Three Strategies of State Economic Development: Entrepreneurial, Industrial Recruitment, and Deregulation Policies in the American States

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin T. Leicht ◽  
J. Craig Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
American States ◽  
State Economic Development

Targeted state economic development incentives and entrepreneurship

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Patrick Tuszynski ◽  
Dean Stansel
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic Freedom ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activity ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Incentive Programs ◽  
Economic Development Incentives ◽  
State Economic Development ◽  
Development Incentives ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between state economic development incentives programs and entrepreneurial activity. Design/methodology/approach The authors use panel data and a fixed-effects model to examine the determinants of five measures of entrepreneurial activity. To measure state economic development incentives programs, they use a new and substantially improved data set from Bartik (2017). They also include a measure for economic freedom, the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of North America index. Findings The authors find a robustly negative relationship between development incentives and patent activity. They find some evidence that incentives are negatively associated with small business establishments (<10 employees) as a percentage of total establishments but positively associated with the large business establishment (>500 employees) share. They also find evidence of a positive relationship between economic freedom and both patent activity and net business formation. Research limitations/implications The results imply that economic development incentive programs are unlikely to increase entrepreneurial activity and may decrease it. They also imply increased economic freedom (lower taxes, lower spending, and lower governmental restrictions on labor markets) may increase entrepreneurial activity. Originality/value To the authors’ knowledge, this paper provides the first examination of the relationship between development incentives and entrepreneurial activity that utilizes Bartik (2017), a new vastly improved data set of state economic development incentive programs. The paper also contributes to the literature on the relationship between economic freedom and entrepreneurial activity.

State Economic Development Policy: A Decade of Activity

1991 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 171 ◽  
Author(s):  
DeLysa Burnier ◽  
Keon Chi ◽  
Lee Walker ◽  
Roger Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
Economic Development Policy ◽  
State Economic Development

Corporatism Without Labor? Industrial Policymaking in the American States

1991 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia Gray ◽  
David Lowery
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Industrial Policy ◽  
State Government ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
Group Influence ◽  
Economic Development Policy ◽  
American States ◽  
American Form ◽  
Better Than

ABSTRACTThis paper extends previous analyses of industrial policy from a corporatist perspective. We advocate a mid-level measure of group influence; the measure is based upon analysis of newspaper stories. A preliminary exploration of NewsBank data is reported, and several interesting trends in economic development policy are isolated. Business and education are heavily involved in policymaking whereas labor and political parties are not at all involved. On the whole, a meso-corporatist model in which business, state government, and education are partners seems to fit better than a business capture model. Some speculations are offered about this new American form of corporatism and its resemblance to the Japanese case.

Biotechnology, State Economic Development, and Interest Politics: a Troublesome Trinity

1991 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
William P. Browne
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Private Interest ◽  
Strategic Planning Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Logical Reason ◽  
State Economic Development

When finally U.S. political archives are reviewed comprehensively and definitively, one confusing point will still linger unresolved: were the artisans of politics crafting policy in response to visions of a public or a private interest? Portz and Eisinger's comparative analysis of state economic development efforts, with hopes pegged on biotechnology, grapples with that distinction at least by implication. Their instructive article needs revisiting - - and their useful findings and conclusions need follow-up research — because there is logical reason to fear that the strategic planning process is no more or less directed toward the public interest than is private interest advocacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document