The Value of Benefits of a Public Street Market: The Case of Maxwell Street

EDQ introduces a new format to the Forum section in this issue. Periodically an article is submitted to us that raises important policy or methodological issues that have generated sharp responses from external reviewers. We believe that the debate that has taken place between the authors and reviewers is of such importance that we have then solicited people to comment on the article. Controversy on Maxwell Street raises the issue of the marriage of anthropologic and economic techniques in economic development analysis. We hope that you find this debate as stimulating as we did. Controversy on Maxwell Street began when Morales, Balkin, and Persky submitted their article, “The Value of Benefits of a Public Street Market: The Case of Maxwell Street.†We then requested that Rhoda H. Halperin and Wim Wiewel respond. Following their responses is a rejoinder by the authors. Chicago's Maxwell Street Market was among the oldest open-air public markets in the United States. The market was closed in August 1994 and a smaller alternative market was opened on Canal Street. This article estimates monetary losses resulting from the closure of the market. First, the authors briefly discuss the markets history, followed by a review of the literature on the informal economy. The problem of quantifying the value of street vending is addressed by combining ethnographic and economic analytical methods. Ethnography is introduced in the article's third section. The authors demonstrate the usefulness of merging ethnographic and economic analysis by estimating monetary losses to vendors and consumers as a result of changes in the market's governance and location.