IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v53y2016i14p3027-3047.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Countering decline of industrial sites: Do local economic development policies target the neediest places?

Author

Listed:
  • Jasper Beekmans

    (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands)

  • Huub Ploegmakers

    (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands)

  • Karel Martens

    (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands)

  • Erwin van der Krabben

    (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands; University of Ulster, Northern Ireland)

Abstract

Local economic development is a much used tool for the regeneration of urban areas. Although the designation and effectiveness of local economic development policies has been studied extensively in existing literature, the question as to whether these policies are aimed at the areas that are most in need of these policies remains relatively understudied. This question has been answered using the case of industrial sites in the Netherlands. This particular type of urban area in the Netherlands has experienced problems with rapid urban area decline and has therefore been targeted by various area-based regeneration initiatives for many years. The economic performance is the main justification for the designation of industrial sites that are in greater need of regeneration. However, another pertinent and unanswered question is: are the industrial sites targeted for regeneration really the ones that underperform economically? (Multinomial) logistic regression analysis is used to answer this question. Differences in economic performance, measured by the growth in employment figures, the number of companies and property values, between industrial sites that are targeted for regeneration in two different rounds of regeneration initiatives and non-targeted sites are studied. The analysis shows that the differences in economic performance are negligible between these groups. It indicates that other criteria, such as political and strategic decision making influence policymakers’ decisions to target industrial sites for regeneration, thus making it at least doubtful that public money for the regeneration of industrial sites is being spent on what it is meant for.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasper Beekmans & Huub Ploegmakers & Karel Martens & Erwin van der Krabben, 2016. "Countering decline of industrial sites: Do local economic development policies target the neediest places?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(14), pages 3027-3047, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:53:y:2016:i:14:p:3027-3047
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098015603289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098015603289
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098015603289?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. Anderson, John E., 1990. "Tax Increment Financing: Municipal Adoption and Growth," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 43(2), pages 155-63, June.
    2. Bondonio, Daniele & Engberg, John, 2000. "Enterprise zones and local employment: evidence from the states' programs," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 519-549, September.
    3. Robert T. Greenbaum & John B. Engberg, 2004. "The impact of state enterprise zones on urban manufacturing establishments," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 315-339.
    4. Dye, Richard F. & Merriman, David F., 2000. "The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 306-328, March.
    5. Timothy J. Bartik, "undated". "What Should the Federal Government Be Doing About Urban Economic Development?," Upjohn Working Papers tjb1994c, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    6. Peter Tyler & Colin Warnock & Allan Provins & Bruno Lanz, 2013. "Valuing the Benefits of Urban Regeneration," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(1), pages 169-190, January.
    7. Timothy J. Bartik, 1991. "Who Benefits from State and Local Economic Development Policies?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number wbsle, December.
    8. John E. Anderson & Robert W. Wassmer, 2000. "Bidding for Business: The Efficacy of Local Economic Development Incentives in a Metropolitan Area," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number bb, December.
    9. Timothy J. Bartik, 2004. "Evaluating the Impacts of Local Economic Development Policies on Local Economic Outcomes: What Has Been Done and What Is Doable?," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Evaluating Local Economic and Employment Development: How to Access Waht Works Among Programmes and Policies, pages 113-142, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    10. Matias Busso & Jesse Gregory & Patrick Kline, 2013. "Assessing the Incidence and Efficiency of a Prominent Place Based Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 897-947, April.
    11. Rachel Weber & Saurav Dev Bhatta & David Merriman, 2003. "Does Tax Increment Financing Raise Urban Industrial Property Values?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(10), pages 2001-2021, September.
    12. Robert Greenbaum & Daniele Bondonio, 2004. "Losing Focus: A Comparative Evaluation of Spatially Targeted Economic Revitalization Programmes in the US and the EU," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 319-334.
    13. Kala Seetharam Sridhar, 2005. "Benefits and Costs of Regional Development: Evidence from Ohio’s Enterprise Zone Programme," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Incentives for Regional Development, chapter 5, pages 87-114, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. I Turok, 1992. "Property-Led Urban Regeneration: Panacea or Placebo?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 24(3), pages 361-379, March.
    15. Alan H. Peters & Peter S. Fisher, 2002. "State Enterprise Zone Programs: Have They Worked?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number sezp, December.
    16. Bondonio, Daniele & Greenbaum, Robert T., 2007. "Do local tax incentives affect economic growth? What mean impacts miss in the analysis of enterprise zone policies," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 121-136, January.
    17. Robert W. Wassmer & John E. Anderson, 2001. "Bidding for Business: New Evidence on the Effect of Locally Offered Economic Development Incentives in a Metropolitan Area," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 15(2), pages 132-148, May.
    18. Neumark, David & Kolko, Jed, 2010. "Do enterprise zones create jobs? Evidence from California's enterprise zone program," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 1-19, July.
    19. Anderson, John E., 1990. "Tax Increment Financing: Municipal Adoption and Growth," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 43(2), pages 155-163, June.
    20. Lang, Thilo, 2005. "Insights in the British Debate about Urban Decline and Urban Regeneration," IRS Working Papers 32, Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space (IRS).
    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. Sumei Zhang, 2019. "Rethinking U.S. enterprise zones: The role of research design in program evaluation," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(6), pages 545-571, September.
    2. Huub Ploegmakers & Pascal Beckers, 2015. "Evaluating urban regeneration: An assessment of the effectiveness of physical regeneration initiatives on run-down industrial sites in the Netherlands," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(12), pages 2151-2169, September.
    3. Sumei Zhang, 2020. "Do Research Methods Matter in Enterprise Zone Outcome Evaluations?," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 34(3), pages 299-309, August.
    4. Patrick Kline & Enrico Moretti, 2014. "People, Places, and Public Policy: Some Simple Welfare Economics of Local Economic Development Programs," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 629-662, August.
    5. Givord, Pauline & Rathelot, Roland & Sillard, Patrick, 2013. "Place-based tax exemptions and displacement effects: An evaluation of the Zones Franches Urbaines program," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 151-163.
    6. Tammy Leonard & Xi Yang & Lei Zhang & Connor Reed, 2020. "Impact of Property Tax Abatement on Employment Growth," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 34(2), pages 209-221, May.
    7. Hanson, Andrew & Rohlin, Shawn, 2013. "Do spatially targeted redevelopment programs spillover?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 86-100.
    8. Pender, John & Reeder, Richard, 2011. "Impacts of Regional Approaches to Rural Development: Initial Evidence on the Delta Regional Authority," Economic Research Report 262240, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. Felix, R. Alison & Hines, James R., 2013. "Who offers tax-based business development incentives?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 80-91.
    10. Reynolds, C. Lockwood & Rohlin, Shawn M., 2015. "The effects of location-based tax policies on the distribution of household income: Evidence from the federal Empowerment Zone program," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-15.
    11. Ham, John C. & Swenson, Charles & Imrohoroglu, Ayse & Song, Heonjae, 2011. "Government programs can improve local labor markets: Evidence from State Enterprise Zones, Federal Empowerment Zones and Federal Enterprise Community," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 779-797, August.
    12. Charles W. Swenson, 2015. "The Death of California Redevelopment Areas," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(3), pages 211-228, August.
    13. Nidhi Chaudhary & Jonathan Potter, 2019. "Evaluation of the local employment impacts of enterprise zones: A critique," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(10), pages 2112-2159, August.
    14. Gibbons, Stephen & Overman, Henry & Sarvimäki, Matti, 2021. "The local economic impacts of regeneration projects: Evidence from UK's single regeneration budget," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    15. Krupka, Douglas J. & Noonan, Douglas S., 2009. "Empowerment Zones, neighborhood change and owner-occupied housing," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 386-396, July.
    16. Sumei Zhang, 2015. "Impacts of Enterprise Zone Policy on Industry Growth," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(4), pages 347-362, November.
    17. Anthony Briant & Miren Lafourcade & Benoît Schmutz, 2015. "Can Tax Breaks Beat Geography? Lessons from the French Enterprise Zone Experience," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 88-124, May.
    18. Thierry Mayer & Florian Mayneris & Loriane Py, 2017. "The impact of Urban Enterprise Zones on establishment location decisions and labor market outcomes: evidence from France," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 709-752.
    19. Hanson, Andrew, 2009. "Local employment, poverty, and property value effects of geographically-targeted tax incentives: An instrumental variables approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 721-731, November.
    20. Neumark, David & Simpson, Helen, 2015. "Place-Based Policies," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 1197-1287, Elsevier.

    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:urbstu:v:53:y:2016:i:14:p:3027-3047. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.