The academic literature on economic development incentive programs has generated mixed results, though most studies conclude that incentives do not lead to economic growth. Oklahoma has received high praise for its innovative Quality Jobs program, because it provides cash payments (not tax incentives) and emphasizes jobs with high wages and benefits. However, few evaluations of the program’s success in growing the state’s economy have been made. This study employs multivariate regression and mixed-pair analysis techniques and concludes that the economic growth between 1990 and 2005 was not statistically different between Oklahoma communities with businesses participating in the Quality Jobs program and those that were not participating. There was, however, a statistical difference in median household income growth when Oklahoma communities with participating businesses were compared with similar Kansas communities.
CrandallM.WeberB. (2004). Local social and economic conditions, spatial concentrations of poverty, and poverty dynamics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86, 1276-1281.
7.
DauffenbachR.WarnerL. (2004). State policy and economic development in Oklahoma: 2004. Oklahoma City: Oklahoma 21st Century.
8.
DavisE.WeberB. (2002). How much does local job growth improve employment outcomes of the rural working poor?Review of Regional Studies, 32, 255-274.
9.
DehejiaR.WahbaS. (2002). Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 151-161.
10.
DueJ. (1961). Studies of state-local tax influences on location of industry. National Tax Journal, 14, 163-173.
11.
EisingerP. (1988). The rise of the entrepreneurial state. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
12.
FloridaR. (2012, December7). The uselessness of economic development incentives. From the Atlantic City Lab. Washington, DC: Atlantic Media Company.
13.
HansenT.KalambokidisL. (2010). How are businesses responding to Minnesota’s tax-free zone program?Economic Development Quarterly, 24, 180-192.
14.
ImbensG.AngristJ. (1994). Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects. Econometrica, 62, 467-475.
15.
KovenS.LyonsT. (2010). Economic development: Strategies for state and local practice. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.
LugerM.BaeS. (2005). The effectiveness of state business tax incentive programs: The case of North Carolina. Economic Development Quarterly, 19, 327-345.
18.
NewmanR. J.SullivanD. H. (1988). Econometric analysis of business tax impacts on industrial location: What do we know, and how do we know it?Journal of Urban Economics, 23, 215-234.
19.
OaklandW. H. (1978). Local taxes and intra-urban industrial location: A survey. In BreakG. F. (Ed.), Metropolitan financing and growth management policies (pp. 13-30). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
OsgoodJ. L.OppS. M.BernotskyR. L. (2012). Yesterday’s gains versus today’s realities: Lessons from 10 years of economic development practice. Economic Development Quarterly, 26, 334-350.
22.
PartridgeM.RickmanD. (2005). High-poverty nonmetropolitan counties in America: Can economic development help?International Regional Science Review, 28, 415-440.
23.
PartridgeM.RickmanD. (2007). Persistent pockets of extreme American poverty and job growth: Is there a place-based policy role?Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 32, 201-224.
PetersA.FisherP. (2004). The failures of economic development incentives. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(1), 27-37.
26.
Pew Center on the States. (2012). Evidence counts: Evaluating state tax incentives for jobs and growth. Philadelphia, PA: PEW Charitable Trusts.
27.
PriegerJ. (2013). The broadband digital divide and the benefits of mobile broadband for minorities (Working paper). Malibu, CA: Pepperdine University, School of Public Policy.
28.
ReeseL. A.YeM. (2011). Policy versus place luck: Achieving local economic prosperity. Economic Development Quarterly, 23, 221-236.
