The new economic geography versus urban economics: an evaluation using local wage rates in Great Britain
AbstractThis paper tests two major competing theories explaining the spatial concentration of economic activity, namely new economic geography theory (NEG) which emphasizes varying market potential, and urban economics theory (UE) in which the main emphasis is on producer service linkages. Using wage rate variations across small regions of Great Britain, the paper finds that it is UE theory rather than NEG theory that has most explanatory power. Evidence for this comes from encompassing both models within an artificial nesting model. Despite the popularity of NEG theory, this paper shows that although NEG works well using regional data, there is evidence that it does not necessarily provide the best explanation of local wage variations, since producer services inputs associated with UE theory and labour efficiency variations are important effects at a local level, and these are excluded from the formal NEG model. Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Oxford Economic Papers.
Volume (Year): 58 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 (July)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://oep.oupjournals.org/
Other versions of this item:
- Bernard Fingleton, 2004. "The new economic geography versus urban economics : an evaluation using local wage rates in Great Britain," ERSA conference papers ersa04p638, European Regional Science Association.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.