Empowerment for whom? The impact of community renewal tax incentives on jobs and businesses

Urban Studies

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 702-720

  Smith, Richard ^a  

^a WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

economic development; employment; empowerment zones; renewal communities; tax incentives; urban policy

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; EMPLOYMENT; EMPOWERMENT; GENTRIFICATION; MINORITY GROUP; NEIGHBORHOOD; TAX INCENTIVE; URBAN POLICY;

CALIFORNIA; TENNESSEE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84961288788     PISSN: 00420980     EISSN: 1360063X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0042098014528398     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. ADP (2010) Federal and State Tax Incentives. Available at: http://www.adp.com/solutions/employer-services/tax-and-compliance/large-business/tax-credits-and-incentives/federal-and-state-tax-incentives.aspx.
2. Angrist JD, Pischke J-S (2008) Mostly Harmless Econometrics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Anselin L, Syabri I, Kho Y (2006) GeoDa: An introduction to spatial data analysis. Geographical Analysis 38(1): 5–22.
4. Bartik T (1991) Conclusion: People and places. Who benefits from state and local economic development policies? Kalamazoo, MI: Upjohn Institute Press, pp. 205–211. Available at: http://research.upjohn.org/up_press/77/.
5. Boarnet MG (2001) Enterprise zones and job creation: Linking evaluation and practice. Economic Development Quarterly 15(3): 242–254.
6. Busso M, Gregory J, Kline P (2013) Assessing the incidence and efficiency of a prominent place based policy. American Economic Review 103(2): 897–947.
7. FIRSTAdvantage (2010) Location-Based Incentives. Available at: http://www.fadv.com/Location-Based-Incentives.aspx.
8. Galster G, Temkin K, Walker C, et al. (2004) Measuring the impacts of community development initiatives: A new application of the adjusted interrupted time-series method. Evaluation Review 28(6): 502–538.
9. Greenbaum RT, Bondonio D (2004) Losing focus: A comparative evaluation of spatially targeted economic revitalization programmes in the US and the EU. Regional Studies 38(3): 319–334.
10. Halpern R (1995) Rebuilding the Inner City. New York: Columbia University Press.
11. Ham JC, Swenson C, İmrohoro˘lu A, et al. (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.
12. Hanson A (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.
13. Hanson A (2011) Utilization of employment tax credits: An analysis of the empowerment zone wage tax credit. Public Budgeting and Finance 31(1): 23–36.
14. Hanson A, Rohlin S (2013) Do spatially targeted redevelopment programs spillover? Regional Science and Urban Economics 43(1): 86–100.
15. Hartman E (2009) Employing Matching to Alleviate Bias in Survey Data. University of California, Berkeley. Available at: http://ekhartman.berkeley.edu/work/Hartman-1988cnes.pdf.
16. Hebert S, Vidal A, Mills G, et al. (2001) Interim assessment of the empowerment zones and enterprise communities (EZ/EC) program: A progress report. HUD Office of Policy Development and Research. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ezec_report.pdf.
17. Hilbe JM (2011) Negative Binomial Regression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Hubbard AE, Ahern J, Fleischer NL, et al. (2010) To GEE or not to GEE. Epidemiology 21(4): 467–474.
19. Kubisch AC (2010) Recent history of community change efforts in the United States. In Kubisch AC, Auspos P, Brown P, et al. (eds) Voices from the Field III: Lessons and Challenges from Two Decades of Community Efforts. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change, pp. 8–14.
20. Ladd HF (1994) Spatially targeted economic development strategies: Do they work? Cityscapes 1(1): 193–219. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20868371.
21. Lavin M, Whysall P (2004) From enterprise to empowerment: The evolution of an Anglo-American approach to strategic urban economic regeneration. Strategic Change 13(4): 219–229.
22. Levine DI (1999) Gilding the Ghetto. Across the Board 36(9): 10.
23. Marcuse P (1997) The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto. What has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city. Urban Affairs Review 33(2): 228–264.
24. Neumark D, Kolko J (2010) Do enterprise zones create jobs? Evidence from California's enterprise zone program. Journal of Urban Economics 68(1): 1–19.
25. Oakley D, Tsao HS (2006) A new way of revitalizing distressed urban communities? Assessing the impact of the Federal Empowerment Zone program. Journal of Urban Affairs 28(5): 443–471.
26. O'Connor A (1999) Swimming against the tide: A brief history of federal policy in poor communities. In: Ferguson RF, Dickens WT (eds) Urban Problems and Community Development. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, pp. 77–137.
27. Parker T and USDA Economic Research Service (2003) ERS/USDA Briefing Room – Measuring Rurality: Rural–Urban Continuum Codes. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/ruralurbcon/ (accessed 15 September 2009).
28. Quigley JM (1994) New directions for urban policy. Housing Policy Debate 5(1): 97–106.
29. Rich MJ (1989) Distributive politics and the allocation of federal grants. The American Political Science Review 83(1): 193–213.
30. Rich MJ and Stoker RP (2010) Rethinking empowerment: Evidence from local empowerment zone programs. Urban Affairs Review 45(6): 775–796.
31. Rosenbaum P and Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1): 41–55.
32. Sekhon JS (2009) Opiates for the matches: Matching methods for causal inference. Annual Review of Political Science 12(1): 487–508.
33. Spencer JH (2004) People, places, and policy: A politically relevant framework for efforts to reduce concentrated poverty. Policy Studies Journal 32(4): 545–568.
34. Tatian P and Kingsley T (2003) Neighborhood Change Database (NCDB). National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership. Available at: http://www2.urban.org/nnip/ncua/ncdb.html (accessed 1 February 2010).
35. Thistlethwaite D and Campbell D (1960) Regression-discontinuity analysis: An alternative to the ex post facto experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology 51(6): 309–317.
36. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2003) Tax Incentives + Businesses = Jobs. Washington, DC. Available at: http:// portal.hud.gov/huddoc/19132_taxincentives 2003.pdf.
37. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2004) 24 C.F.R. 570.209(b)(1)(i). Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ CFR-2004-title24-vol3/pdf/CFR-2004-title24vol3.pdf.
38. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2005) Spotlight on Results. Available at: http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/economicdevelopment/library/spotlight508.pdf.
39. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2008) RC/EZ/EC Performance Measurement System. Available at: http://www5. hud.gov/urban/perms/printReport.asp?report= 1010.
40. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2012) RC/EZ Initiative Timeline – Economic Development – CPD – HUD. 4 November. Available at: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/ comm_planning/economicdevelopment/programs/rc/about/timeline.
41. US Department of the Treasury (2011) General Explanation of the Administration’s FY 2012 Revenue Proposals. 14 February. Available at: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Final%20Greenbook%20Feb %202012.pdf
42. US Government Accountability Organization (2004) Federal Revitalization Programs Are Being Implemented, but Data on the Use of Tax Benefits Are Limited. 5 March. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04–306.
43. US Government Accountability Organization (2006) Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community Program: Improvements Occurred in Communities, but the Effect of the Program is Unclear. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/ cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06–727.
44. US Government Accountability Organization (2010) Revitalization Programs: Empowerment Zones, Enterprise Communities, and Renewal Communities. Washington, DC, 13 March. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/products/ GAO-10–464R.
45. Wallace MA (2003) An analysis of presidential preferences in the distribution of empowerment zones and enterprise communities. Public Administration Review 63(5): 562–572.
46. Wallace MA (2004) Congressional considerations and urban characteristics in the selection of empowerment zones and enterprise communities. Journal of Urban Affairs 26(5): 593–609.
47. Walls DW (2008) National Establishment Time-Series Database: Data Description. Oakland, CA. Available at: http://youreconomy.org/ YE2010/pages/walls.lasso.
48. White House (2011) Winning the Future for Cities and Metropolitan Areas. The White House. Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb /factsheet/cities-and-metropolitan-areas.
49. White House Office of the Press Secretary (2013) The President’s Plan to Ensure Hard Work Leads to a Decent Living. 15 February. Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/15/fact-sheet-president-s-plan-ensure-hard-work-leads-decent-living (accessed 8 May 2013).
50. Wilder MG and Rubin BM (1996) Rhetoric versus reality: A review of studies on state enterprise zone programs. Journal of the American Planning Association 62(4): 473–491.