Variation in the Heartland: Explaining the Use of Economic Development Incentives in Three Great Lakes States

2020 ◽  
pp. 107808742092841
Author(s):  
Andrea Craft ◽  
Joshua Drucker ◽  
Rachel Weber

We identify the factors correlated with the use of economic development incentives after the Great Recession of 2007–2009 to determine the presence of entrepreneurial development regimes. We utilize a unique dataset that combines information on incentives (tax increment financing districts and selected tax abatements and business assistance) with economic, fiscal, and political characteristics for all municipalities in the largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas of Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan. These three states bordering Lake Michigan share similar histories and settings, thus targeting the research focus on the key attributes of interest. Our empirical results demonstrate substantial dissimilarity between incentive types and across states, most likely due to policy structures and reforms at the state level that encourage different municipal development regimes. Whereas municipalities, particularly larger ones, continue to use tax abatements, exemptions, and credits to pursue employment growth, the municipalities gravitating toward tax increment financing tend to be suburbs with low unemployment rates and relatively highly educated residents, and not places with greater employment density or manufacturing employment.

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric J. Stokan

This article empirically tests the impact of failing to account for state-level authorization when explaining the factors that lead municipalities to use tax abatements, tax increment financing, and enterprise zones. Although existing research implicitly assumes that state-level authorization exists, this article demonstrates that this unfounded assumption leads to biased estimates using the 1999, 2004, and 2009 International City/County Management Association (ICMA) Economic Development Survey data on a nationwide set of municipalities. This article refines what is known about the factors, leading to the usage of these three policies before offering implications for practitioners and researchers of local economic development.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Patrick Tuszynski ◽  
Dean Stansel

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.


Author(s):  
Branka Radović ◽  
Dragan Radović ◽  
Zoran ÄŒekerevac ◽  
Jugoslav Aničić

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document