Local Government Fiscal Burden in Nonmetropolitan America<sup>1</sup>

Johnson, Kenneth M.; Pelissero, John P.; Holian, David B.; Maly, Michael T.

doi:10.1111/j.1549-0831.1995.tb00579.x

Cited by 40 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, poorer counties are more likely to have established an industrial park and have greater own source revenues to expenditures. Johnson et al. (1995) also find counties with higher poverty rates have greater revenues to expenditures, in contrast to expectations: they argue this may reflect less willingness to spend scarce resources.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Lobao¹,

Kraybill²

2009

Growth and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social scientists have given substantial attention to poverty across U.S. localities. However, most work views localities through the lens of population aggregates, not as units of government. Few poverty researchers question whether governments of poorer localities have the capacity to engage in economic development and service activities that might improve community well-being. This issue is increasingly important as responsibilities for growth and redistribution are decentralized to local governments that vary dramatically in resources. Do poorer communities have less activist local governments? Are they more likely to be engaged in a race to the bottom, focusing on business attraction activities but neglecting services for families and working people? We bring together two distinct literatures, critical research on decentralization and research on local development efforts, that provide contrasting views about the penalty of poverty. Data are from a unique, national survey of county governments measuring activity across two time points. The most consistent determinants of activity are local government capacity, devolutionary pressures, and inertia or past use of strategies. Net of these factors, levels and changes in poverty do not significantly impact government activity. There is no evidence the nations' poorest counties are racing to the bottom. Findings challenge views that poverty is a systematic structural barrier to pursuing innovative economic development policies and suggest that even poorer communities can take steps to build local capacity, resources, and networks that expand programs for local businesses and low-wage people. Copyright (c) 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc..

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Lobao¹,

Kraybill²

2009

Growth and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As federal aid has declined, state aid has risen. State aid is redistributive and has become more so over time (Johnson et al 1995;Warner 2001). State policy can play a redistributive role, helping to reduce the negative impact of the rural structural deficits.…”

Section: Decentralizationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Civic government or market-based governance? The limits of privatization for rural local governments

Warner

2008

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thomas Lyson argued that civic markets were possible and could have positive impacts on rural development. Increasingly local governments are being forced into market-based governance regimes of privatization, decentralization and free trade. This article explores the impacts of these trends on rural local governments in the US. These market trends can erode civic foundations, but recent data show local governments are balancing markets with civic concerns and giving increased attention to citizen interests in the service delivery process.

show abstract

“…Rural local governments are already more likely to face challenges to local fiscal well-being due to below average capacities to raise revenues through taxation and above average costs of providing services (Cigler 1993;Warner 1999). At the same time, research indicates that rural local governments are increasingly dependent upon state aid to ease local governmental fiscal burden ( Johnson et al 1995). In the face of changing intergovernmental relationships, rural localities may only become more dependent upon states' willingness to provide a redistributive function.…”

Section: Devolutionary and Local Governmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local Economic Development in an Age of Devolution: The Question of Rural Localities*

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is limited recent research on the strategies that rural local governments are employing in the face of changing intergovernmental relationships, especially in relation to local economic development. This paper draws on data from a survey of local governments in the Ohio River Valley Region that includes a mix of localities on the urban‐rural continuum, to empirically address three issues. First, we examined the extent to which county governments have undertaken local economic development initiatives as well as other, extra‐economic activities designed to improve community well‐being. Second, we assessed the extent to which rural county governments vary from urban counties in their activities and available resources. Finally, we employed logistic regression models of factors associated with use of development strategies to determine the relationship between rurality and local development policy activities. The results show that rural counties are less likely than urban counties to undertake various economic development activities, with observed urban‐rural differences largely attributable to county socioeconomic disadvantages, such as poverty and education.

show abstract

Local Government Fiscal Burden in Nonmetropolitan America¹

Cited by 40 publications

References 21 publications

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Civic government or market-based governance? The limits of privatization for rural local governments

Local Economic Development in an Age of Devolution: The Question of Rural Localities*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Local Government Fiscal Burden in Nonmetropolitan America1

Cited by 40 publications

References 21 publications

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Poverty and Local Governments: Economic Development and Community Service Provision in an Era of Decentralization

Civic government or market-based governance? The limits of privatization for rural local governments

Local Economic Development in an Age of Devolution: The Question of Rural Localities*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Local Government Fiscal Burden in Nonmetropolitan America¹