A new role for science - II

We are entering a period of change in the very styles of science

A new role for science - I

Science and technology are in desperate need of change, just because they have been extraordinarily successful

Local Decentralization and Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan and Non-Metropolitan Regions

This paper extends the recent empirical literature on the relationship between local decentralization and growth using data from both metropolitan and non-metropolitan regions in the U.S. The analysis utilizes both metropolitan and non-metropolitan regions, and thus avoids the possible selection bias present in previous research. The results for non-metropolitan regions indicate a relatively weak or negative relationship between the local decentralization measures and local economic growth compared to a positive relationship suggested by a recent study on metropolitan regions. Results for the non-metro regions also suggest that there are different impacts across population and income than we observe for metropolitan regions.Decentralization, metropolitan, non-metropolitan, economic growth

The Impact of Local Decentralization on Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Counties

We analyze the impact of fiscal decentralization on U.S. county population, employment, and real income growth. Our findings suggest that government organization matters for local economic growth, but that the impacts vary by government unit and by economic indicator. We find that single-purpose governments per square mile have a positive impact on metropolitan population and employment growth, but no significant impact on nonmetropolitan counties. In contrast, the fragmentation of general-purpose governments per capita has a negative impact on employment and population growth in nonmetropolitan counties. Our results suggest that local government decentralization matters differently for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties.fiscal decentralization, metropolitan, nonmetropolitan, population, employment, income, spatial econometrics

Amenities, local conditions and fiscal determinants of factor growth in rural America

This paper examines how amenities, asset indicators, and fiscal factors influence the growth in factors of production from 1972 to 1999 in the 466 non-metropolitan labor market areas in the continental United States. In developing our model of non-metropolitan factor markets, we combine the emphasis of Brown et al. (2003) on the affect of taxes and public expenditure policy on labor and capital formation with the emphasis of Beeson et al. (2001) on the importance of climate and natural features on localized population growth. We develop our own measure of capital stock in non-metropolitan areas using data from the Census of Manufacturing for 1967, 1972, 1977, 1982, 1987, and 1992. Results indicate that local taxes discourage both employment growth and manufacturing capital formation, but that local public infrastructure investment and the level of local entrepreneurship encourages employment growth. Amenities such as a favorable climate and the presence of surface water encourage the growth of employment, and greater local wealth, as measured by dividend, interest, and rent income, encourages the formation of manufacturing capital stock. Results fail to support an “export base” approach for rural economies where greater manufacturing capital stock encourages greater employment in a region.Rural areas ; Rural development