Spatially concentrated poverty has been the subject of scholarly research and policy debates since at least the late 1980s. The frameworks for understanding these studies and debates have focused on causes related to individuals, or “people,” and neighborhoods, or “places.” This article reviews the literature on people-based and place-based policy, suggesting that the dichotomy obscures important spatial impacts of individual entitlements and the impact of place-based policies on individual residents. The study empirically examines the implementation of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) in Los Angeles and compares its spatial characteristics with the public investments associated with the place-based Enterprise Zone (EZ) program. Findings show that the EITC represents a significantly greater, though unintended, investment in poor neighborhoods than does the EZ and suggest new scholarly research and policy directions.
Berube, A.2003. Rewarding work through the tax code: The power and potential of the Earned Income Tax Credit in 27 cities and rural areas. Report from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, January.
2.
Berube, A., and B. Forman. 2001a. A local ladder for the working poor: The impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit in U.S. metropolitan areas. Report from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, October.
3.
Berube, A., and B. Forman. 2001b. Rewarding work: The impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit in Chicago. Report from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, November.
4.
Brookings Institution. 2001. Rewarding work: The impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit in greater Los Angeles. Report from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, June.
5.
California Budget Project. 2001. How can a state earned income tax credit help California’s working poor make ends meet?Sacramento: California Budget Project.
6.
Dickert, S., S. Houser, and K. Scholz. 1995. The Earned Income Tax Credit and transfer programs: A study of labor market and program participation. In Tax policy and the economy, ed. J. Poterba. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economics and MIT Press.
7.
Dowall, D. E.1996. An evaluation of California’s Enterprise Zone programs. Economic Development Quarterly10 (4): 352-368.
8.
Eissa, N., and J. B. Liebman. 1996. Labor supply response to the Earned Income Tax Credit. Quarterly Journal of Economics111:605-637.
9.
Engberg, J., and D. Bondonio. 2000. Enterprise zones and local employment: Evidence from the states’ programs. Regional Science and Urban Economics30 (5): 519-549.
10.
Goldsmith, W. W., and E. J. Blakely. 1992. Separate societies: Poverty and inequality in U.S. cities. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
11.
Gramlich, E. M., and C. M. Heflin. 1998. The spatial dimension: Should worker assistance be given to poor people or poor places? In Generating jobs: How to increase demand for less-skilled workers, ed, Richard B. Freeman and Peter Gottschalk. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
12.
Greenbaum, R., and J. Engberg. 2000. An evaluation of state enterprise zone policies. Policy Studies Review17:29-46.
13.
Greenstein, R.2000. Should EITC benefits be enlarged for families with three or more children?Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
14.
Gyourko, J.1998. Place-based aid versus people-based aid and the role of an urban audit in a new urban strategy. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research3 (3): 205-229.
15.
Horowitz, J. B.2002. Income mobility and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Economic Inquiry40 (3): 334-347.
16.
Hotz, V. J., and J. C. Scholz. 2000. The Earned Income Tax Credit. Paper prepared for the National Bureau of Economic Research Conference on Means-Tested Transfers.
17.
Ihlanfeldt, K. R., and D. L. Sjoquist. 1998. The spatial mismatch hypothesis: A review of recent studies and their implication for welfare reform. Housing Policy Debate9:849-892.
18.
Jargowsky, P.1997. Poverty and place. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
19.
Jargowsky, P.2003. Stunning progress, hidden problems: The dramatic decline of concentrated poverty in the 1990s. Report from the Brookings Center on Urban and Metropolitan Poverty, May.
20.
Johnson, N.2000. A hand up: How state Earned Income Tax Credits help working families escape poverty. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
21.
Lang, R. E., and S. P. Hornburg. 1998. What is social capital and why is it important to public policy?Housing Policy Debate9 (1): 1-16.
22.
Liebman, J. B.1998. The impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit on incentives and income distribution. In Tax policy and the economy, vol. 12, ed. J. M. Poterba. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
O’Keefe, S., and R. Dunstan. 2001. Evaluation of California’s enterprise zones. Sacramento: California Research Bureau.
24.
Quinn, L. M., and J. Pawasarat. 2001. Tracking the progress of welfare reform quickly: A model for measuring neighborhood health and change. Report from the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, October.
25.
Sawhill, I., and A. Thomas. 2001. A tax proposal for working families with children. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
26.
Spencer, J. H.2002. Place-based and people-based policy approaches to neighborhood poverty: A comparative evaluation of the Enterprise Zone program and the Earned Income Tax Credit in Los Angeles. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
27.
Wilson, W. J.1997. When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Vintage.
28.
Zahradnik, R., and I. J. Lav. 2000. A.D.C. Earned Income Tax Credit could provide tax relief and reduce child poverty. Washington, DC: Center on Budget Policy and Priorities.
