Abstract
Planning for local economic development assumes a rational systematic process in which goals are set, strategies weighed, and technical studies undertaken. But most economic development practitioners spend little time on planning, and much on sales, marketing and public relations. In the process, public planners often become arms of the private development process. There is also little empirical evidence to support the claims that local economic development subsidies fulfill their public purpose by creating jobs for city residents, net tax increases for local treasuries or revitalization for city neighborhoods. Subsidies are used, projects are built, but poverty and joblessness increase. This article concludes with suggestions for a more equitable and effective local economic development process.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: