State Economic Development in the 1990s: Politics and Policy Learning

Economic Development Quarterly

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 1995, Pages 146-158

  Elisinger, Peter ^a  

^a Wisconsin Department Natural Rsrc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84970677361     PISSN: 08912424     EISSN: 15523543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/089124249500900204     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. See Peter Eisinger, The Rise of the Entrepreneurial State (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1988).
2. Virginia Gray and David Lowery, “The Corporatist Foundation of State Industrial Policy,” Social Science Quarterly 71 (March 1990): 3–24.
3. Otis Graham, Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).
4. Susan Hansen, “Industrial Policy and Corporatism in the American States,” Governance 2 (April 1989): 172–97.
5. James Cobb, The Selling of the South (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982).
6. Eisinger, Rise of the Entrepreneurial State.
7. Graham, Losing Time, p. 198.
8. David Osborne, Laboratories of Democracy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press, 1988), p. 23.
9. Chris Evans and Linda Triplett, “Measuring the Immeasurable,” State Legislatures 15 (March 1989): 19–21.
10. Irwin Feller, “The Effectiveness of State Investments in Science and Innovation” in Industrial Policy for Agriculture in the Global Economy, ed. Stanley Johnson and Sheila Martin (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1993), p. 131.
11. Goldie Blumenstyk, “States Re-Evaluate Industrial Collaborations Built around Research Grants to Universities,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 26, 1992, p. 1.
12. State Policy Reports, 10(April 1992), p. 22.
13. Peter Eisinger, “The State of State Venture Capitalism,” Economic Development Quarterly 5 (1991): 64–76.
14. Peter Eisinger, “State Venture Capitalism, State Politics, and the World of High Risk Investment,” Economic Development Quarterly 7 (1993): 131–9.
15. State Policy Reports, 10(October 1992), p. 5.
16. William Nothdurft, “The Export Game” Governing 5 (August 1992): 57–61, 58.
17. Herbert Kaufman, Are Government Organizations Immortal? (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1976), p. 64.
18. Again, the figure is probably conservative, since many respondents provided examples rather than exhaustive tallies, despite interviewer prompting. It should be acknowledged that counting programs as an indicator of economic development activity is highly imperfect. Not only is it difficult to accomplish a complete census, but counting tells us nothing about budgetary commitments and priorities. But program counts continue, in the absence of any other quick measure, to serve both as a rough guide to comparative state involvement in this policy area and as an indicator of growing or declining policy commitment. See, for example, Paul Brace, State Government and Economic Performance (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1993), pp. 91–92.
19. Keon Chi, “State Business Incentives” State Trends and Forecasts 3(June 1994), pp. 4–6.
20. The “economic momentum index” is the creation of Anne Jordan, “A State Fiscal Report Card,” Governing 5 (January, 1992), p. 34. Note that economic status seems to be a better predictor of budget cutting than region. Between 45% and 56% of all states in each of the four major census regions—Midwest, Northeast, South, and West—were in the category of budget cutters.
21. A survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures indicates that “the budget will be the issue in 1992. Other pressing issues—like economic development, workers' compensation, and solid waste management—must be tabled in many cases while [states] struggle to bridge widening gaps between revenues and projected expenditures.” National Conference of State Legislatures, State Issues: A Survey of Priority Issues for State Legislatures (Denver: NCSL, 1991), p. 1.
22. Eisinger, Rise of the Entrepreneurial State, pp. 16–21.
23. Eric Herzik, “Policy Agendas and Gubernatorial Leadership,” in Gubernatorial Leadership and State Policy, ed. Eric Herzik and Brent Brown (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1991), pp. 25–37.
24. Robert Guskind, “The New Civil War,” National Journal 14 (April 3, 1993): 818.
25. State Policy Reports, 10 (April 1992), p. 21.
26. Keon Chi, “State Business Incentives,” State Trends and Forecasts 3 (June 1994): 11.
27. H. Brinton Milward and Heidi Newman, “State Incentive Packages and the Industrial Location Decision,” Economic Development Quarterly 3 (1989): 203–22.
28. South Carolina State Development Board, “A Corporate Gem Comes to South Carolina,” Economic Developments 2 (summer 1992): 4–8.
29. New York Times, October 4, 1993.
30. Wall Street Journal, February 3, 1994.
31. New York Times, November 30, 1992.
32. National Association of State Development Agencies, State Economic Development Expenditure Survey (Washington, DC: National Association of State Development Agencies, 1990).
33. South Carolina State Development Board, “A Corporate Gem,” pp. 1, 4.
34. State Policy Report, 10 (April 1992), p. 22.
35. Doug Ross and Robert Friedman, “The Emerging Third Wave,” The Entrepreneurial Economy 9 (autumn 1990): 3–10.
36. Dan Pilcher, “The Third Wave of Economic Development,” State Legislatures 17 (November 1991): 34–37.
37. Paul Sabatier, “Policy Change over a Decade or More,” in Policy Change and Learning, ed. Paul Sabatier and Hank Jenkins-Smith (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1993), p. 19.
38. Guy Peters, American Public Policy: Promise and Performance (Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, 1986).
39. also, for example, Rita Mae Kelly and Bruce Frankel, “The Federal Decision to Fund Local Programs: Utilizing Evaluation Research,” in The Policy Cycle, ed. Judith May and Aaron Wildavsky (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1978), pp. 237–58.
40. This argument is not unrelated to the point made by in Sabatier (see “Policy Change,” pp. 19–20) that policy change is often less a product of formal policy analysis than of noncognitive forces, such as changes in macroeconomic conditions or the rise of new governing coalitions. But the axgument differs from Sabatier's in its emphasis on the strategic considerations that political actors make when faced with these noncognitive changes or the possibility of them.
41. Dennis Grady, “Governors and Markets: Corporate Recruitment from the Gubernatorial Perspective,” in Market-Based Public Policy, ed. Richard Hula (London: Macmillan, 1988), pp. 36–51.
42. Paul Brace writes that as their economies seem “caught in boom and bust cycles,” states' efforts in economic development have come to be seen as lacking both sufficiency and durability. Expensive economic development efforts could not be sustained in periods of economic constraint (Brace, State Goverment and Economic Performance, p. 121).