No abstract

Since the first U.S. state adopted the Research and Development (R&D) tax credit in the early 1980s, the policy has spread to most of the other states. The diffusion continues with numerous modifications and enhancements to the basic R&D tax credit. This study examines the diffusion of the R&D investment tax credit using event history analysis supported by qualitative research. The conclusions of the research are that the R&D tax credit is an economic development approach associated with an existing manufacturing base and implementation is aided by political factors. Adjacent state competition does not appear to lead toward adoption. Applying these findings to the current literature on the effectiveness of the state R&D tax credits highlights the need for thorough policy evaluation before the adoption of tax credits as part of an economic development program.

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) was developed to study complex, enduring public policy processes involving multiple actors. In this article, it is applied to the freight transportation policy subsystem in the United States, in which the highway motor complex has traditionally dominated coalitions from other transportation modes (e.g., railroads, aviation, and inland waterways). Using historical analysis and the Appalachian wood products industry as an illustrative example of the policy change toward intermodalism, the article shows how changes external to the subsystem are forcing a rethinking of the governing belief systems. The research provides support for several ACF hypotheses and substantiates its validity as a framework for studying the freight transportation policy subsystem. Conclusions regarding the need for increased policy-oriented learning and the prediction of the emergence of a new intermodal coalition are made based on the ACF.

Economic Modeling Specialist International (EMSI) model is a common economic development research tool that has begun to be utilized for tourism research. Therefore, it is important to examine the differences between the EMSI model and the commonly used Impact Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN) model. The multiplier effects of the default version of EMSI and IMPLAN were compared using data obtained from a visitor expenditure survey of the Jackson Mississippi Mistletoe Marketplace. The results revealed that IMPLAN estimated larger multiplier effects (both type I and type II) than EMSI for the total output and employment (job supports).

No abstract