This article provides empirical evidence that the factors of context and social climate are the most influential for achieving green building. Using both chi-squared analysis and factor analysis findings indicate that providing the context and social climate which can reduce transaction costs influence green building. Specifically, through policies and guidelines, having the local expertise and support to make the outcomes occur are all important factors. Additionally, central cities were much more likely to engage in green building than suburban or non-metropolitan areas. This has implications for matters of collective action.
Allen, J.H., & Potiowsky, T. ( 2008). Portland’s green building cluster: Economic trends and impacts. Economic Development Quarterly, 22, 303-315.
2.
Basolo, V. ( 2000). City spending on economic development versus affordable housing: Does inter-city competition or local politics drive decisions? Journal of Urban Affairs, 22, 317-332.
3.
Chao, M., Parker, G., Mahon, D., & Kammerud, R. ( 1999, February). Recognition of energy costs and energy performance in commercial property valuation: Recommendations and guidelines for appraisers . For the Pacific Gas & Electric Company and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved from http://www.imt.org/PDF%20files/CA%20RGs%202-99.PDF
4.
Dawkins, C.J. ( 2000). Transactions cost and the land use planning process. Journal of Planning Literature, 14, 507-518.
5.
Duerksen, C. ( 2009, June 17-18). Saving the world through zoning: Sustainable community development code reform project. Paper presented at the Planning in the West conference, Boise, Idaho.
6.
Eisinger, P.K. ( 1988). The rise of the entrepreneurial state. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
7.
Energy Information Administration. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/index.html
8.
Feiock, R.C., & Stream, C. ( 2001). Environmental protection versus economic development: A false trade-off? Public Administration Review, 61, 313-321.
9.
Fowler, F.J., Jr. ( 1993). Survey Research Methods. (2nd Ed.). Newbury Park: SAGE Publications .
10.
Jacobs, J. ( 1969). The economy of cities. New York, NY : Random House
11.
Jeong, M.G., & Feiock, R. ( 2006). Impact fees, growth management, and development: A contractual approach to local policy and governance. Urban Affairs Review , 41, 749-768.
12.
Jepson, E.J., Jr. ( 2004). The adoption of sustainable development policies and techniques in U.S. cities: How wide, how deep, and what role for planners?Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23, 229-241.
13.
Kim, J., & Mueller, C.W. ( 1978). Introduction to factor analysis: What it is and how to do it. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
14.
Lewis, P.G. ( 2001). Looking outward or turning inward? Motivations for development decisions in California central cities and suburbs. Urban Affairs Review, 36, 696-720.
15.
Linder, S.H., & Peters, B.G. ( 1989). Instruments of government: Perceptions and contexts. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1), 35-58.
16.
Lockwood, C. ( 2008). The dollars and sense of green retrofits. Joint study by Deloitte and Charles Lockwood. Retrieved from http://www.deloitte.com/assests/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assests/Documents?us_re_Dollars_Sense_Retrofits_190608_.pdf
17.
Mason, S.G., & Thomas, K.P.(2010) Tax Increment Financing in Missouri: An Analysis of Determinants, Competitive Dynamics, Equity and Path Dependency. Economic Development Quarterly24: 169-179.
18.
McGuire, M. ( 2000). Collaborative policy making and administration: The operational demands of local economic development. Economic Development Quarterly, 14, 278-291
19.
Peterson, P.E. ( 1981). City limits. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Porter, M. ( 1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 77-93.
21.
Saha, D., & Paterson, R.G. (2008). Local government efforts to promote the "Three E’s" of sustainable development: Survey in medium to large cities in the United States. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, 21-37.
22.
Smith, A. ( 2003). Building momentum: National trends and prospects for high-performance green buildings (Report by the U.S. Green Building Council for the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works). Washington, DC: U.S. Green Building Council.
23.
Stone, C. ( 1989). Regime politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946-1988. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
24.
Sullivan, D.M. ( 2002). Local governments as risk takers and risk reducers: An examination of business subsidies and subsidy controls. Economic Development Quarterly, 16(2), 115-126.
25.
United States Conference of Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.usmayors.org/climateprotection/revised/
26.
United States Green Building Council. (2008 ). Buildings and climate change. Retrieved from http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dgs/pio/facts/LA%20workshop/climate.pdf
27.
Watson, R. ( 2008). Green Building Impact Report 2008. Retrieved from http://www.greenbix.com/research/report/2008/11/18/green-building-impact-report-2008
28.
Wildavsky, A. ( 1964). Leadership in a small town. Totawa, NJ: Bedminster Press.
29.
Zahran, S., Grover, H.Brody, S.D., & Vedlitz, A. ( 2008). Risk, stress, and capacity: Explaining metropolitan commitment to climate protection. Urban Affairs Review, 43, 447-474.
