IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v112y2022ics0264837721004981.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends, motivations, and land use outcomes of municipal annexation: A case of Alberta, Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Agrawal, Sandeep
  • Gretzinger, Cody
  • Lowerre, Andrew

Abstract

Annexation is the most common form of municipal boundary adjustment in Canada, yet a systematic analysis of annexations is missing from the academic literature. This begs two key questions: Why do Canadian municipalities annex land? What are the land use outcomes of annexation? This qualitative and quantitative case study of Alberta, a Canadian prairie province, reveals that trends in annexation activity, motivations, and land use outcomes are broadly informative, but every instance of annexation is a story of local ambitions and outcomes. Through a series of examples, we illustrate a growth-driven, inherently political and economic process of annexation that is sometimes complex, and one in which the outcomes of annexation may not always match the motivations for it. We find that multiple motivations (that may be intertwined) prompt municipal annexations; furthermore, development in the annexed area occurred at the expense of the non-annexed parts of annexing municipalities, particularly in small towns and villages. This leads us to believe that annexation is perhaps a contributing factor to urban sprawl and land fragmentation. The study calls into question the efficacy of annexation as a policy tool for municipal boundary adjustment or as a substitute for conducting regional planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Agrawal, Sandeep & Gretzinger, Cody & Lowerre, Andrew, 2022. "Trends, motivations, and land use outcomes of municipal annexation: A case of Alberta, Canada," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:112:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721004981
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721004981
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105775?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Austin, D. Andrew, 1999. "Politics vs Economics: Evidence from Municipal Annexation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 501-532, May.
    2. Yong Hyo Cho, 1969. "Fiscal Implications of Annexation: The Case of Metropolitan Central Cities in Texas," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 45(3), pages 368-372.
    3. Russell M. Smith & Whitney B. Afonso, 2016. "Fiscal Impact of Annexation Methodology on Municipal Finances in North Carolina," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 664-681, December.
    4. Glaeser, Edward L. & Kahn, Matthew E., 2004. "Sprawl and urban growth," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 56, pages 2481-2527, Elsevier.
    5. Chris Mothorpe & W. William Woolsey & Russell S. Sobel, 2021. "Do political motivations and strategic considerations influence municipal annexation patterns?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 385-405, September.
    6. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(5), pages 416-416.
    7. Wing Sun Li, 2018. "Creating Value Through Strategic Alliances," Management for Professionals, in: Strategic Management Accounting, chapter 11, pages 193-216, Springer.
    8. Jing Wang & Evgenia Gorina, 2018. "Fiscal effects of municipal annexation: Evidence from a large national sample of urban municipalities," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 612-635, December.
    9. Zack Taylor & Marcy Burchfield & Anna Kramer, 2014. "Alberta Cities at the Crossroads: Urban Development Challenges and Opportunities in Historical and Comparative Perspective," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 7(12), May.
    10. Nkengne A & Nkengne A & Vié K & Seroul P & Trevisan S, 2020. "Visual Properties of Striae Distensae of Chinese Women," JOJ Dermatology & Cosmetics, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 2(1), pages 21-26, January.
    11. Rodolfo Gonzalez & Stephen Mehay, 1987. "Municipal annexation and local monopoly power," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 245-255, January.
    12. Stephen Mehay, 1981. "The expenditure effects of municipal annexation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 53-62, January.
    13. Carol E. Heim, 2012. "Border Wars: Tax Revenues, Annexation, and Urban Growth in Phoenix," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 831-859, July.
    14. Richard S.J. Tol, 2020. "Property rights," Video Library 2016, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Ostrom, Vincent & Tiebout, Charles M. & Warren, Robert, 1961. "The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 831-842, December.
    16. Lionel D. Feldman, 1982. "Tribunals, Politics, and the Public Interest: The Edmonton Annexation Case - A Response," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 8(3), pages 367-371, Summer.
    17. Zack Taylor & Alec Dobson, 2020. "Power and Purpose:Canadian Municipal Law in Transition," IMFG Papers 47, University of Toronto, Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance.
    18. Matthew Mariola, 2005. "Losing ground: Farmland preservation, economic utilitarianism, and the erosion of the agrarian ideal," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 22(2), pages 209-223, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pengju Zhang & Phuong Nguyen‐Hoang & Na Chen, 2022. "The impact of home rule on municipal boundary and fiscal expansion: Evidence from Texas," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(5), pages 1442-1466, November.
    2. Chris Mothorpe & W. William Woolsey & Russell S. Sobel, 2021. "Do political motivations and strategic considerations influence municipal annexation patterns?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 385-405, September.
    3. Gaigné, Carl & Riou, Stéphane & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2016. "How to make the metropolitan area work? Neither big government, nor laissez-faire," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 100-113.
    4. John Meligrana, 2007. "Testing the Elastic-Cities Concept within a Nonmetropolitan Environment: Evidence from British Columbia, Canada, 1971 to 2001," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(3), pages 700-727, March.
    5. Mark Partridge & M. Rose Olfert & Alessandro Alasia, 2007. "Canadian cities as regional engines of growth: agglomeration and amenities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 39-68, February.
    6. Deller, Steven C. & Hinds, David G. & Hinman, Donald L., 2001. "Local Public Services In Wisconsin: Alternatives For Municipalities With A Focus On Privatization," Staff Papers 12658, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    7. Eric A. Hanushek & Kuzey Yilmaz, 2007. "Schools and Location: Tiebout, Alonso, and Government Policy," NBER Working Papers 12960, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Vicente Royuel & Rosina Moreno & Esther Vaya, 2007. "Is the influence of quality of life on urban growth non-stationary in space? A case study of Barcelona," IREA Working Papers 200703, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Feb 2007.
    9. Bowman Cutter, W. & DeShazo, J.R., 2007. "The environmental consequences of decentralizing the decision to decentralize," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 32-53, January.
    10. Ehrlich, Maximilian V. & Hilber, Christian A.L. & Schöni, Olivier, 2018. "Institutional settings and urban sprawl: Evidence from Europe," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-18.
    11. Francisco Martínez Mora, 2004. "The impact of fiscal decentralization on income segregation," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/68, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    12. Tavares Antonio F., 2018. "Municipal amalgamations and their effects: a literature review," Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, Sciendo, vol. 22(1), pages 5-15, March.
    13. Mark Schneider & Byung Ji, 1987. "The flypaper effect and competition in the local market for public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 27-39, January.
    14. Peter J. Boettke & Liya Palagashvili, 2015. "Taming Leviathan," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 279-303.
    15. Mark Koyama, 2012. "Prosecution Associations in Industrial Revolution England: Private Providers of Public Goods?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 95-130.
    16. Kuzey Yılmaz & Muharrem Yeşilırmak, 2023. "Access to transportation, residential segregation, and economic opportunity," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(1), pages 103-127, January.
    17. repec:wly:soecon:v:80:4:y:2014:p:926-937 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Marcy Burchfield & Henry G. Overman & Diego Puga & Matthew A. Turner, 2006. "Causes of Sprawl: A Portrait from Space," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 587-633.
    19. David Agrawal & William H. Hoyt, 2014. "State Tax Differentials, Cross-Border Commuting, and Commuting Times in Multi-State Metropolitan Areas," CESifo Working Paper Series 4852, CESifo.
    20. Peter Boettke & Christopher Coyne & Peter Leeson, 2011. "Quasimarket failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 209-224, October.
    21. Boitier, Vincent & Auvray, Emmanuel, 2021. "Schelling paradox in a system of cities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 68-88.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:112:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721004981. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.