Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/202889 
Year of Publication: 
2018
Series/Report no.: 
Upjohn Institute Working Paper No. 18-291
Publisher: 
W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, MI
Abstract: 
The use of incentive packages has intensified as local governments compete for new plants and corporate relocations, and as private firms increasingly demand a deal. While incentives promise jobs and tax revenue, scholars and practitioners criticize their high cost and limited accountability. Through a comparison of matched establishments, this paper explores how governmental incentive-granting strategy impacts incentive performance. We examine the overall impact of incentives and whether incentives granted to smaller firms perform better. Using economic development budget data, we also assess the state's overall approach to economic development to determine which strategies are prioritized through funding. By showing that incentivized firms fail to create more jobs than matched controls, our analysis casts doubt on claims that "but for" incentives job creation would not occur. Still, our findings suggest that states are smarter in their incentive use when they strike a balance between recruiting industry and supporting "homegrown" businesses and technology.
Subjects: 
Incentives
mediating policies
employment
equity
economic development
JEL: 
R0
R3
R5
H2
H7
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
209.91 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.