This paper tests two competing models, one deriving from new economic geography theory (NEG) emphasising varying market potential, the other with a basis in 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, taking commuting into account, it is UE theory rather than NEG theory that has explanatory power. However since the two hypotheses are non-nested, the evaluation of the competing hypotheses is difficult and therefore the conclusions are provisional. Nevertheless this paper provides evidence that we should be cautious about the ability of NEG to work at all levels of spatial resolution, and re-emphasises the need to focus on supply-side variations in producer services inputs and labour efficiency variations, including the role of commuting, in local economic analysis.
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
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number
ersa04p638.
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.)