National government policy options for contributing to regional economic stability: The US department of energy's major nuclear weapons sites

Review of Policy Research

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 647-670

  Greenberg, Michael ^a   Lowrie, Karen ^a   Frisch, Michael ^a   Lewis, David ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INVESTMENT; NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING; REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT; REGIONAL ECONOMY;

HANFORD; IDAHO; NORTH AMERICA; OAK RIDGE RESERVATION; SAVANNAH RIVER; TENNESSEE; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [UNITED STATES];

EID: 1642422911     PISSN: 1541132X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1541-1338.2003.00045.x     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Anderson, M., Bischak, M., & Oden, M. (1991). Converting the American economy. Lansing, MI: Employment Research Associates.
2. Bar-El, R. (1987). Patterns of change in developing rural regions. Boulder, CO: Westview.
3. Bebbington, W. (1990). History of DuPont at the Savannah River plant. Wilmington, DE: E.I. DuPont De Nemours.
4. Bergman, E., Maier, G., & Todtling, F. (Eds.) (1991). Regions reconsidered: Economic networks, innovation, and local development in industrialized countries. New York: Mansell.
5. Bluestone, B., & Harrison, B. (1982). The Deindustrialization of America: Plant closings, community abandonment, and the dismantling of basic industry. NY: Basic.
6. Blush, S., & Heitman, T. (1995). Train wreck along the river of money. Washington, DC: Report to U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
7. Brice, R., Cartron, D., Rhyne, T., Schulze, M., & Weltry, L. (1994). Commercialization of Los Alamos National Laboratory technologies in small businesses. Report to the US Department of Energy. Austin, TX: M.C. Ventures.
8. Browning, G. (1995, May). Energy labs due for overhaul? National Journal, pp. 1170-1171.
9. Crump, J. (1989). The spatial distribution of military spending in the United States, 1941-1985. Growth and Change, 20, 50-62.
10. Frieden, B., & Baxter, C. (2000). From barracks to business: The MIT report on base redevelopment. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce, EDA.
11. Frisch, M., & Lewis, D. (2000). What happened to conversion in the nuclear weapons complex? An analysis of regional spending on environmental management and defense programs in the Department of Energy. New Brunswick, NJ: Report 34 of Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP).
12. Frisch, M., Solitare, L., Greenberg, M., & Lowrie, K. (1998). Regional economic benefits of environmental management at the US Department of Energy's major nuclear weapons sites. Journal of Environmental Management, 54, 23-37.
13. Frisch, M., Solitare, L., Greenberg, M., & Lowrie, K. (2000). Impact of providing off-site economic development funds to dependent regions surrounding the US DOE's major nuclear weapons sites. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27, 801-819.
14. Geddes, R. (1997). Cities in our future. Washington, DC: Island Press.
15. Gerber, M. (1992). Home front: The Cold War legacy of the Hanford Nuclear Site. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
16. Gertcher, F., & Weida, W. (1990). Beyond deterrence: The political economy of nuclear weapons. Boulder, CO: Westview.
17. Gittell, R. (1992). Renewing cities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18. Greenberg, M., Isserman, A., Frisch, M., Krueckeberg, D., Lowrie, K., Mayer, H., Simon, D., & Sorenson, D. (1999). Questioning conventional wisdom: The regional economic impacts of major US nuclear weapons sites, 1970-1994. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 33, 183-204.
19. Greenberg, M., Lewis, D., & Frisch, M. (2001). Regional economic impacts of environmental management of radiological hazards: An initial analysis of a complex problem. Environmental Planning and Management, 44, 377-390.
20. Greenberg, M., Lewis, D., Frisch, M., Lowrie, K., & Mayer, H. (2002). The US Department of Energy's regional economic legacy: spatial dimensions of a half-century of dependency. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 36, 109-125.
21. Greenberg, M., & Schneider, D. (1996). Environmentally devastated neighborhoods: Perceptions, policies, and realities. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
22. Hill, C. (1998). The political economy of military base redevelopment: An evaluation of four converted naval bases. New Brunswick, NJ: Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.
23. Hooks, G., & Getz, V. (1996). Federal investments and economic stimulus at the end of the Cold War: The influence of federal installations on employment growth, 1970-1990. Paper presented at Rutgers University, New Jersey, December.
24. Isaacs, N. (2002a, February 11). Deja boom, vit plant workers may add 20 minutes to rush hour. The Tri-City Herald. Available at http://www.hanfordnews.com/boom/0211.html.
25. Isaacs, N. (2002b, February 10). Deja boom, area braces for influx of 7,300 newcomers, The Tri-City Herald. Available at http://hanfordnews.com/boom/0210.html.
26. Isaacs, N. (2002c, February 15). Deja boom, cities ask legislature to help ease vit plant boom, Tri-City Herald. Available at http://hanfordnews.com/boom/0215.html.
27. Isserman, A., & Rephann, T. (1995). The economic effects of the Appalachian Regional Commission: An empirical assessment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 61, 345-364.
28. Kaiser, E., Godschalk, D., & Chapin, F. S., Jr. (1995). Urban land use planning (4th ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
29. Keating, D., & Krumholz, N. (Eds.) (1999). Rebuilding urban neighborhoods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Lancaster, J. (1984, December 6). Aiken, SC: Town that lives by the bomb, Atlanta Constitution, A-1.
31. Lewis, D., & Frisch, M. (2001). Prospects for innovation-based economic development in two Department of Energy-dominated regions. New Brunswick, NJ: Report 41 of Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP).
32. Lewis, D., Greenberg, M., & Frisch, M. (2001). Downsizing and worker separations: Modeling the regional economic impacts of alternative Department of Energy work-force adjustment policies. New Brunswick, NJ: Report 37 of Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP).
33. Lowrie, K., & Greenberg, M. (1997). Placing future land use planning in a regional context: The Savannah River site. Federal Facilities Environmental Journal, 8(1), 51-65.
34. Lowrie, K., Greenberg, M., & Frisch, M. (1999). Economic fallout. Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, summer, 119-125.
35. Lowrie, K. (1999b). Land use planning on and around U.S. DOE sites: communication, coordination and commitment, New Brunswick, NJ: CRESP report 32.
36. Lowrie, K., & Greenberg, M. (2001). Can David and Goliath get along? Federal lands in local places. Environmental Management, 28(6), 703-711.
37. Lowrie, K., Greenberg, M., & Waishwell, L. (2000). Hazards, risk and the press: a comparative analysis of newspaper coverage of nuclear and chemical weapons sites. Risk: Health, Safety and Environment, 11, 49-67.
38. Mavrides, M. (1995, October 29). Housing cools off in Washington. New York Times, pp. 7, 33.
39. Markusen, A., Hall, P., Campbell, S., & Deitrick, S. (1991). The rise of the gunbelt: The military remapping of industrial America. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Mayer, H., & Greenberg, M. (2000). Responding to economic change in remote, rural regions: federal installations in Idaho and Washington. Journal of Rural Studies 16, 421-432.
41. Melman, S. (1974). The permanent war economy. New York: Simon and Schuster.
42. Miller, R.-E., & Cote, M. (1987). Growing the next Silicon Valley: A guide for successful regional planning. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
43. Mitchell, R., Payne, B., & Dunlap, R. (1989). Stigma and radioactive waste: Theory, assessment and some empirical findings from Hanford, Washington. Worcester, MA.: CENTED report no. 78.
44. Moffat, R. (1996). Population history of western US cities and towns 1830-1990. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
45. Noah, J. (1994). Environmental ethics and the future use of weapons facilities. Federal Facilities Environmental Journal (Autumn), 349-360.
46. Nourse, H. (1968). Regional economics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
47. Oden, M., & Markusen, A. (1995). Coming in from the cold: The future of Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Project on Regional and Industrial Economics.
48. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense. (1991). Base structure report for fiscal year 1991. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy.
49. Office of Environmental Management, US Department of Energy. (1995a). Closing the circle on splitting the atom. Washington, DC: Author.
50. Office of Environmental Management, US Department of Energy. (1995b). Estimating the Cold War mortgage (2 vols.). Washington, DC: Author.
51. Roberson, J. (2001a, November 19). Environmental management priorities, memorandum, 4 pp.
52. Roberson, J. (2001b, December 14). Office of Environmental Management Science and Technology Program, 2 pp.
53. Schoeni, R., & Dardia, M. (1998). Special government assistance to defense-dependent industry workers: The case of the aerospace industry. Contemporary Economic Policy, 16, 251-264.
54. Schwartz, S. (1995). Atomic audit: What the U.S. nuclear arsenal has cost. Brookings Review (Fall), 14-17.
55. Slovic, P., Layman, M., & Kraus, N. (1991). Perceived risk, stigma, and potential economic impacts of a high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada. Risk Analysis, 11(4), 683-695.
56. Solitare, L., & Greenberg, M. (2002). Is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency brownfield assessment pilot program environmentally just? Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 110 (suppl 2), 249-257.
57. Staff. (2002, February 10). Deja boom. Tri-City Herald. Accessed March 6, 2002. Available at http://www.hanfordnews.com/boom/primer.html.
58. Suffolk County Planning Commission. (1995). The impact of Brookhaven National Laboratory on the Long Island Economy. Suffolk County, NY: Author.
59. Top-to-Bottom Review Team. (2002). A review of the environmental management program. Washington, DC: US DOE.
60. Trumbo, J. (2002, February 16). Deja boom: Survival comes after boom. Tri-City Herald. Accéssed March 6, 2002. Available at http://www.hanfordnews.com/boom/0216-2.html.
61. US Department of Energy. (2000). Paths to closure. Report no. DOE/EM-0526 Washington, DC: Office of Environmental Management.
62. US General Accounting Office (GAO). (1999). Department of Energy Workforce Reduction: Community Assistance Can Be Better Targeted. Washington, DC: Author.
63. US Department of Energy. (2000). Paths to closure: Status report. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service.
64. US Department of Energy-SR. (2000, December). Savannah River Site long range comprehensive plan: Discussion draft.
65. US Department of Energy-RL. (1999). Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement. Report no. (HCP-EIS), DOE/EIS-0222D. Washington, DC: Author.
66. US Department of Energy-ID. (1995). Long-Term Land Use Future Scenarios for the Idaho National Engineering laboratory, Report no. DOE/ID-10440. Washington, DC: Author.
67. Weart, S. (1992). Fears, fantasies and fallout. New Scientist, 136(1849), 34-37.
68. Williams, B., Brown, S., & Greenberg, M. (1999) Determinants of trust perceptions among residents surrounding the Savannah River nuclear weapons site. Environment and Behavior, 31, 354-371.