The impact of enterprise zones on resident employment: An evaluation of the enterprise zone programs of California and Florida

Economic Development Quarterly

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 44-59

  Elvery, Joel A ^a  

^a CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Enterprise zones; Local labor markets; Propensity score matching; Tax incentives

Indexed keywords

EMPLOYMENT GENERATION; ESTIMATION METHOD; INDUSTRIAL LOCATION; LABOR MARKET; MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISE; NEIGHBORHOOD; PROBABILITY; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; TAX INCENTIVE;

CALIFORNIA; FLORIDA [UNITED STATES]; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 58149520941     PISSN: 08912424     EISSN: 15523543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0891242408326994     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Andrews, D.W.K., & Buchinsky, M. (2000). A three-step method for choosing the number of bootstrap repetitions. Econometrica, 68(1), 23-51.
2. Angrist, J.D., & Krueger, A.B. (1999). Empirical strategies in labor economics. In O. C. Ashenfelter & D. Card (Eds.), Handbook of labor economics (Vol. 3, pp. 1277-1366). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V.
3. Bartik. T. J. (1991). Who benefits from state and local economic development policies? Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
4. Black, D., & Smith, J. (2004). How robust is the evidence on the effects of college quality? Evidence from matching. Journal of Econometrics, 121(1-2), 99-124.
5. Boarnet, M.G. (2001). Enterprise zones and job creation: Linking evaluation and practice. Economic Development Quarterly, 15, 242-254.
6. Bondonio, D. (2002). Evaluating decentralized policies: How to compare the performance of economic development programmes across different regions or states. Evaluation, 8(1), 101-124.
7. Bondonio, D., & Engberg, J. (2000). Enterprise zones and local employment: Evidence from the states' programs. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 30, 519-549.
8. Bondonio, D., & Greenbaum, R.T. (2007). Do tax incentives affect local economic growth? What mean impacts miss in the analysis of enterprise zone policies. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 37(1), 121-136.
9. Brooks, L. (2008). Volunteering to be taxed: Business Improvement Districts and the extra-governmental provision of public safety. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 388-406.
10. Busso, M., & Kline, P. (2007). Do local economic development programs work? Evidence from the federal Empowerment Zone Program. (Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1639). New Haven, CT: Yale University.
11. California Department of Commerce. (1987a). Employment and economic incentive program: Report to the legislature. Sacramento: State of California, Author.
12. California Department of Commerce. (1987b). Enterprise zone act: Report to the legislature. Sacramento: State of California, Author.
13. California Legislature, Committee on Housing and Community Development. (1999, August). SB 511 (Alarcon) Enterprise zones: Where do we go from here? A summary report from the special hearing of the Senate Committee on Housing and Community Development. Sacramento: State of California, Senate Publications.
14. Elvery, J. (2004). The impact of Enterprise Zones on residents' employment: An evaluation of the Enterprise Zone programs of California and Florida. Unpublished dissertation, University of Maryland.
15. Engberg, J., & Greenbaum, R. (1999). State enterprise zones and local housing markets. Journal of Housing Research, 10, 163-187.
16. Florida Office of the Auditor General. (1993). Review and evaluation of the enterprise zone program. (Report No. 12003). Tallahassee, FL: Author.
17. Greenbaum, R.T. (2004). Siting it right: Do states target economic distress when designating enterprise zones? Economic Development Quarterly, 18, 67-80.
18. Greenbaum, R., & Engberg, J. (1998). The impact of state urban enterprise zones on business outcomes. (Working paper No. 98-20). Washington, DC: U. S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies.
19. Greenbaum, R., & Engberg, J. (2000). An evaluation of state enterprise zone policies. Policy Studies Review, 17(2-3), 30-45.
20. Greene, W.H. (1997). Econometric analysis (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21. Greene, W.H. (2002). The bias of the fixed effects estimator in nonlinear models. Unpublished manuscript.
22. Hanson, A. (2007). Poverty reduction and local employment effects of geographically-targeted tax incentives: An instrumental variables approach. Unpublished manuscript.
23. Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., Smith, J., & Todd, P. (1998). Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica, 66, 1017-1098.
24. Holzer, H.J. (1991). The spatial mismatch hypothesis: What has the evidence shown? Urban Studies, 28(1), 105-122.
25. Ihlanfeldt, K.R., & Sjoquist, D.L. (1998). The spatial mismatch hypothesis: A review of recent studies and their implications for welfare reform. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 849-892.
26. Kain, J.F. (1968). Housing segregation, Negro employment, and metropolitan decentralization. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82, 175-197.
27. Krupka, D.J., & Noonan, D.S. (2008). Empowerment zones, neighborhood change and owner occupied housing. (Working paper No. 3320). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
28. Lechner, M. (2001). Identification and estimation of causal effects of multiple treatments under the conditional independence assumption. In M. Lechner & F. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Econometric evaluation of active labour market policies (pp. 43 - 58). Heidelberg, Germany: Physica.
29. O'Keefe, S. (2004). Job creation in California's enterprise zones: A comparison using a propensity score matching model. Journal of Urban Economics, 55(1), 131-150.
30. Papke, L. (1993). What do we know about enterprise zones? (Working paper No. 4251). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
31. Papke, L. (1994). Tax policy & urban development: Evidence from the Indiana Enterprise Zone Program. Journal of Public Economics, 54(2), 37-49.
32. Peters, A.H., & Fisher, P.S. (2002). State enterprise zone programs: Have they worked? Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
33. Rogers, C.L., & Tao, J.L. (2004). Quasi-experimental analysis of targeted economic development programs: Lessons from Florida. Economic Development Quarterly, 18, 269-285.
34. Rosenbaum, P.R., & Rubin, D.R. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41-55.
35. Smith, J., & Todd, P. (2005). Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators ? Journal of Econometrics, 125, 305-353.
36. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1994). Geographic areas reference manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
37. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1999). Census of population and housing, 1980 [United States]: Summary tape file 3A [Computer file], ICPSR version. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Author [producer], 1982). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
38. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2001a). Census of population and housing, 1970 [United States]: Summary Statistic file 4A-Housing [fourth count] [Computer file], ICPSR version. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Author [producer], 1972. (Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]).
39. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2001b). Census of population and housing, 1970 [United States]: Summary Statistic File 4A-Population [fourth count] [Computer file], 2nd ICPSR version. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Commerce, Author. [producer], 1972. (Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]).
40. Wilder, M.G., & Rubin, B.M. (1996). Rhetoric versus reality: A review of studies on state enterprise zone programs. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62, 473-491.