Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Urban Affairs Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carr, J. B.
Right arrow Articles by Feiock, R. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Notes

Metropolitan Government and Economic Development

Jered B. Carr

Richard C. Feiock

Florida State University

Academic and political debate regarding the desirability of metropolitan government has focused on the provision of public goods. Although efficient production of services is of great importance, the consequences of metropolitan government for economic development have remained unexplored. The authors assess the development impacts of city-county consolidation by examining the attraction of manufacturing and retail/service firms for nine consolidated governments from 1950 to 1993. The annual growth in manufacturing, retail, and service establishments in the county before the merger is compared to the record afterward. No support emerges for the idea that consolidation enhances economic development.

Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 34, No. 3, 476-488 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/10780879922184031
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The American Review of Public AdministrationHome page
H.V. Savitch, R. K. Vogel, and L. Ye
Beyond the Rhetoric: Lessons From Louisville's Consolidation
The American Review of Public Administration, January 1, 2010; 40(1): 3 - 28.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
R. Shearmur and B. Motte
Weak Ties that Bind: Do Commutes Bind Montreal's Central and Suburban Economies?
Urban Affairs Review, March 1, 2009; 44(4): 490 - 524.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
P. Kantor
Regionalism and Reform: A Comparative Perspective on Dutch Urban Politics
Urban Affairs Review, July 1, 2006; 41(6): 800 - 829.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
D. K. Hamilton, D. Y. Miller, and J. Paytas
Exploring the Horizontal and Vertical Dimensions of the Governing of Metropolitan Regions
Urban Affairs Review, November 1, 2004; 40(2): 147 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
H. V. Savitch and R. K. Vogel
Suburbs without a City: Power and City-County Consolidation
Urban Affairs Review, July 1, 2004; 39(6): 758 - 790.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 The American Review of Public AdministrationHome page
J. A. Visser
Understanding Local Government Cooperation in Urban Regions: Toward a Cultural Model of Interlocal Relations
The American Review of Public Administration, March 1, 2002; 32(1): 40 - 65.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
R. C. Feiock and J. B. Carr
Incentives, Entrepreneurs, and Boundary Change: A Collective Action Framework
Urban Affairs Review, January 1, 2001; 36(3): 382 - 405.
[Abstract] [PDF]