IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecdequ/v13y1999i2p157-171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The “More Means More†Assumption: Congruence Versus Contingency in Local Economic Development Research

Author

Listed:
  • Michael McGuire

    (University of North Texas)

Abstract

This article focuses on the conceptual and methodological foundation of local development policy adoption studies. It reexamines the prevailing supposition of congruence between context and policy and revisits the accepted rationale for choosing particular policies by introducing a performance component into the model. From this perspective, policy adoption is not determined purely by external circumstances—the lesson of studies that find a congruent link between context and policy—but such adoption is also strategic. By using a data set used in similar research, a contingency model indicates that the economic development policy adoption patterns of cities can be explained in terms of the proper fit between the policy and the local economic context. Because the pursuit of effective economic development policies is a significant factor in policy adoption, the model presented here is an applicable alternative to the standard congruence research approach offered in the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael McGuire, 1999. "The “More Means More†Assumption: Congruence Versus Contingency in Local Economic Development Research," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 13(2), pages 157-171, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:13:y:1999:i:2:p:157-171
    DOI: 10.1177/089124249901300205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/089124249901300205
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/089124249901300205?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard C. Feiock, 1989. "The Adoption of Economic Development Policies by State and Local Governments: A Review," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 3(3), pages 266-270, August.
    2. Timothy J. Bartik, 2010. "Small Business Start-Ups in the United States: Estimates of the Effects of Characteristics of States," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Zolton Acs (ed.),Entrepreneurship and regional Development, pages 155-169, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    3. Carlton, Dennis W, 1983. "The Location and Employment Choices of New Firms: An Econometric Model with Discrete and Continuous Endogenous Variables," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 65(3), pages 440-449, August.
    4. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1989. "Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 35-58, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael R. Betz & Mark D. Partridge & David S. Kraybill & Linda Lobao, 2012. "Why Do Localities Provide Economic Development Incentives? Geographic Competition, Political Constituencies, and Government Capacity," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 361-391, September.

    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. Theodore M. Crone, 1997. "Where have all the factory jobs gone - and why?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue May, pages 3-18.
    2. Jason P. Brown & Dayton M. Lambert & Raymond J. G. M. Florax, 2013. "The Birth, Death, and Persistence of Firms: Creative Destruction and the Spatial Distribution of U.S. Manufacturing Establishments, 2000–2006," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 89(3), pages 203-226, July.
    3. John C. Leatherman & Donald J. Howard & Terry L. Kastens, 2002. "Improved Prospects for Rural Development: An Industrial Targeting System for the Great Plains," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 59-77.
    4. Button, Patrick, 2019. "Do tax incentives affect business location and economic development? Evidence from state film incentives," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 315-339.
    5. Rork, Jonathan C., 2005. "Getting What You Pay For: The Case of Southern Economic Development," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 35(2), pages 1-17.
    6. Patrick Button, 2015. "Do Tax Incentives Affect Business Location? Evidence from State Film Incentives," Working Papers 1507, Tulane University, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2017.
    7. Paulo Guimaraes & Robert J. Rolfe & Douglas P. Woodward, 1998. "Regional Incentives and Industrial Location in Puerto Rico," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 21(2), pages 119-138, August.
    8. Dirk Dohse & Sascha Walter, 2012. "Knowledge context and entrepreneurial intentions among students," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 877-895, November.
    9. Michael McGuire, 2000. "Collaborative Policy Making and Administration: The Operational Demands of Local Economic Development," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 14(3), pages 278-293, August.
    10. David B. Audretsch & Max Keilbach, 2004. "Entrepreneurship Capital: Determinants and Impact," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2004-37, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    11. Audretsch, David B. & Keilbach, Max, 2008. "Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1697-1705, December.
    12. Krol, Robert & Svorny, Shirley, 1996. "The effect of the bank regulatory environment on state economic activity," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 531-541, August.
    13. Rui Baptista & Joana Mendonça, 2010. "Proximity to knowledge sources and the location of knowledge-based start-ups," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 45(1), pages 5-29, August.
    14. Yingcheng Li & Kai Zhu, 2017. "Spatial dependence and heterogeneity in the location processes of new high-tech firms in Nanjing, China," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(3), pages 519-535, August.
    15. Jason P. Brown & Raymond J.G.M. Florax & Kevin T. McNamara, 2009. "Determinants Of Investme??T Flows In U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 09-10, Purdue University, College of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Akihiro Otsuka, 2008. "Determinants of new firm formation in Japan: A comparison of the manufacturing and service sectors," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 18(5), pages 1-7.
    17. David P Carter & Christopher M Weible & Saba N Siddiki & Xavier Basurto, 2016. "Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs: An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 159-185, January.
    18. Zoltan J. Acs & Monika I. Megyesi, 2009. "Creativity and industrial cities: A case study of Baltimore," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 421-439, July.
    19. Yoonsoo Lee, 2006. "Relocation patterns in U.S. manufacturing," Working Papers (Old Series) 0624, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    20. Sung Hoon Kang & Mark Skidmore & Laura Reese, 2015. "The Effects of Changes in Property Tax Rates and School Spending on Residential and Business Property Value Growth," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 300-333, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:ecdequ:v:13:y:1999:i:2:p:157-171. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.