This paper examines the decentralization of employment using zip code data on employment by industry. Most American cities are decentralized on average less than 16 percent of employment in metropolitan areas is within a three mile radius of the city center. In decentralized cities, the classic stylized facts of urban economics (i.e. prices fall with distance to the city center, commute times rise with distance and poverty falls with distance) no longer hold. Decentralization is most common in manufacturing and least common in services. The human capital level of an industry predicts its centralization, but the dominant factor explaining decentralization is the residential preferences of workers. Political borders also impact employment density which suggests that local government policies significantly influence the location of industry.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number
8117.
Length: Date of creation: Feb 2001 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:8117
Note: EFG LE PE Contact details of provider: Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A. Phone: 617-868-3900 Email: Web page: http://www.nber.org More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Edward L. Glaeser & Matthew E. Kahn & Jordan Rappaport, 2000.
"Why Do the Poor Live in Cities?,"
NBER Working Papers
7636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Edward L. Glaeser, Jed Kolko, and Albert Saiz, 2001.
"Consumer city,"
Journal of Economic Geography,
Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 27-50, January.
Other versions:
Ed Glaeser & Jed Kolko & Albert Saiz, 2000.
"Consumer City,"
NBER Working Papers
7790, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
Marcy Burchfield & Henry G. Overman & Diego Puga & Matthew A. Turner, 2005.
"Causes of sprawl: A portrait from space,"
Working Papers
tecipa-192, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
Edward L. Glaeser & Matthew E. Kahn, 2003.
"Sprawl and Urban Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
9733, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Glaeser, Edward L. & Kahn, Matthew E., 2004.
"Sprawl and urban growth,"
Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics,
in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 56, pages 2481-2527
Elsevier.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)