Earnings inequality and central-city development

This paper was presented at the conference "Unequal incomes, unequal outcomes? Economic inequality and measures of well-being" as part of session 4, "Economic inequality and local public services." The conference was held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on May 7, 1999. The author considers not only the competition between cities, but also the competition between cities and the surrounding areas - the suburbs. He notes that rising income inequality tends to lead to greater income disparity between the suburbs and the central cities because the rich are more likely to move to the suburbs. In addition, business suburbanization has occurred because modern transportation and communication technologies have reduced the costs of moving people, goods, and messages over considerable distances. Moreover, some central business districts have become so large as to exhaust the advantages of locating there. However, the author suggests that the movement of businesses away from central cities began to change around 1996. Tighter labor markets have induced U.S. businesses to locate in central cities for the same reason that these businesses have been going to Mexico and East Asia - namely, the availability of relatively low-wage workers. The author also cites the dramatic fall in central-city crime rates in the 1990s and new legislation allowing cities to limit "brownfields liability" - the liability of businesses for environmental damage that occurred before their occupation of a site - as developments that have made it easier for businesses to return to the central cities.Income distribution ; Income ; Urban economics

Should government try to control suburban growth?

Metropolitan areas - Statistics

Truly Smart Growth

Editors Note: The following articles by Professor Mills and Ed LeClear, a Cornell graduate student, both address a very contentious issue currently in debate among real estate developers, planners, and governments: Smart Growth and Suburban Sprawl. In the Graduate Program in Real Estate at Cornell, every student Is tasked with completing two major project developments, one in the first year, and the other in the second. This years first year students planned a development on 858 acres in Pennsylvania. An undercurrent of discussion among the students was whether this relatively large property in a basically rural environment should be developed or if the development of it simply contributed to more sprawl. This question was made more poignant by the fact that the city of Philadelphia, was the only major city in the country to experience a decline in population during the 90\u27s, as more and more individuals moved to the inner and outer suburbs consequently expanding suburban development boundaries. Professor Mills\u27 article addresses this very issue in the first article from a decided viewpoint. Ed LeClear presents a different perspective on the issue. We encourage you to respond