Positive Discrimination, Spatial Targeting, and Urban Policy
- 1 July 1987
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Planning Literature
- Vol. 2 (3) , 243-261
- https://doi.org/10.1177/088541228700200301
Abstract
Many programs dealing with urban distress direct resources into limited inner-city areas. The United States and Great Britain have both pursued such policies of spatial targeting or positive discrimination. Major problems of targeting include inequities, unanticipated secondary impacts, and the inappropriate scale of targeted efforts. Arguments for targeting include the presence of positive spatial externalities, increased program efficiency resulting from concentration, and the possibility that targeting may better meet the most severe needs. The contrasting experiences of the two countries aids in the formulation of policies that may involve spatial targeting.Keywords
This publication has 36 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Evolution of Community Development PolicyJournal of the American Planning Association, 1985
- The effects of Enterprise Zone policy: Evidence from SwanseaRegional Studies, 1985
- ENTERPRISE ZONES: THE NON-MANIPULATION OF ECONOMIC SPACEUrban Geography, 1983
- Enterprise ZonesUrban Affairs Quarterly, 1982
- Inner City Partnerships and Established Policies: The Newcastle/Gateshead ExperiencePolicy & Politics, 1981
- Social Targeting in Community DevelopmentPolitical Science Quarterly, 1980
- Urban dynamics: Environmental processes with bandwagon effects and product cyclesPapers in Regional Science, 1978
- Positive discrimination and Urban deprivationLocal Government Studies, 1977
- Policies for Priority AreasJournal of Social Policy, 1974
- The Job Corps: Proposals for RedesignThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1971