Although economic development incentives have increasingly been targeted to particular geographic areas during recent decades, there has been surprisingly little examination of which areas are actually targeted. This article examines the targeting decisions of 10 states that implemented enterprise zone programs that limited their number of zones. Therefore, in all the states, not all distressed areas received enterprise zone incentives. By examining the relative distress of zone areas prior to designation, this study finds that factors such as population density, local housing market, and demographics help distinguish between distressed areas that received zones and those that did not. In addition, this article suggests that some characteristics of neighboring areas can help predict zone location. By helping to distinguish the types of places likely to be designated as enterprise zones, the article creates a framework for selecting comparison areas for enterprise zone impact evaluation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, J. E.,& Wassmer, R. W. (2000). Bidding for business: The efficacy of local economic development incentives in a metropolitan area. Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
2.
Anselin, L. (1988).Spatial econometrics: Methods and models. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
3.
Anselin, L., Bera, A. K., Florax, R.,& Yoon, M. J. (1996). Simple diagnostic tests for spatial dependence.Regional Science and Urban Economics26(1), 77-104.
4.
Bartik, T. J. (1991). Who benefits from state and local economic development policies? Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
5.
Blodgett, J., & the Center for International Earth Science Information Network. (1998). Master Area Block Level Equivalency (MABLE) (Geographic Correspondence Engine, Version 3.0 [Geocorr]). New York: Columbia University. Retrieved from http://plue.sedac.ciesin.org/geocorr/
6.
Boarnet, M. G. (2001). Enterprise zones and job creation: Linking evaluation and practice. Economic Development Quarterly, 15(3), 242-254.
7.
Bondonio, D.,& Engberg, J. (2000). Enterprise zones and local employment: Evidence from the states’programs. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 30(5), 519-549.
8.
Buss, T. F. (2001). The effect of state tax incentives on economic growth and firm location decisions: An overview of the literature. Economic Development Quarterly, 15, 90-105.
9.
Butler, S. (1991). The conceptual evolution of enterprise zones. In R. E. Green (Ed.), Enterprise zones: New directions in economic development (pp. 27-40). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Cisneros, H. G. (Ed.). (1993). Interwoven destinies: Cities and the nation (pp. 17-29). New York: Norton.
11.
Clarke, S. E. (1982). Enterprise zones: Seeking the neighborhood nexus. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 18(1), 53-71.
12.
Dehejia, R. H.,& Wahba, S. (1999). Applications and case studies. Causal effects in nonexperimental studies. Reevaluating the evaluation of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(448), 1053-1062.
13.
Eisinger, P. K. (1988). The rise of the entrepreneurial state: State and local economic development policy in the United States. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
14.
Engberg, J., & Greenbaum, R. (1999). State enterprise zones and local housing markets. Journal of Housing Research, 10(2), 163-187.
15.
Erickson, R. A.,& Friedman, S. W. (1991). Comparative dimensions of state enterprise zone policies. In R. E. Green (Ed.), Enterprise zones: New directions in economic development (pp. 155-176). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Fisher, P.,& Peters, A. (1998). Industrial incentives: Competition among American states and cities. Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
17.
Greenbaum, R.,& Engberg, J. (2000). An evaluation of state enterprise zone policies. Policy Studies Review, 17(2-3), 29-46.
18.
Gyourko, J. (1998). Place-based aid versus people-based aid and the role of an urban audit in a new urban strategy.Cityscape, 3(3), 205-229.
19.
Harrison, B. (1998, November). It takes a region (or does it?): The material basis for metropolitanism and metropolitics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy and Management, New York.
20.
Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1997). Matching as an economic evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Review of Economic Studies, 64(4), 605-654.
21.
Holzer, H. J. (1991). The spatial mismatch hypothesis: What has the evidence shown? Urban Studies, 28(1), 105-122.
22.
Jargowsky, P. A. (1997). Poverty and place: Ghettos, barrios, and the American city. New York: Russell Sage.
23.
Kain, J. F. (1968). Housing segregation, Negro employment, and metropolitan decentralization. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82(2), 175-197.
24.
Ladd, H. F. (1994). Spatially targeted economic development strategies: Do they work? Cityscape, 1(1), 193-211.
25.
Ladd, H. F., & Ludwig, J. (1997). Federal housing assistance, residential relocation, and educational opportunities: Evidence from Baltimore. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 87(2), 272-277.
26.
Lehman, J. S. (1994). Updating urban policy. In S. H. Danziger, G. D. Sandefur,& D. H. Weinberg (Eds.), Confronting poverty: Prescriptions for change (pp. 226-252). New York: Russell Sage; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
Levitan, S. A., & Miller, E. I. (1992). Enterprise zones are no solution for our blighted areas. Challenge, 35(3), 4-8.
28.
Megbolugbe, I. F., & Linneman, P. (1993). Home ownership. Urban Studies, 30(4-5), 659-682.
29.
Mills, E. S., & Lubuele, L. S. (1997). Inner cities. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(2), 727-756.
30.
Reeder, R. J.,& Robinson, K. L. (1992). Enterprise zones: Assessing their rural development potential. Policy Studies Journal, 20(2), 264-275.
31.
Sclar, E. D.,& Hook, W. (1993). The importance of cities to the national economy. InH. G. Cisneros (Ed.), Interwoven destinies: Cities and the nation (pp. 48-79). New York: Norton.
32.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1981). 1980 census of population and housing (Summary Tape File 3a). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
33.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1992). State enterprise zone update. Washington, DC: Author.
34.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1997). The state of the cities (HUD No. 97-106). Washington, DC: Author.
35.
Wilson, W. J. (1999). The bridge over the racial divide: Rising inequality and coalition politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
