Economic Development Quarterly

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wassmer, R. W.
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 2, 132-148 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/089124240101500203

Bidding for Business: New Evidence on the Effect of Locally Offered Economic Development Incentives in a Metropolitan Area

Robert W. Wassmer

California State University, Sacramento

John E. Anderson

University of Nebraska, Lincoln

The use of local economic development incentives within a metropolitan area has undergone less analysis than incentives that attempt to alter interregional business location decisions. This is unfortunate because other factors that influence where business resides are constant across cities in a metropolitan area, and a properly used incentive is more likely to alter a business location decision. To comment on these issues, the authors use a simultaneous equation model to conduct regression analyses of panel data from 112 cities in the Detroit metropolitan area. They find that only certain forms of local incentives, at certain times, exert the expected positive influence on the local value of commercial and manufacturing property. The findings are tied to issues related to the redistribution of economic activity from the core to the periphery in U.S. metropolitan areas, and the authors conclude with policy suggestions on the future use of local incentives.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Economic Development QuarterlyHome page
D. Schwartz, J. Pelzman, and M. Keren
The Ineffectiveness of Location Incentive Programs: Evidence From Puerto Rico and Israel
Economic Development Quarterly, May 1, 2008; 22(2): 167 - 179.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Economic Development QuarterlyHome page
G. Sands, L. A. Reese, and H. L. Khan
Implementing Tax Abatements in Michigan: A Study of Best Practices
Economic Development Quarterly, February 1, 2006; 20(1): 44 - 58.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Economic Development QuarterlyHome page
E. G. Dalehite, J. L. Mikesell, and C. K. Zorn
Variation in Property Tax Abatement Programs Among States
Economic Development Quarterly, May 1, 2005; 19(2): 157 - 173.
[Abstract] [PDF]