Local governments must balance their growth ambitions against needs arising from social inequities. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program aims to redress these disparities by directing funds toward disinvested tracts. We ask whether a city's institutional design, public and private actor composition, and resource availability influence the decision to invest in communities with greater levels of social need. Utilizing a social equity framework, we connect place-level procedural fairness mechanisms with neighborhood-level access equity consequences. Combining U.S. local government survey data over two decades with census tract-level CDBG expenditures, we find that in neighborhood where 51 percent or more of the families are low-to-moderate income (LMI), its likelihood of receiving funds increases with its share of LMI population relative to the city's, but at a diminished rate compared to non-LMI tracts. Further, city-level factors moderate this relationship (e.g., including community development corporations in planning processes).
BartikT. J.2018. Who Benefits From Economic Development Incentives? How Incentive Effects on Local Incomes and the Income Distribution Vary with Different Assumptions about Incentive Policy and the Local Economy.https://doi.org/10.17848/tr18-034.
2.
BasoloV.HuangC.. 2001. “Cities and Economic Development: Does the City Limits Story Still Apply?” Economic Development Quarterly15 (4): 327–39.
3.
BellemareM. F.WichmanC. J.. 2020. “Elasticities and the Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Transformation.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics82 (1): 50–61.
4.
BrazilN.PortierA.. 2021. “Investing in Gentrification: The Eligibility of Gentrifying Neighborhoods for Federal Place-Based Economic Investment in U.S. Cities.” Urban Affairs Review58 (5): 1234–1276.
5.
BrennanG.BuchananJ. M.. 1980. The Power to tax: Analytic Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution. Cambridge, MD: Cambridge University Press.
6.
BrooksL.PhillipsJ.SinitsynM.. 2011. “The Cabals of a Few or the Confusion of a Multitude: The Institutional Trade-Off Between Representation and Governance.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy3 (1): 1–24.
CampbellS.1996. “Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable Development.” Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association62 (3): 296–312.
ClarkeS. E.GaileG. L.. 1989. “Moving Toward Entrepreneurial Economic Development Policies: Opportunities and Barriers.” Urbana, Ill17 (3): 574.
12.
CollinsonR. A.2014. “Assessing the Allocation of CDBG to Community Development Need.” Housing Policy Debate24 (1): 91–118.
13.
CrawM.2006. “Overcoming City Limits: Vertical and Horizontal Models of Local Redistributive Policy Making.” Social Science Quarterly87 (2): 361–79.
14.
CrawM.2010. “Deciding to Provide: Local Decisions on Providing Social Welfare.” American Journal of Political Science54 (4): 906–20.
15.
DeslatteA.ChungJ.StokanE.. 2023. “Structural Drivers of Sustainability and Resilience Strategies in Small (ish) Cities: A Text Analysis of Comprehensive Planning in Indiana.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1–22.
16.
DeslatteA.SchattemanA. M.StokanE.. 2019. “Handing Over the Keys: Nonprofit Economic Development Corporations and Their Implications for Accountability and Inclusion.” Public Performance and Management Review42 (1): 90–114.
17.
DeslatteA.StokanE.. 2019. “Hierarchies of Need in Sustainable Development: A Resource Dependence Approach for Local Governance.” Urban Affairs Review55 (4): 1125–1152.
18.
DeslatteA.StokanE.. 2020. “Sustainability Synergies or Silos? The Opportunity Costs of Local Government Organizational Capabilities.” Public Administration Review80 (6): 1024–1034.
19.
DomingueS. J.EmrichC. T.. 2019. “Social Vulnerability and Procedural Equity: Exploring the Distribution of Disaster aid Across Counties in the United States.” American Review of Public Administration49 (8): 897–913.
20.
DommelP. R.RichM. J.. 1987. “The Rich Get Richer: The Attenuation of Targeting Effects of the Community Development Block Grant Program.” Urban Affairs Quarterly22 (4): 552–79.
21.
EinsteinK. L.KoganV.. 2016. “Pushing the City Limits: Policy Responsiveness in Municipal Government.” Urban Affairs Review52 (1): 3–32.
22.
ElkinsD. R.1995. “Testing Competing Explanations for the Adoption of Type II Policies.” Urban Affairs Quarterly30 (6): 809–39.
23.
FarmerJ. L.2022. “State Interventions and Interlocal Collaborations Across the Three Pillars of Sustainability.” State and Local Government Review54 (2): 120–145.
24.
FeiockR. C.ClingermayerJ. C.StreamC.BarbaraC. M.AhmedS.. 2001. “Political Conflict, Fiscal Stress, and Administrative Turnover in American Cities.” State and Local Government Review33 (2): 101–8.
25.
FilionP.ReeseL. A.SandsG.. 2019. “Progressive Economic Development Policies: A Square PED in a Round Hole.” Urban Affairs Review57 (5): 1410–1441.
26.
FischelW. A.2005. The Homevoter Hypothesis: How Home Values Influence Local Government Taxation, School Finance, and Land-Use Policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
FisherP. S.PetersA. H.. 1998. “Industrial Incentives: Competition among American States and Cities.” Employment Research Newsletter5 (2): 1.
28.
FleischmannA.GreenG. P.KwongT. M.. 1992. “What’s a City to Do? Explaining Differences in Local Economic Development Policies.” The Western Political Quarterly45 (3): 677–99.
29.
GalsterG., Levy, D. K., Sawyer, N., Temkin, K., and C. Walker. 2016. The Impact of Community Development Corporations on Urban Neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
30.
GalsterG.WalkerC.HayesC.BoxallP.JohnsonJ.. 2004. “Measuring the Impact of Community Development Block Grant Spending on Urban Neighborhoods.” Housing Policy Debate15 (4): 903–34.
31.
GoetzE. G.1994. “Expanding Possibilities in Local Development Policy: An Examination of U.S.” Cities. Political Research Quarterly47 (1): 85–109.
32.
HallJ. L.HandleyD. M.. 2011. “City Adoption of Federal Performance Measurement Requirements.” Public Performance & Management Review34 (4): 443–66.
33.
HammerJ.PivoG.. 2017. “The Triple Bottom Line and Sustainable Economic Development Theory and Practice.” Economic Development Quarterly31 (1): 25–36.
34.
HawkinsC.2014. “Competing Interests and the Political Market for Smart Growth Policy.” Urban Studies51 (12): 2503–22.
35.
JacksonK. T.1987. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
36.
JansaJ. M.GrayV.. 2017. “Captured Development: Industry Influence and State Economic Development Subsidies in the Great Recession Era.” Economic Development Quarterly31 (1): 50–64.
37.
JensenN. M.MaleskyE. J.. 2018. Incentives to Pander: How Politicians Use Corporate Welfare for Political Gain. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
38.
JohnsonN. J.SvaraJ. H.. 2011. Justice for all: Promoting social equity in public administration (ME Sharpe).
39.
KantorP.2016. “The End of American Urban Policy—Or a Beginning.” Urban Affairs Review52 (6): 887–916.
40.
KaufmannD.WittwerS.. 2019. “Business Centre or Bedroom Community? The Development of Employment in Small and medium-Sized Towns.” Regional Studies53 (10): 1483–93.
41.
KenyonD. A. 1997. “Theories of Interjurisdictional Competition.” New England Economic Review97: 13–27.
42.
LiaoL.WarnerM. E.HomsyG. C.. 2019. “Sustainability’s Forgotten Third E: What Influences Local Government Actions on Social Equity?” Local Environment24 (12): 1197–208.
43.
LobaoL.KraybillD.. 2009. “Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an era of Decentralization.” Growth and Change40 (3): 418–51.
44.
LoganJ. R.MolotchH.. 2007. Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. University of California Press.
45.
MasseyD.DentonN. A.. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
MinkoffS. L.2009. “Minding Your Neighborhood: The Spatial Context of Local Redistribution*.” Social Science Quarterly90 (3): 516–537.
47.
MoldogazievT. T.KrauseR. M.ArnoldG.LongL. A. N.RusevaT.SilviaC.WitkoC.. 2023. “Support for the Environment Post-Transition? Material Concerns and Policy Tradeoffs.” Review of Policy Research40 (2): 186–206.
48.
MorganJ. Q.HoymanM. M.McCallJ. R.. 2019. “Everything but the Kitchen Sink? Factors Associated With Local Economic Development Strategy Use.” Economic Development Quarterly33 (4): 267–278.
49.
MuellerE. J.SchwartzA.. 1998. “Leaving Poverty Through Work: A Review of Current Development Strategies.” Economic Development Quarterly12 (2): 166–80.
50.
OsgoodJ. L.OppS. M.DeMastersM.. 2017. “Exploring the Intersection of Local Economic Development and Environmental Policy.” Journal of Urban Affairs39 (2): 260–76.
51.
OstromV.TieboutC. M.WarrenR.. 1961. “The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry.” The American Political Science Review55 (4): 831–42.
52.
OvertonM.2017. “Sorting Through the Determinants of Local Government Competition.” American Review of Public Administration47 (8): 914–928.
53.
OvertonM.StokanE.. 2023. “Rethinking Development and Redistribution Policy: Testing the Local Expenditure Assumption Using the Community Development Block Grant Program.” Journal of Urban Affairs, 1–21.
54.
PaganoM. A.BowmanA. O.. 1997. Cityscapes and Capital: The Politics of Urban Development. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.
55.
PetersonP. E.2012. The Price of Federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
56.
ReeseL. A.1993. “Categories of Local Economic Development: An Empirical Analysis.” Policy Studies Journal: The Journal of the Policy Studies Organization21 (3): 492–506.
57.
ReeseL. A.2006. “Not Just Another Determinants Piece: Path Dependency and Local tax Abatements.” The Review of Policy Research23 (2): 491–504.
58.
ReeseL. A.Blackmond LarnellT.SandsG.. 2010. “Patterns of tax Abatement Policy: Lessons from the Outliers?” The American Review40 (3): 261–283.
59.
ReeseL. A.RosenfeldR. A.. 2002. “Reconsidering Private Sector Power: Business Input and Local Development Policy.” Urban Affairs Review37 (5): 642–74.
60.
RichM. J.2014. “Community Development Block Grants at 40: Time for a Makeover.” Housing Policy Debate24 (1): 46–90.
61.
RichardsonT.2007. “Analyzing a Community Development Needs Index.” Cityscape (Washington, D C )9 (1): 47–72.
62.
RoheW. M.GalsterG. C.. 2014. “The Community Development Block Grant Program Turns 40: Proposals for Program Expansion and Reform.” Housing Policy Debate24 (1): 3–13.
63.
RothsteinR.2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. New York, NY: Liveright Publishing.
64.
RubinH. J.1988. “Shoot Anything That Flies; Claim Anything That Falls: Conversations with Economic Development Practitioners.” Economic Development Quarterly2 (3): 236–51.
65.
RubinI. S.RubinH. J.. 1987. “Economic Development Incentives: The Poor (Cities) Pay More.” Urban Affairs Quarterly23 (1): 37–62.
66.
SapotichneJ.ReeseL. A.YeM.. 2019. “Won’t You Be My Neighbor? An Integrated Model of Urban Policy Interdependence.” Urban Affairs Review55 (1): 108–147.
67.
StiglitzJ. E.2012. The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
68.
StokanE.2013. “Testing Rubin’s Model 25 Years Later: A Multilevel Approach to Local Economic Development Incentive Adoption.” Economic Development Quarterly27 (4): 301–315.
69.
StokanE.DeslatteA.. 2019. “Beyond Borders: Governmental Fragmentation and the Political Market for Growth in American Cities.” State and Local Government Review51 (3): 150–167.
70.
StokanE.DeslatteA.HatchM. E.. 2021. “Exploring the Trade-Offs Local Governments Make in the Pursuit of Economic Growth and Equity.” Urban Affairs Review57 (4): 1084–1114.
71.
StokanE.HatchM. E.OvertonM.. 2022. “Fifty Years as the Fourth Pillar of Public Administration: A Polycentric Extension of the Social Equity Framework.” Public Administration.
72.
StoneC. N.1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946-1988. University press of Kansas.
73.
StoneC. N.StokerR. P.BetancurJ.ClarkeS. E.DanticoM.HorakM.MossbergerK., et al.2015. Urban Neighborhoods in a New Era. University of Chicago Press.
74.
SugrueT. J.2014. The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit - Updated Edition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
75.
SvaraJ. H.BrunetJ. R.. 2004. “Filling in the Skeletal Pillar: Addressing Social Equity in Introductory Courses in Public Administration.” Journal of Public Affairs Education10 (2): 99–109.
76.
SvaraJ. H.BrunetJ. R.. 2005. “Social Equity Is a Pillar of Public Administration.” Journal of Public Affairs Education11 (3): 253–8.
77.
TalenE.2010. “Affordability in New Urbanist Development: Principle, Practice, and Strategy.” Journal of Urban Affairs32 (4): 489–510.
ThomsonD. E.2008. “Strategic, Geographic Targeting of Housing and Community Development Resources: A Conceptual Framework and Critical Review.” Urban Affairs Review43 (5): 629–62.
81.
ThomsonD. E.2011. “Strategic Geographic Targeting in Community Development: Examining the Congruence of Political, Institutional, and Technical Factors.” Urban Affairs Review47 (4): 564–94.
82.
TieboutC. M.1956. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” The Journal of Political Economy64 (5): 416–24.
83.
TortolaP. D.2015. “The Microfoundations of Policy Inertia: A City-Level Analysis of the Community Development Block Grant.” State and Local Government Review47 (1): 6–14.
84.
TrounstineJ.2018. Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities. Cambridge, MD: Cambridge University Press.
85.
WolmanH.SpitzleyD.. 1996. “The Politics of Local Economic Development.” Economic Development Quarterly10 (2): 115–150.
86.
WongK. K.PetersonP. E.. 1986. “Urban Response to Federal Program Flexibility: Politics of Community Development Block Grant.” Urban Affairs Quarterly21 (3): 293–309.
87.
ZhangX.WarnerM. E.HomsyG. C.. 2017. “Environment, Equity, and Economic Development Goals: Understanding Differences in Local Economic Development Strategies.” Economic Development Quarterly31 (3): 196–209.
88.
ZhengL.WarnerM.. 2010. “Business Incentive Use Among U.S. Local Governments: A Story of Accountability and Policy Learning.” Economic Development Quarterly24 (4): 325–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242410376237
89.
ZuoG. W.2020. Getting beneath the hood of effective place-based policies: Evidence from the community development block grant. Unpublished paper, University of Maryland.
