Zhang (2015) and Lambert and Coomes (2001) have studied the Louisville Enterprise Zone (EZ) program and drawn different conclusions. This Forum/Letter to the Editor unpacks the differences in both studies by first exploring the structure and implementation of a state EZ program and various factors affecting EZ outcome measures. Methodologically, it is crucial to control for these factors to avoid biases in assessing the effectiveness of a program. Further exploration of conventional methods in the existing literature suggests that econometric analyses can offer remedies to control for these factors.
BartikT. J. (2002). Evaluating the impacts of local economic development policies on local economic outcomes: What has been done and what is doable? Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. https://doi.org/10.17848/wp03-89
2.
BeauregardR. A.HolcombB. (1983).
Enterprise zones: The non-manipulation of economic space. Urban Geography,
4(3), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.4.3.223
BlairR. (2002).
Policy tools theory and implementation networks: Understanding state enterprise zone partnerships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
12(2), 161–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003528
6.
BoarnetM. G. (2001).
Enterprise zones and job creation: Linking evaluation and practice. Economic Development Quarterly,
15(3), 242–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240101500304
7.
BoarnetM. G.BogartW. T. (1996).
Enterprise zones and employment: Evidence from New Jersey. Journal of Urban Economics,
40(2), 198–215. https://doi.org/10.1006/juec.1996.0029
8.
BollingerC. R.IhlanfeldtK. R. (2003).
The intraurban spatial distribution of employment: Which government interventions make a difference?Journal of Urban Economics,
53(3), 396–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-1190(03)00007-X
9.
BondonioD. (2002).
Evaluating decentralized policies: A method to compare the performance of economic development programmes across different regions or states. Evaluation,
8(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1358902002008001738
10.
BondonioD.EngbergJ. (2000).
Enterprise zones and local employment: Evidence from the states’ programs. Regional Science and Urban Economics,
30(5), 519–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-0462(00)00042-9
11.
BondonioD.GreenbaumR. T. (2007).
Do local tax incentives affect economic growth? What mean impacts miss in the analysis of enterprise zone policies. Regional Science and Urban Economics,
37(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2006.08.002
12.
BosticR. W.ProhofskyA. C. (2006).
Enterprise zones and individual welfare: A case study of California. Journal of Regional Science,
46(2), 175–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-4146.2006.00438.x
13.
BrintnallM.GreenR. E. (1988).
Comparing state enterprise zone programs: Variations in structure and coverage. Economic Development Quarterly,
2(1), 50–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124248800200105
14.
BussT. F. (2001).
The effect of state tax incentives on economic growth and firm location decisions: An overview of the literature. Economic Development Quarterly,
15(1), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240101500108
15.
BussoM.GregoryJ.KlineP. (2013).
Assessing the incidence and efficiency of a prominent place based policy. American Economic Review,
103(2), 897–947. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.2.897
CouchJ. F.AtkinsonK. E.SmithL. H. (2005).
The impact of enterprise zones on job creation in Mississippi. Contemporary Economic Policy,
23(2), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1093/cep/byi019
18.
CouchJ. F.BarrettJ. D. (2004).
Alabama’s enterprise zones: Designed to aid the needy?Public Finance Review,
32(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142103260517
19.
CrainicT. G.RicciardiN.StorchiG. (2004).
Advanced freight transportation systems for congested urban areas. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies,
12(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2004.07.002
20.
DabneyD. Y. (1991).
Do enterprise zone incentives affect business location decisions?Economic Development Quarterly,
5(4), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124249100500404
ElveryJ. A. (2009).
The impact of enterprise zones on resident employment: An evaluation of the enterprise zone programs of California and Florida. Economic Development Quarterly,
23(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242408326994
23.
EngbergJ.GreenbaumR. (1999).
State enterprise zones and local housing markets. Journal of Housing Research,
10(2), 163–187.
24.
EricksonR. A.FriedmanS. W. (1990).
Enterprise zones: A comparative analysis of zone performance and state government policies. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy,
8(4), 363–378. https://doi.org/10.1068/c080363
25.
FisherP. S.PetersA. H. (1997).
Tax and spending incentives and enterprise zones. New England Economic Review,
1997, 109–137.
26.
GloverG. (1993).
Enterprise zones: Incentives are not attracting minority firms. Review of Black Political Economy,
22(1), 73–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02689921
27.
GreenbaumR.BondonioD. (2004).
Losing focus: A comparative evaluation of spatially targeted economic revitalization programmes in the US and the EU. Regional Studies,
38(3), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/003434042000211042
GreenbaumR. T. (2004).
Siting it right: Do states target economic distress when designating enterprise zones?Economic Development Quarterly,
18(1), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242403259999
30.
GreenbaumR. T.EngbergJ. B. (2004).
The impact of state enterprise zones on urban manufacturing establishments. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,
23(2), 315–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20006
31.
GreenbaumR. T.LandersJ. (2009).
Why are state policy makers still proponents of enterprise zones? What explains their action in the face of a preponderance of the research?International Regional Science Review,
32(4), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017609341385
32.
HamJ. C.SwensonC.İmrohoroğluA.SongH. (2011).
Government programs can improve local labor markets: Evidence from state enterprise zones, federal empowerment zones and federal enterprise community. Journal of Public Economics,
95(7-8), 779–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.027
33.
HansonA. (2009).
Local employment, poverty, and property value effects of geographically-targeted tax incentives: An instrumental variables approach. Regional Science and Urban Economics,
39(6), 721–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2009.07.002
HansonA.RohlinS. (2011b).
The effect of location-based tax incentives on establishment location and employment across industry sectors. Public Finance Review,
39(2), 195–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142110389602
KolkoJ.NeumarkD. (2010).
Do some enterprise zones create jobs?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,
29(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/10.3386/w15206
38.
KrupkaD. J.NoonanD. S. (2009).
Empowerment zones, neighborhood change and owner-occupied housing. Regional Science and Urban Economics,
39(4), 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2009.03.001
39.
LambertT. E.CoomesP. A. (2001).
An evaluation of the effectiveness of Louisville’s enterprise zone. Economic Development Quarterly,
15(2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240101500205
40.
O’KeefeS. (2004).
Job creation in California’s enterprise zones: A comparison using a propensity score matching model. Journal of Urban Economics,
55(1), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2003.08.002
41.
RemlerD. K.Van RyzinG. G. (2014). Research methods in practice: Strategies for description and causation.
Sage.
42.
RubinB. M. (1990).
Urban enterprise zones: Do they work? Evidence from New Jersey. Public Budgeting & Finance,
10(4), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5850.00881
43.
RubinB. M.WilderM. G. (1989).
Urban enterprise zones: Employment impacts and fiscal incentives. Journal of the American Planning Association,
55(4), 418–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944368908975431
TaoJ. L.FeiockR. C. (1999).
Directing benefits to need: Evaluating the distributive consequences of urban economic development. Economic Development Quarterly,
13(1), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124249901300108
47.
ZhangS. (2015).
Impacts of enterprise zone policy on industry growth: New evidence from the Louisville program. Economic Development Quarterly,
29(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242415593343
48.
ZhangS. (2019).
Rethinking US enterprise zones: The role of research design in program evaluation. Local Economy,
34(6), 545–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094219871955
