The review reveals that the concept of “regionalism” has been (1) traditionally associated with the first of these 3 alternative visions and (2) evolving toward the second, particularly boosted by the implementation of the federal ISTEA and TEA21 legislation. But it also shows that regions are striving for higher performance and collective efficacy, and increasingly for “smarter” approaches to improvement (alternative 3).

DeToqueville is best remembered for extolling the virtues of small town government in America; in volume 2 of Democracy in America, he marvels at the ability of Americans to organize new institutions flexibly around goals ranging from education to business development.[96] John Kirlin at USC has remarked, “Increasing the value of place is, I believe, the primary function of governments. The highest place value is found in sustaining collective discussion concerning the future of the affected populations.”[97] In conversations with over 1,000 civic leaders in twelve metropolitan areas in 1997 and 1998, the Metropolitan Initiative found that while “smart growth” and “livable communities” were strong emerging themes, a rallying cry common to urban, suburban and rural communities might be characterized as “sustaining existing communities.”

It is unlikely that today’s governmental structures by themselves will similarly rise to the rapid pace of change that challenges all of us. The arbitrariness of administrative geographies can’t hope to deliver the performance necessary to address the geographies of natural capital, such as watersheds and air sheds, nor can government easily contain growth within boundaries. Successful regional initiatives need to identify and be based in a workable geographic setting to succeed.

In long term studies of “what works” in fields ranging from community policing to local market development, the ideas of collective efficacy and mutual gain are gaining respect. “Ensuring sustainable communities” will require “learning to sustain” across a large number of small efforts, which in turn will require learning to “do it together.”

“Learning to do it together” is becoming a dominant vision for effective regional engagement. Our challenge is to amass the tools to make it so.