Reconciling Practice with Theory in the Micro-Evaluation of Regional Policy
This paper seeks to reconcile evaluative practice with theory, focusing on the micro-evaluation of UK regional industrial policy. Two issues are examined: the measurement of the pecuniary external effects, including displacement and linkages; and the concept of 'additionality', which is central to the industrial survey approach. It argues that current evaluative practice is at odds with theory, but while cost-benefit analysis simplifies the measurement of the external effects, it has other features that may limit its appeal. On 'additionality', the paper traces its evolution, and shows that it is a multi-dimensional concept. It argues that in practice the use of 'additionality' is deficient as it ignores the firm's private funds and all forms of deadweight transfer.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
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.
Volume (Year): 21 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIRA20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CIRA20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:irapec:v:21:y:2007:i:3:p:321-337. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.