American federalism is a unique political structure, especially in its capacity for managing regional economic development. Multiple and often competing development goals — equity, efficiency, democracy, and long term economic vitality — are demanded of it. The system performs relatively well at providing access for democratic participation and engendering efficiency in public service provision, but it has difficulty ensuring long-term vitality and achieving equity. Territorialized legislative bodies substitute for and impede the evolution of more centralized, deliberative regional policy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alonso, W.1990. Regional policy in the new integrating Europe. In Comparative regional research: Setting the post-1992 agenda, eds. E. Bergman and U. Schubert. Hannover, Germany: Urbinno.
2.
Beer, S.1973. The modernization of American federalism. Publius2: 49-95.
3.
Bolton, R.1966. Defense purchases and regional growth. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
4.
Bolton, R.1988. An economic interpretation of a `sense of place.'Williamstown, Mass.: Williams College Department of Economics Working Paper.
5.
Duchacek, I. D.1970. Comparative federalism: The territorial dimension of politics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
6.
Friedmann, J.
, and R. Bloch. 1990. American exceptionalism in regional planning, 1933-2000. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research4: 576-601.
7.
Glickman, N.
, and A. Glasmeier. 1989. The international economy and the American South. In Deindustrialization and regional economic transformation: The experience of the United States, eds. L. Rodwin and H. Sazanami. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
8.
Harrison, B.
, and B. Bluestone. 1988. The great U-turn: Corporate restructuring and the polarization of America. New York: Basic Books.
9.
Isserman, A.
, T. Rephann, and D. Sorenson. 1989. Highways and rural economic development: Results from quasi-experimental approaches. Morgantown: West Virginia University Regional Research Institute Working Paper 8907.
10.
Malecki, E.1988. Military spending and the U.S. defense industry: Regional patterns of military contracts and subcontracts. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy1: 31-44.
11.
Markusen, A.1976. Class and urban social expenditures: A local theory of the state. In Marxism and the metropolis: New perspectives in urban political economy, eds. W. Tabb and L. Sawers. New York: Oxford University Press.
12.
Markusen, A.1987. Regions: The economics and politics of territory. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Allenheld.
13.
Markusen, A.1988. Planning for communities in decline: Lessons from steel communities. Journal of Planning Education and Research7: 173-184.
14.
Markusen, A.1990. Regional planning and policy: An essay on the American exception. In Comparative regional research: Setting the post-1992 agenda, eds. E. Bergman and U. Schubert. Hannover, Germany: Urbinno.
15.
Markusen, A.
, and V. Carlson. 1989. Deindustrialization in the American Midwest: Causes and responses. In Deindustrialization in the U.S.: Lessons for Japan, eds. L. Rodwin and H. Sazanami. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
16.
Markusen, A.
, P. Hall, S. Deitrick, and S. Campbell. 1991. The rise of the Gunbelt. New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
Martis, K.1988. Sectionalism and the United States Congress. Political Geography Quarterly2: 99-109.
18.
Mehay, S.
, and L. Solnick. 1990. Defense spending and state economic growth. Journal of Regional Science4: 477-487.
19.
Mieszkowski, P.
, and G. Zodrow. 1989. Taxation and the Tiebout model. Journal of Economic Literature3: 1098-1146.
20.
Mishel, L.
, and J. Bernstein. 1992. The state of working America, 2nd ed.Economic Policy Institute Series. Armount, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.
21.
Nash, G. D.1985. The American West transformed: The impact of the Second World War. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
22.
Osborne, D.1987. Economic competitiveness: The states take the lead. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.
23.
Paddison, R.1983. The fragmented states: The political geography of power. New York: St. Martin's Press.
24.
Rees, J.1981. The impact of defense spending on regional industrial change in the United States. In Federalism and regional development, ed. G. W. Hoffman. Austin: University of Texas Press.
25.
Sack, R.1980. Conceptions of space in social thought: A geographical perspective. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
26.
Sack, R.1981. Territorial bases of power. In Political studies from spatial perspectives, eds. A. Burnett and P. H. Taylor. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
27.
Taylor, P.1981. A materialist framework for political geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers1: 15-34.
28.
Tiebout, C.1956. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy5: 416-424.
29.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
. 1984. Current population reports, local population estimates, Series P-26. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO.
30.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis
. 1992. Regional per capita income. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO.
31.
U.S. Department of Defense
. 1984. Prime contract awards by state. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO.
32.
Walker, D.
, ed. 1980. Planning industrial development. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
