And COVID was that shock, which I think exposed a lot of the existing inadequacies in the American system that people were unsure of, like unable to think outside the box. Our bureaucrats were quite skilled at figuring out how to pass the buck, how to not take responsibility for things. But they had no idea how to actually take responsibility and then how to actually enact change that will be beneficial. And we're seeing that continue today, you still can't buy N95 masks on Amazon, it's 3 months after the fact. This is a very solvable problem but our institutions are fundamentally broken and I think you can add that to the growing culture war where you have red states where a lot of people are refusing to wear masks because it's not a pandemic, it's a dempanic, this is a fake disease, really idiotic stuff like that. And then in blue states, you're seeing some of the elite institutions basically begin to eat themselves. The New York Times has basically been taken over by Social Justice Warriors staffers who sort of opposed an op-ed by Tom Cotton, the senator from, I think, Arkansas. And I didn't like that op-ed, it was a bad op-ed but he's a senator for goodness sakes. I mean, if you are the paper of record you should allow senators to publish sometimes even if you don't like their arguments. And so we're seeing this, sort of, I think deeply dysfunctional institutions combined with this deeply dysfunctional culture that will probably take decades or generation to really sort themselves out. There isn't a lot of sort of, I don't know, capacity left at the seams. Even the late 60s, '68 when we saw a similar social unrest, there was something solid. There was a core underneath and I think that core it's quite atrophied. I'm a little bit nervous about the future of the US. TL: And I mean it's interesting to me that you talked about Silicon Valley because, at least, from an outsider's perspective here, it amazes me how little political influence Silicon Valley has. LaughsAnd I have one analogy and I think I tweeted this though I got a lot of pushback here and there that I don't think, and I may be wrong about this... I don't think that the Koch Brothers, for example, would have struggled to build more housing in Silicon Valley. And we have people that are vastly richer than the Koch brothers in the Valley. I mean, what is going on? Why do they have so little political influence? They get railroaded even by the local government. ML: Yeah, I mean, I think that's a good question. One of my friends likes to joke that Silicon Valley thinks they're above politics, but in fact, they are below it. You've seen, I think, Apple pledged 2.5 billion dollars to affordable housing in the Bay Area. Microsoft, I think a billion to affordable housing in San Francisco, Mark Zuckerberg, I think, 500 million to affordable housing in the Bay Area. And like the problem is just that, okay, if you're spending half a billion dollars to put it crassly. Like just buy off the entire City Council and just tell them to legalise housing. And I think it's a sort of combination of historical circumstances. One is that because most of Silicon Valley is in the world of bits and not in atoms, they just haven't interacted with the government that much. So because of that, there was no need to really figure out how to work with government, it was like you ignore us, we ignore you. To use this sort of Chinese proverb - the emperor is far away, I'm on the other side of the country, and so they didn't really interact with the government that much, and because of that just saw it as kind of part of the ecosystem, not something that to pay attention to. I believe that is changing now.I think Mark Zuckerberg's congressional hearing like a year ago was a wake-up call where the congressmen were asking Mark Zuckerberg, how do you turn on the iPhone? And it's like, OK, well, when you have the political leaders who are that disconnected with what is actually going on, there is a serious challenge. That being said, it will take a number of years for Silicon Valley to actually figure or politics out. There is, I think, several challenges involved in that. One, I think Silicon Valley has a bias towards nonprofits, they figure if something is a good idea, you should be able to make money off it. But nonprofits are a kind of integral parts of influencing government. Second is Silicon Valley likes things that scale. Government necessarily doesn't really scale. At least it doesn't scale in the same manner that a technology startup does and so because of that you have to put all of these resources in, to help mobilize people, to help create a network, to help influence things and you're unable to tell whether it's actually working for a long period of time. So the technology startup, right, okay, you work for a year, you get product-market fit. After product-market fit, you grow at 10 per cent month over month for a period of like three years or something. So if you're growing 10 per cent month over month, you can see it's working, you can see something is happening. While with politics, you might pay activists on the ground, you might pay lobbyists, but it might take years before you actually see legislation that's even proposed, much less implemented. And most of Silicon Valley just doesn't really operate on those...they're not used to those time horizons and so they're unwilling to sort of put the resources necessary to actually engage them. Now I think a third reason is that Silicon Valley is very, I don't know...it has a very universal mindset. So New York, if you look at New York, all the high net worth people in New York, When they donate to charity, they typically donate to New York charities. So they donate to the Met, they donate to Central Park. They get status by paying for things in New York City, so you have all of these goods supported by basically the billionaire class in New York. In San Francisco, people get status by doing universal things. So the effect of altruist movement, for example, is quite popular in San Francisco. But these universal things, while I think they have a great impact on humanity because you don't get status by helping to improve housing in the city, there just isn't as much focus on the city itself, it's a little bit neglected and so there hasn't been this (the) same mobilization of Silicon Valley elite to coordinate to help fix the city as with New York where the elite do spend a lot more money on improving the city's quality of life. TL: That's interesting. I hope they wake up and they get it right.ML: Me too.TL: Final question, Mark. Ten years from now, if you're looking back at all these things you're working on, particularly charter cities, what do you hope to have achieved? ML: Yeah, in ten years I figure we probably [indistinct words] three dozens or so charter cities that are either up and running or are like in advanced planning stages. In ten years, probably a few million people living in charter cities and with the potential population to reach 10s of millions. I want charter cities to be sort of understood and discussed at every world forum, like the World Economic Forum. All these, like, sort of highfalutin events. I want them to be part of the language, like right now, for example, if we think about International Development there are some themes that come up all the time. I think gender equality and global warming kind of pervade every discussion, as well as randomized control trials, they all pervade every discussion about development, I want to charter cities to help pervade those discussions and not just pervade those discussions but actually be improving people's lives on the ground. TL. Yeah. That's a goal I can get behind. Thank you very much, Mark, and I wish you all the best. ML: Thank you for having me. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe

Tocqueville said, “We need to work at making democracy work.” That is the springboard from which this episode begins. Kurtis Lockhart fills in for Mark Lutter as today's host, and our guest is Professor Nic Cheeseman. Nic is a political scientist at the University of Birmingham, and was formerly the head of the African Studies Center at Oxford University. His research focuses on a range of topics, from democracy and elections, to development and institutional change, all of which we will discuss in this episode. Nic is the author or editor of ten books on African Politics, including Democracy in Africa: Successes, Failures, and the Struggle for Political Reform and How to Rig an Election. Nic shares with us some of the projects he is working on, and we discuss anti-corruption messaging, foreign aid, China in Africa, and redrawing African countries' borders, as well as invisible election rigging, “sweet spot” strategies, and counterfeit democrats. Tune in today! Key Points From This Episode: •   Nic shares the projects that he is working on, including one on elections and COVID. •   Anti-corruption messaging, corruption fatigue, and the need to change incentive structures. •   The value of redesigning messages rather than reinforcing the scale of the problem. •   Nic's concerns about the Department for International Development being merged into the foreign office body. •   The only thing Nic thinks will counter the significance of China in Africa is bigger investment. •   Nic's thoughts on foreign aid serving geopolitical concerns or power competitions. •   What Nic thinks the international development community should prioritize – do less, better. •   How Tocqueville's writings on democracy have helped shape some of Nic's thinking. •   Why Nic believes that Jeffrey Herbst's suggestion to redraw borders in Africa is unfeasible. •   What Nic is interested in about cities, and his views on urbanization, and urban or rural bias. •   What has made Lagos such a successful city and how other African cities can follow suit. •   Why invisible election rigging is one of the biggest challenges to contemporary democracy. •   Sweet spot strategies include gerrymandering, the exclusion of a rival candidate, and so-called subtle violence or intimidation. •   Nic is worried that other governments will learn subtle intimidation and use it to win elections. •   Going from high-level thinking about institutions to actual on-the-ground implementation when one constantly has to worry about “counterfeits.” •   Democracy in Africa's collaboration with The Continent, a free newspaper in partnership with The Mail & Guardian, South Africa. Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: https://twitter.com/Fromagehomme (Prof. Nic Cheeseman on Twitter) https://www.linkedin.com/in/nic-cheeseman-a57bb292/ (Prof. Nic Cheeseman on LinkedIn) https://profcheeseman.wordpress.com/ (Prof. Nic Cheeseman) https://twitter.com/AfricaDemocracy (Democracy in Africa on Twitter) http://democracyinafrica.org/ (Democracy in Africa) https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Africa-Successes-Political-Approaches/dp/0521138426/ (Democracy in Africa) https://www.amazon.com/How-Rig-Election-Nic-Cheeseman/dp/0300204434 (How to Rig an Election) https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Economy-Elections-Africa-Democracy/dp/110841723X (The Moral Economy of Elections in Africa) https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-international-development (Department for International Development) https://www.amazon.com/Religion-International-Development-Palgrave-Politics/dp/3030382222 (Regional and British International Development Policy)... Support this podcast

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Charter City Institute, joins Erik. They discuss:- The key factors that make countries successful or prosperous.- The different schools of thought on charter cities.- What the key factors to get right with a charter city are.- What Silicon Valley understands and misunderstands about charter cities.- Why there are few true entrepreneurs in the US anymore.- His thoughts on Balaji Srinivasan’s ideas about charter cities.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Charter City Institute, joins Erik. They discuss:- The key factors that make countries successful or prosperous.- The different schools of thought on charter cities.- What the key factors to get right with a charter city are.- What Silicon Valley understands and misunderstands about charter cities.- Why there are few true entrepreneurs in the US anymore.- His thoughts on Balaji Srinivasan’s ideas about charter cities.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.

Made popular by Nobel Laureate and economist Paul Romer, charter city is a new vision for building prosperous cities that can unlock economic potentials and solve common issues in urbanization and poverty for their citizens and countries they are part of. In this episode, Dr. Mark Lutter, Founder of the Charter Cities Institute, discusses what charter cities are, why they are unique compared to special economic zones (SZE), how they can promote progress and growth within a country by reducing regulatory barriers, and how successful examples like Shenzhen and Dubai embody both their advantages and drawbacks. Due to rapid increases of urban population, many governments in the developing world have shown to be ill-equipped to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the cities. Dr. Lutter has long called into question the conventional and popular idea that urbanization leads to increased productivity and economic growth, and he believes that charter cities could be a bold solution to poorly managed urbanization and global poverty. Our conversation goes over how charter cities can address the pent-up demand for urbanization in developing countries while creating opportunities for all the stakeholders involved, from locals to the governments of host countries. In doing so, we also analyze how new projects arise from private partnerships and how they can integrate with the goals of their host countries and communities. While charter cities can address the needs of developing countries, they are also worth exploring in mature economies. Allowing people to build new cities in the US or Europe can provide an alternative to existing cities while creating an incentive for regulatory arbitrage, which can trickle down to the rest of the country. The model of charter city offers a blank slate in commercial law, can be developed on greenfield sites (untouched land with no current residents), and can allow for deep governance reforms to be enacted with minimal interference or resistance because of the lack of existing interest groups. Charter cities may be the perfect place to experiment new governance structures proposed by “techno-utopians” from Silicon Valley to around the world. Dr. Lutter also addresses criticisms for charter cities, such as the possible need for strong central governments during the establishment of charter cities and their incentives to reap the benefits and interfere with organic growth. We also go over a famous charter city blunder in Honduras and the concerns that it would entrench the local elite while limiting freedom of locals. In this context, we also discuss how charter cities can be built so local can actually share the fruits of the progress enabled by the city, as well as how political ideologies intertwine with charter cities and their economic success. Dr. Mark Lutter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Charter Cities Institute, as well as the host of the Charter Cities Podcast. He is on the Board of Directors of Explorer Academy, a Zambian education platform. He is an advisor to and has a financial interest in the Victoria Harbor Group, a firm that is building a new Hong Kong. He has a PhD in economics from George Mason University where his research focused on charter cities. Prior to launching the Institute, he was Lead Economist for NeWAY Capital, an asset management firm which made early stage investments in charter cities. He has been published in several newspapers and magazines including the Chicago Tribune, City Journal, CityAM, and Cato Unbound. Currently, Dr. Mark Lutter is involved with several charter city projects. In this episode we discuss his recent work in Zambia, Nigeria, and with the Hong Kong-based Victoria Harbor Group. We also go over how the Charter Cities Institute was formed and what the next steps are for this nonprofit.

As the pandemic-driven recession tanks fiscal revenues, governments are seeing radical ideas such as charter cities with new eyes. Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute, argues for privately built and managed urban centers to attract investment and jobs. He believes charter cities have the potential to lift millions out of poverty in the developing world by fostering policy competition between jurisdictions. In this week’s segment with the Discovery Group, Jim Paterson, CEO of ValOre Metals (TSX-V: VO), outlines the 2020 exploration program for its platinum-group element project in Brazil.

As the pandemic-driven recession tanks fiscal revenues, governments are seeing radical ideas such as charter cities with new eyes. Mark Lutter, founder and executive director of the Charter Cities Institute, argues for privately built and managed urban centers to attract investment and jobs. He believes charter cities have the potential to lift millions out of poverty in the developing world by fostering policy competition between jurisdictions. In this week’s segment with the Discovery Group, Jim Patterson, CEO of ValOre Metals (TSX-V: VO), outlines the 2020 exploration program for its platinum-group element project in Brazil. Show notes: http://goldnewsletter.com/podcast/charter-cities-investment-development/

We are so happy to welcome you to the Charter Cities Podcast, where we highlight the different facets of building a charter city. Through this platform, we hope that listeners will not only gain a deep understanding of charter cities from urban planning to politics and finance but also the necessary steps that it takes to build them. In this episode, we do things a bit differently, with Mark Lutter, founder of Charter Cities Institute, and host of the podcast getting put in the hot seat. His CCI colleague, Tamara Winter, interviews him on a range of topics, both directly and not so directly, related to charter cities. We learn more about the mission of CCI and why Mark believes that charter cities are a good model for economic development. While Paul Romer, famed economist, unsuccessfully tried to get charter cities off the ground, Mark explains why he believes CCI's approach will ultimately be more successful. Mark also sheds light on how charter cities are complementary to but different from economic zones. While these delineated areas are often politically motivated, the vision behind the charter city is much broader than that. CCI hopes to contribute to aspects such as site selection, urban planning, and governance, and in doing so, take a holistic approach to building a new city. Mark also discusses what it takes to build governance capacity, some of the charter city constraints, and how partnerships helped him launch CCI. We learn more about Mark as well, from some of his favorite books, the African cuisine that's made the biggest impression on him, and how he has carried the lessons from his federal bureaucratic parents with him. We couldn't have hoped for a better first episode, and we hope you join us for the journey to come. Tune in today! Key Points From This Episode: •   The two ways that CCI's attempt at creating charter cities is different from Paul Romer's. •   Why Mark is skeptical about using services as a means of building charter cities. •   Find out how charter cities are similar to and different from special economic zones. •   How regulatory arbitrage can produce favorable outcomes and what CCI is doing about it. •   Charter cities need good urban planning and infrastructure in conjunction with good governance. •   Two of Mark's favorite books that he's read related to places he has been. •   How growing up with parents who worked in federal bureaucracy has shaped Mark. •   What industrial policy is and what charter cities should be cognizant of when pursuing it. •   Why, despite admiring China's Belt and Road Initiative, Mark is cautious about it. •   An overview of Honduras' charter legislation and what went wrong in execution. •   Find out what it would take to build a government from scratch and successful examples. •   Which historical leaders would have been good charter city founders? •   Learn more about the constraints that charter cities face and how they're likely to change. •   Why Mark would opt to build charter cities in Canada rather than the US. •   Mark's motivation for founding CCI and his proudest CCI achievements thus far. •   Find out about the two key partnerships that helped Mark launch CCI. •   Why the state shouldn't be trusted with industrial policy. •   What Silicon Valley is not understanding about politics and how they can change it. •   Mark's favorite non-charter city books and what we can learn from historical eras. •   An overview of the Hanseatic League and how it can be used as a governance model today. •   How Mark's thinking about charter cities has changed since founding CCI and how listeners can get involved.   Links Mentioned Support this podcast

Mark Lutter is the Founder of Charter Cities Institute. The Charter Cities Institute is a nonprofit dedicated to advancing human flourishing by building the ecosystem for charter cities worldwide.   Brought to you by Haberland Group (HaberlandGroup.com) and Hardy Haberland's Programs (HardyHaberland.com).   This podcast is brought to you by Haberland Group. Haberland Group is a global provider of marketing solutions. With multidisciplinary teams in major world markets, our holding companies specialize in advertising, branding, communications planning, digital marketing, media, podcasting, public relations, as well as specialty marketing. If you are looking for a world-class partner to work on marketing programs, go to HaberlandGroup.com and contact us.   This podcast is also brought to you by Hardy Haberland's Programs. Hardy provides educational programs for high performers who want world-class achievement, true fulfillment, and lasting transformation in their lives. He also provides consulting for established brands and businesses that have generated a minimum of $3 million in annual sales. If you need a catalyst for transformation and a strategist for success at the highest level, go to HardyHaberland.com and apply.   If you enjoyed this episode, please consider to rate, review, and subscribe on Apple Podcasts/iTunes. It takes less than 60 seconds and it really makes a difference. Rate, review, and subscribe at HardyHaberland.com/iTunes.

Mark Lutter is the Founder of Charter Cities Institute. The Charter Cities Institute is a nonprofit dedicated to advancing human flourishing by building the ecosystem for charter cities worldwide.   If you enjoyed this episode, please consider to rate, review, and subscribe on Apple Podcasts/iTunes. It takes less than 60 seconds and it really makes a difference. Rate, review, and subscribe at HardyHaberland.com/iTunes.

In this conversation with Mark Lutter, we dive deep into the world of Charter City development. Hope you enjoy this podcast!

Iyin Aboyeji, Co-founder of Andela & Flutterwave and Mark Lutter, Founder & Executive Director of Charter Cities Institute join us to discuss the concept of how Charter Cities can drive economic development in frontier markets around the world.

Dr. Mark Lutter is Founder and Executive Director of the Center for Innovative Governance Research, a nonprofit creating the ecosystem for charter cities. Prior to launching the Center for Innovative Governance Research, he was Lead Economist for NeWAY Capital, an asset management firm which made early stage investments in charter cities. During graduate school, he consulted on several new city projects and special economic zones. He has a PhD in economics from George Mason University where his research focused on charter cities. He has been published in several newspapers and magazines including CityAM, the Daily Caller, and Cato Unbound.   On this episode you'll learn: -What's the difference between a special economic zone and a charter city? -Where in the world can the charter city model have the most impact? -What does Mark think of China's $4 Trillion commitment to their Belt  Road Initiative?

Welcome to the tenth episode of the Palladium Podcast, where we explore the future of governance and society. This week, Jonah Bennett, Wolf Tivy, and Ash Milton interview Mark Lutter, founder of the Center for Innovative Governance Research, on the future of charter cities. For suggestions or questions, email editor@palladiummag.com.

The theme that connects both of the interviews in today’s episode is the value of planning for the future. That can be as simple as thinking about the ways that driverless cars will affect the car insurance industry, as Ian Adams from TechFreedom discusses. Or it can be as big as Dr. Mark Lutter, Founder of the Center for Innovative Governance Research, advocating for charter cities, a place where the best urban ideas can be implemented from the outset rather than waiting for something to go wrong and having to struggle against regulatory inertia. What is the latest regulatory news for driverless cars? What challenges do autonomous vehicles present to the insurance industry? Why is California such an innovative space? Will there be a migration pattern away from California? What is a charter city? What leads to economic growth?Further Reading:Creating the Charter Cities Ecosystem, written by Mark LutterTechquake: The Biggest Threat to California’s Tech-Sector May Lie Directly Beneath its Feet, written by Ian AdamsCalifornia Needs to Hit the Brakes on Minimum Staffing Requirements for Automated Vehicles, written by Ian AdamsRelated Content:When Will We Get Fully Autonomous Cars?, Building Tomorrow PodcastFlying Taxis: Cleared for Takeoff?, Building Tomorrow PodcastIs China Beating the U.S. at Innovation?, Building Tomorrow Podcast See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Mark Lutter is the founder and executive director of the Center for Innovative Governance, where he studies, advocates for, and helps build charter cities across the globe. He joins Michael Gibson to discuss what charter cities are, why you would want to start one, how to start one, and what the future of charter cities looks like. Visit medium.com/1517 for show notes and additional info on this month's episode.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Centre For Innovative Governance Research, joins Erik on this special two-hour episode to talk about charter cities. They start off by discussing how Mark became interested in the idea of charter cities. Mark explains the two main schools of thought when it comes to new forms of governance and talks about his philosophy for figuring out the best way to govern and how that involves charter cities.He talks about the recent interest from Silicon Valley in charter cities and some of the projects that have been going on in the space. Mark talks about seasteading and why the promise of that project wasn’t realized. He points out that there are over 200 masterplanned cities being built around the world.Mark explains the differences between charter cities and special economic zones and the main models for charter cities and special economic zones. Erik asks what forms of government Mark would advocate for if he was building a brand new charter city from scratch. Mark talks about the reasons for avoiding centralized planning and reasoning from first principles and instead running experiments to see what kinds of phenomena emerge. They also have a lightning round where Erik names an individual and Mark explains where he agrees and disagrees with that individual’s thinking.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg and is produced by Brett Bolkowy.

Mark Lutter (@MarkLutter), founder and executive director of the Centre For Innovative Governance Research, joins Erik on this special two-hour episode to talk about charter cities. They start off by discussing how Mark became interested in the idea of charter cities. Mark explains the two main schools of thought when it comes to new forms of governance and talks about his philosophy for figuring out the best way to govern and how that involves charter cities.He talks about the recent interest from Silicon Valley in charter cities and some of the projects that have been going on in the space. Mark talks about seasteading and why the promise of that project wasn’t realized. He points out that there are over 200 masterplanned cities being built around the world.Mark explains the differences between charter cities and special economic zones and the main models for charter cities and special economic zones. Erik asks what forms of government Mark would advocate for if he was building a brand new charter city from scratch. Mark talks about the reasons for avoiding centralized planning and reasoning from first principles and instead running experiments to see what kinds of phenomena emerge. They also have a lightning round where Erik names an individual and Mark explains where he agrees and disagrees with that individual’s thinking.Thanks for listening — if you like what you hear, please review us on your favorite podcast platform. Check us out on the web at villageglobal.vc or get in touch with us on Twitter @villageglobal.Venture Stories is brought to you by Village Global, is hosted by co-founder and partner, Erik Torenberg and is produced by Brett Bolkowy.

In this episode I speak with Mark Lutter. 

Mark Lutter is the Executive Director of the Center for Innovative Governance Research. He comes on the podcast to discuss what he knows best: Charter Cities. 

Ever since Francis Bacon's The New Atlantis, men have dreamed of using science to advance empirical knowledge and bring relief to the human condition. But in the area of law and governance in particular, some countries have tried to apply rational principles (i.e., Marx's supposedly scientific laws of history) with disastrous consequences. The common law tradition — with its protections of private property and individual liberty, plus stable rule of law — has proved the best system so far, despite being an emergent, system rather than the creation of an all-wise leader or bureaucracy.Ironically, the countries that have tried the hardest to engineer social outcomes are now implementing special zones where more organically-evolved legal systems are the law of the land. China's SEZs — free trade zones modeled on western governance — are credited with bringing close to a billion people out of poverty. This economic miracle has spawned copy-cat experiments around the world, but they are not necessarily the end-all-be-all of good governance. Newer concepts like charter cities, technological zones, and startup cities have been proposed to jumpstart growth in dysfunctional jurisdictions around the world.A few years ago, before a series of high profile failures in places like Honduras and Madagascar, these ideas seemed to be gaining traction. There was cross-spectrum support, ranging from “crazy utopian techno-libertarians” (like the “seasteaders”) to establishment-types like former World Bank Chief Economist Paul Romer.Mark Lutter straddles these two worlds. He knows what drives libertarian aspirations for free cities, having recently received his PhD from George Mason University (under Don Boudreaux, no less). But Lutter also knows what it takes for radical ideas to get a hearing with the people with the authority to implement it. He recently founded the Center for Innovative Governance, a new think tank, to fill the vacuum in credible academic literature and guide pragmatic policy-makers who see the potential for more innovative governance.Although it has become a cliche in some circles, governance matters — more than many realize. Writing for Jacobite Magazine, Lutter notes that a practical approach must convince the ruling elites. Our empirical knowledge of what works (rule of law, property rights, etc.) needs to be transmitted to the parts of the world where darkness, superstition, and authoritarianism still reign.Why City States?Nation-states have been the default configuration for governance for 400 years. Static in their geographic boundaries, and sclerotic in their administration, nation-states are like lumbering giants that frequently start wars against other countries and shackle their own citizens with one-size-fits-all laws. When it comes to economic activity, however, cities are by far the more dynamic relevant unit. They are also where most of the problems requiring government need to be solved. As Richard Florida, founder of CityLabs, recently wrote:“Local governments tend to be less ideological and more focused on problem-solving, and they know intimately which problems actually need to be solved. They are more accountable to the people they represent, because they interact with them every day. And because people pick where they live by “voting with their feet,” constituents tend to share the same values as their leaders.”The push for more innovative governance builds on the on-going devolution of power from dysfunctional nation-states to cities and neighborhoods. Where this devolution is stalled, we see widespread human misery: Honduras, Venezuela, and much of Africa.This brings up the possibility of cities wresting even more autonomy from their Federal counterparts, and implementing best practices or trying out new ones in the competition for tax-paying constituents. Florida and Lutter suspect that cities that are most attractive to knowledge workers — and those that innovate — are most likely to win.Lutter is also working on a narrative that will make it easier for policy-makers to implement the changes that will help cities evolve into hubs of next-generation governance. He returns to the show this Sunday to talk about his new organization's work on this crucial dimension. As a think tank, the Center for Innovative Governance Research aims to provide a menu of policy options, and even more importantly, to cast these options in a compelling light that captures people's imaginations. He and Bob discuss some of these options, and the surprising places where innovative governance is taking off.

The George Mason University economics department is known for developing new ideas into influential ideas. The Virginia-based bastion of free market thought has been producing groundbreaking scholarly work for decades, and shows no signs of slowing down. Last month, GMU PhD Candidate Mark Lutter defended his thesis, “Three Essays on Proprietary Cities.” His committee included Donald Boudreaux, Tyler Cowen, and Richard Wagner. Lutter's academic interest in proprietary, or free cities is part of a trend among scholars and thought leaders studying the incentives that drive government decision-makers. If politicians respond to rewards and punishments just like you and I do, shouldn't we consider giving them a larger stake in the profits and losses of the underlying jurisdiction? A proprietary city, Lutter argues, could achieve this, with tremendous benefits for both the developing and the developed world. He makes a convincing case on his blog, FreeCitiesInitiative.com, and joins Bob to defend the idea that the time for free cities has come.