IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local Preferences for Economic Development Outcomes: Analytical Hierarchy Procedure


  • Anna M. Cox
  • Jeffrey Alwang
  • Thomas G. Johnson


Governments frequently formulate policies designed to stimulate regional economic development. Rarely, however, are efforts made to measure local preferences for economic development outcomes. While the political process should eventually sort out how well local governments are meeting the needs of their constituents, the irreversible nature of many development outcomes makes it preferable to incorporate local preferences directly into the decision making process. This paper presents a straightforward means of measuring preference trade‐offs. The analytical hierarchy procedure is applied to local economic development outcomes in three Virginia counties and is shown to improve the targeting of industries by incorporating local preferences in the targeting process. The method has wide applicability for different development decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna M. Cox & Jeffrey Alwang & Thomas G. Johnson, 2000. "Local Preferences for Economic Development Outcomes: Analytical Hierarchy Procedure," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 341-366.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:growch:v:31:y:2000:i:3:p:341-366
    DOI: 10.1111/0017-4815.00132

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Erdogmus, Senol & Kapanoglu, Muzaffer & Koc, Eylem, 2005. "Evaluating high-tech alternatives by using analytic network process with BOCR and multiactors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 391-399, November.
    2. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 79-92, June.
    3. Masako Numata & Masahiro Sugiyama & Gento Mogi, 2020. "Barrier Analysis for the Deployment of Renewable-Based Mini-Grids in Myanmar Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Erdogmus, Senol & Aras, Haydar & Koç, Eylem, 2006. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for residential heating in Turkey using analytic network process (ANP) with group decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 269-279, June.
    5. Aras, Haydar & Erdoğmuş, Şenol & Koç, Eylem, 2004. "Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation station location using analytic hierarchy process," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1383-1392.
    6. Харизма Б. & Реми С. & Нур А. М., 2019. "Определение Приоритетов Местного Самоуправления В Инфраструктуре Здравоохранения С Использованием Метода Аналитической Иерархии: Пример Местных Органов Власти В Провинции Западная Ява," Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления // Public administration issues, НИУ ВШЭ, issue 5, pages 155-182.
    7. Ozgur Demirta, 2013. "Evaluating the Best Renewable Energy Technology for Sustainable Energy Plannin," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(Special), pages 23-33.
    8. Kurek, Katarzyna A. & Heijman, Wim & van Ophem, Johan & Gędek, Stanisław & Strojny, Jacek, 2020. "The impact of geothermal resources on the competitiveness of municipalities: evidence from Poland," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1230-1239.
    9. Bayu Kharisma & Sutyastie Remi & Andar Noor, 2019. "Setting Local Government Priorities in Healthcare Infrastructure Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process Approach: The Cases of Local Governments in West Java Province," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 5, pages 155-182.
    10. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 627-639, June.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:bla:growch:v:31:y:2000:i:3:p:341-366. See general 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: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.