Cities in the US and Europe have chosen increasingly to offer incentives designed to attract and retain local economic development. The increased use of local incentives has occurred with little or no empirical test of their effectiveness. This paper contains a statistical method that can be applied to any group of cities to measure the 'additive effect', or lack of it, that incentives exert on local economic development. Regression analysis applied to cities in the Detroit metropolitan area indicates that incentive efficacy depends on city-specific characteristics and how economic development is measured. Although there are situations where incentive offers exert an additive effect on local economic development, in a majority of situations this is not the outcome.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, J.E. (1990) Tax increment financing: municipal adoption and growth, National Tax Journal, 43, June, pp. 155-164.
2.
Bartik, T.J. (1991) Who Benefits from State and Local Economic Development Policies?Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. UpJohn Institute for Employment Research.
3.
Boviard, T. (1992) Local economic development and the city, Urban Studies, 29, pp. 343-368.
4.
Bradbury, K.A., Downs, A. and Small, K.A. (1982) Urban Decline and the Future of American Cities . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution .
5.
Citizens Research Council Of Michigan (1986 ) Municipal Government Economic Development Incentive Programs in Michigan. Detroit, MI.
6.
Coffin, D.A. (1982) Property tax abatement and economic development in Indianapolis, Growth and Change, April, pp. 18-23.
7.
Foley, P. (1992) Local economic policy and job creation: a review of evaluation studies, UrbanStudies, 29, pp. 557-598.
8.
Fox, W.F. (1981) Fiscal differentials and industrial location: some empirical evidence, UrbanStudies, 18, pp. 105-111.
9.
Huddleson, J.R. (1984) Tax increment financing as a state development policy, Growth and Change, April, pp. 11-17.
10.
National Association Of State Development Agencies (1986) Directory of Incentives for Business Investment and Development in the United States: A State-By-State Guide, 2nd edn. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
11.
Palumbo, G., Sacks, S. and Wasylenko, M. (1990) Population decentralization within metropolitan areas: 1970-1980, Journal of Urban Economics, 27, pp. 151-167.
12.
Papke, L.E. (1991) Tax policy and urban development: evidence from an enterprise zone program. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 3945, Cambridge, MA.
13.
Pindyck, R.S. and Rubinfeld, D.L. (1991) Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
14.
Southeast Michigan Council Of Governments ( 1990) Tax Incentives/Tax Abatements in Southeast Michigan. Detroit, MI.
15.
Storey, D.J. (1990) Evaluation of policies and measures to create local employment, UrbanStudies, 27, pp. 669-684.
16.
Wassmer, R.W. (1990) Local fiscal variables and intrametropolitan firm location: regression evidence from the United States and research suggestions , Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 8, pp. 283-296.
17.
Wassmer, R.W. (1992) Property tax abatement and the simultaneous determination of local fiscal variables in a metropolitan area, Land Economics , 68, August, pp. 263-282.
18.
Wassmer, R.W. (1993) The use and abuse of economic development incentives in a metropolitan area, Proceedings of the Eighty-Sixth Annual Conference, National Tax Association-Tax Institute of America, Columbus, OH.
19.
Willis, K.G. (1985) Estimating the benefits of job creation from local investment subsidies, UrbanStudies, 22, pp. 163-171.
20.
Wolkoff, M.J. (1985) Chasing a dream: the use of tax abatements to spur urban economic development, Urban Studies, 22, pp. 305-315.
21.
Wren, C. (1987) The relative effects of local authority financial assistance policies, UrbanStudies, 24, pp. 268-278.
