IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v32y2014i4p680-696.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Financial Appraisal of Business Improvement Districts in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Lesley Hemphill
  • Jim Berry
  • Stanley McGreal

Abstract

Urban regeneration has increasingly emphasised long-term policy objectives and public—private partnership arrangements where risk and profits are more equitably distributed between the parties. Similarly, successive governments have endorsed area-based regeneration vehicles with increasing importance placed on enterprise zones, business improvement districts (BIDs), tax incremental finance, and other local asset backed vehicles. Each regeneration vehicle necessitates a clear policy direction and performance measurement of its policy outputs to ensure that funding is targeted at initiatives delivering sustainability impacts. This paper presents a ‘market’ and ‘nonmarket’ appraisal of the financial impact of BIDs as an area-based regeneration vehicle. It utilises data from a UK-wide survey to demonstrate the potential of BIDs in generating direct income and indirect investment and how the output capacity of the BID model increases over time. The paper concludes that BIDs have significant leverage potential whilst acting as a key conduit for coordinating wider area-based regeneration.

Suggested Citation

  • Lesley Hemphill & Jim Berry & Stanley McGreal, 2014. "A Financial Appraisal of Business Improvement Districts in the UK," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(4), pages 680-696, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:4:p:680-696
    DOI: 10.1068/c12221b
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c12221b
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c12221b?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Dolan & Robert Metcalfe, 2008. "Comparing Willingness-to-Pay and Subjective Well-Being in the Context of Non-Market Goods," CEP Discussion Papers dp0890, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Anna Alberini & Patrizia Riganti & Alberto Longo, 2003. "Can People Value the Aesthetic and Use Services of Urban Sites? Evidence from a Survey of Belfast Residents," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 193-213, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Romina Boarini & Margherita Comola & Femke Keulenaer & Robert Manchin & Conal Smith, 2013. "Can Governments Boost People’s Sense of Well-Being? The Impact of Selected Labour Market and Health Policies on Life Satisfaction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 105-120, October.
    2. Berlemann, Michael, 2016. "Does hurricane risk affect individual well-being? Empirical evidence on the indirect effects of natural disasters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 99-113.
    3. Berlemann, Michael, 2015. "Hurricane Risk, Happiness and Life Satisfaction. Some Empirical Evidence on the Indirect Effects of Natural Disasters," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113073, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Apergis, Nicholas & Hayat, Tasawar & Kadasah, Nasser A., 2019. "Subjective well-being in housing purchasing: Evidence with survey data from the U.K. housing residential market," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 328-335.
    5. Borgers, Aloys & Vosters, Cindy, 2011. "Assessing preferences for mega shopping centres: A conjoint measurement approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 322-332.
    6. María Laura Arrosa & Nestor Gandelman, 2016. "Valuation of public amenities and differences in quality of life among Latin American cities," Documentos de Investigación 111, Universidad ORT Uruguay. Facultad de Administración y Ciencias Sociales.
    7. Wadim Strielkowski & Jing Wang & Stephen Platt, 2013. "Consumer preferences for cultural heritage and tourism e-sevices: A case study of three European cities," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 25(2), pages 161-176.
    8. Massimiliano Castellani & Pierpaolo Pattitoni & Laura Vici, 2015. "Pricing Visitor Preferences for Temporary Art Exhibitions," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 83-103, February.
    9. Tiziana Cuccia & Roberto Cellini, 2007. "Is cultural heritage really important for tourists? A contingent rating study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 261-271.
    10. Angus Deaton & Jane Fortson & Robert Tortora, 2008. "Life (evaluation), HIV/AIDS, and death in Africa," Working Papers 1121, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    11. Dolan, Paul & Fujiwara, Daniel & Metcalfe, Robert, 2011. "A step towards valuing utility the marginal and cardinal way," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121714, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Patrizia Riganti, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public’s and Decisionmakers’ Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Working Papers 2006.137, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2013. "Valuing Local Environmental Amenity with Discrete Choice Experiments: Spatial Scope Sensitivity and Heterogeneous Marginal Utility of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 105-130, September.
    14. Berlemann, Michael & Eurich, Marina, 2021. "Natural hazard risk and life satisfaction – Empirical evidence for hurricanes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    15. Anita Ratcliffe, 2010. "Housing wealth or economic climate: Why do house prices matter for well-being?," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 10/234, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    16. YODO Masato & UCHIDA Atsuhiko, 2022. "How Much Is It Worth Not Being Alone? An empirical evaluation of social support using the life satisfaction approach in Japan," Discussion papers 22108, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    17. Jaap Boter & Jan Rouwendal & Michel Wedel, 2005. "Employing Travel Time to Compare the Value of Competing Cultural Organizations," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 29(1), pages 19-33, February.
    18. Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto & Riganti, Patrizia, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public's and Decision-makers' Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12221, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    19. Wiśniewska Aleksandra, 2019. "Quality attributes in the non-market stated-preference based valuation of cultural goods," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 6(53), pages 132-150, January.
    20. Patrizia Riganti & Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo, 2005. "Public Preferences for Land usesÂ’ changes - valuing urban regeneration projects at the Venice Arsenale," ERSA conference papers ersa05p756, European Regional Science Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:4:p:680-696. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.