This is the first of two papers in which the programmatic structure and effectiveness of state government designated enterprise zones (EZs) in the United States of America are analyzed. The study is based on survey data from 17 states. Although the EZs are not the ‘miracle cure’ for economically distressed areas, as claimed by many proponents, notable investment and job gains have been achieved in many zones. Some traditional arguments against EZs, such as their presumed attraction of ‘sweatshop’ industries, the pirating of existing firms from surrounding areas, and the failure to provide jobs for zone residents are not substantiated. In the second paper, a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of state EZ policies is undertaken, with a focus on differences in zone settings and program structures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander Grant and Co, 1981, “Analysis of selected investment incentives and the enterprise zone concept”, final report submitted to the Economic Development Administration, Washington, DC; copy available from Grant Thornton and Co, 1850 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20036
2.
BamseyD, 1985, “Enterprise zones in the United Kingdom: Their origin and evolution”, unpublished MA thesis, Department of Geography, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1
3.
BirchD L, 1979, “The job generation process”, MIT Program on Neighborhood and Regional Change, Room 9–322, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139
4.
BlundellJ, 1983, “Enterprise zones: Federal aid in a different package”Inc. 5 (8) 13–15
5.
BrintnallMGreenR, 1988, “Comparing state enterprise zone programs: Variations in structure and coverage”Economic Development Quarterly250–68
6.
Business Facilities, 1987, “Enterprise zones: The directory”20 (May) 47–54
7.
ButlerS, 1979Enterprise Zones: A Solution to the Urban Crisis? (Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC)
8.
ButlerS, 1980Enteprise Zones in the Inner City (Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC)
9.
ButlerS, 1981Enterprise Zones: Greenlining the Inner Cities (Universe Books, New York)
10.
CAOAG, 1988A Review of Economic Activity in the State's Enterprise Zones and Employment and Economic Incentive AreasState of California, Office of the Auditor General, Suite 300, 660 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
11.
ClarkeS, 1982, “Enterprise zones: Seeking the neighborhood nexus”Urban Affairs Quarterly1853–71
12.
CTDED, 1985Enterprise Zones: The Connecticut Experiment report to the Connecticut General Assembly; State of Connecticut, Department of Economic Development, 210 Washington Street, Hartford, CT 06106
13.
DabneyD Y, 1989Enterprise Zones and Their Relationship to Business Location Decisions unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712
14.
DavisODiPasqualeD, 1982, “Enterprise zones: New deal, old deal, or no deal?”Cato Journal2391–406
15.
EricksonR AFriedmanS W, 1990, “Enterprise zones: 2. A comparative analysis of zone performance and state government policies”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy8 forthcoming
16.
FunkhouserR NLorenzE, 1987, “Fiscal and employment impacts of enterprise zones”Atlantic Economic Journal1562–76
17.
FunkhouserR NWiseE, 1985, “Progress report on Maryland's enterprise zones”, paper prepared for presentation at the Atlantic Economic Society Conference, Washington, DC; copy available from Maryland Department of Economic and Employment Development, State Enterprise Zone Program, 217 East Redwood Street, Baltimore, MD 21202
18.
GoldsmithW, 1982a, “Enterprise zones: If they work we're in trouble”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research6435–442
19.
GoldsmithW, 1982b, “Bringing the Third World home”Working Papers for a New Society9 (2) 24–30
20.
GuntherWLeathersC G, 1987, “British enterprise zones: Implications for U.S. urban policy”Journal of Economic Issues21885–893
21.
HallP, 1977, “Green fields and grey areas”, in Proceedings of the Royal Town Planning Institute Annual Conference (Royal Town Planning Institute, London) pp 1–6
22.
HallP, 1982, “Enterprise zones: A justification”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research6416–421
23.
HarrisonB, 1982, “The politics and economics of the urban enterprise zone proposal: A critique”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research6422–428
24.
HarropK, 1981, “Policy symbols and urban recovery: An appraisal of the enterprise zones”Northern Economic Review13–10
25.
HawkinsB, 1984, “The impact of the enterprise zone on urban areas”Growth and Change1535–40
26.
Housing and Community Development Act, 1987, “Enterprise Zone Development”Public Law 100–242VII (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
27.
HumbergerE, 1982, “The enterprise zone fallacy”Rain8 (6) 16–17; reprinted from Journal of Community Action1 (September-October) 20–28
28.
HumphreyC REricksonR AOttensmeyerE J, 1988, “Industrial development groups, organizational resources, and the prospects for effecting growth in local economies”Growth and Change191–21
29.
JacobsSWasylenkoM, 1981, “Government policy to stimulate economic development: Enterprise zones”, in Financing State and Local Governments in the 1980's: Issues and Trends Eds WalzerNChicoineD L, (Oelgeschlager, Gunn, and Hain, Cambridge, MA)
JonesS AMarshallA RWeisbrodG E, 1985Business Impacts of State Enterprise Zones report prepared for the US Small Business Administration; copy available from Cambridge Systematics, 222 Third Street, Cambridge, MA 02142
32.
KempJ, 1982, “A case for enterprise zones”Nation's Business70 (November) 54–56
33.
MasseyD, 1982, “Enterprise zones: A political issue”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research6429–434
34.
MierRGelzerS E, 1982, “State enterprise zones: The new frontier?”Urban Affairs Quarterly1839–52
35.
MeltzerMWatsonC N, 1983, “Going to town”Management Focus30 (3) 33–35
36.
NASDA, 1986Directory of Incentives for Business Investment and Development in the United StatesNational Association of State Development Agencies (The Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC)
37.
NorcliffeG BHoareA G, 1982, “Enterprise zone policy for the inner city: A review and preliminary assessment”Area14265–274
38.
ReesJ, 1982, “The E-Z route and urban policy”Cato Journal2387–390
39.
RevzanL, 1981, “Enterprise zones: Will they affect industrial location decisions”Industrial Development150 (4) 24–28
40.
RevzanL, 1983, “Enterprise zones: Present status and potential impact”Government Finance12 (4) 31–37
41.
RubinBWilderM E, 1988, “Urban enterprise zones: An analysis of employment impacts and fiscal incentives”Journal of the American Planning Association55418–431
42.
RuhterW, 1982, “Enterprise zones: Some empirical observations”Cato Journal2407–410
43.
Sabre Foundation, 1983Enterprise Zone Activity in the States: Summary of Survey Findings (Sabre Foundation, Washington, DC)
44.
SheldonA WEllingR C, 1988Michigan's Enterprise Zone Program: Progress, Prospects, Problems and RecommendationsCenter for Urban Studies, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202
45.
ShuttJ, 1984, “Tory enterprise zones and the labor movement”Capital and Class2319–44
46.
SternliebG, 1981, “Kemp-Garcia Act: An initial evaluation”, in New Tools for Economic Development: The Enterprise Zone, Development Bank, and RFC Eds SternliebGListokinD, (Rutgers University Press, Piscataway, NJ) pp 42–83
47.
TalbotJ, 1988, “Have enterprise zones encouraged enterprise?: Some empirical evidence from Tyneside”Regional Studies22507–514
48.
TaylorS, 1981, “The politics of enterprise zones”Public Administration59421–439
49.
USBC, 1983a1980 Census of Population: General Population Characteristics: U.S. Summary Bureau of the Census (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
50.
USBC, 1983b1980 Census of Population: General Social and Economic Characteristics: U.S. SummaryUS Bureau of the Census (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
51.
USBC, 1987Statistical Abstract of the United States 1988US Bureau of the Census (US Goverment Printing Office, Washington, DC)
52.
USGAO, 1988Enterprise Zones: Lessons from the Maryland Experience (US General Accounting Office, Program Evaluation and Methodology Division, Washington, DC 20548)
53.
USHUD, 1986aEnterprise Zones in America: A Selected Resource GuideUS Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC; copy available from HUD USER, PO Box 6091, Rockville, MD 20850
54.
USHUD, 1986bState-Designated Enterprise Zones: Ten Case StudiesUS Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC; copy available from HUD USER, PO Box 6091, Rockville, MD 20850
55.
USHUD, 1988State Enterprise Zone Update: Summaries of the State Enterprise Zone ProgramsUS Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC; copy available from HUD USER, PO Box 6091, Rockville, MD 20850
56.
USHUD, 1989Enteprise Zones in America: A Selected Resource Guide, Volume 2US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC; copy available from HUD USER, PO Box 6091, Rockville, MD 20850
57.
WadeJ A, 1989The Maryland Enterprise Zone Program: A Progress Report and Response to the GAOMaryland Department of Economic and Employment Development, State Enterprise Zone Program, 217 East Redwood Street, Baltimore, MD 21202
58.
WaltonJ, 1982, “Cities and jobs and politics”Urban Affairs Quarterly185–17
59.
WeinerS, 1984, “Enterprise zones as a means of reducing structural unemployment”Economic Review (March) 3–16, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, 945 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64198
60.
WitthansF W, 1984, “Will enterprise zones work?”Journal of Small Business Management229–17
61.
WolfM A, 1985, “EZ matrix”EZ Gazette (Winter) 2–3; copy available from M A Wolf, University of Richmond, School of Law, Richmond, VA 23173
