To make the case, the paper situates FedDev’s formation in relation to Canada’s history with regional development policy, and in the context of an evolving international body of scholarly knowledge known as the “new regionalism.” The paper draws specific lessons to inform FedDev’s work from five decades of federal policy through similar regional development agencies in the rest of Canada. Grounding these policy lessons in the research findings and theoretical concepts of the new regionalism, the paper’s main messages are as follows:

• Across 50 years of federal regional development activity there is evidence of policy learning in the evolution from centralized and top-down structures to decentralized, collaborative processes. Policy goals and instruments have become more sophisticated and differentiated over time and across regions.
• One of the key evolutions has been the progression away from redistributional spending to investments in knowledge and innovation.
• Establishing causality in regional development is complex, and it is difficult to separate out the impact of public policy interventions on outcomes. All of the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) have implemented indicator systems to benchmark performance and negotiated contractual approaches with various partners to align multiple resources with key outcomes.
• Variation in regional priorities, local conditions, and community capacities has resulted in a diversity of structures, strategies and initiatives across the country. While this is a clear strength in the Canadian approach, the RDAs are insufficiently networked for robust assessment of regional experiments, effective scaling-up of demonstration projects, and efficient transfer of best practices. Greater investment in social learning processes would enhance a pan-Canadian, system-wide capacity for regional policy innovation.
• Southern Ontario is well-positioned for success in the era of the new regionalism with clear advantages to build on across sectors and communities. However, resources must be assembled and aligned, and local assets need leveraging through effective multi-level governance and creative policy leadership. FedDev can be an agent of transformational change, demonstrating the value of both a place-based, innovation-driven approach to regional development and a high-performing federal system that invests strategically for the long term.

The main conclusion from this research is simple. Rather than dispersing its scarce resources through incremental or marginal add-ons to the existing stock of development supports, FedDev should focus on game-changing regional investments that lead to significant advances in innovation and sustainability. Transformative development projects meet this test and they should structure FedDev’s investment portfolio. Examples include technology-driven economic clusters, eco-industrial infrastructures for sustainable business innovation, and multi-community projects for clean and renewable energy supply. Such projects have great potential in all of southern Ontario’s regions, but progress depends on strategic partnerships between governments and across public, private, and community sectors. Given the scale of investment required and scope of change envisioned, transformative development projects could bring valuable policy focus to FedDev.