The Impacts of State Growth Management Programmes: A Comparative Analysis

By John I. Carruthers. 2002

225 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e13eab074c84826afc09e29ab711298f7394bf53

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Does `Smart Growth' Matter to Public Finance? (2008, background): “Specifically, a procedural goal of many smart growth programs is to promote cooperation among local governments as a means of meeting broader societal objectives (Carruthers 2002).”
Urban Sprawl and the Cost of Public Services (2003, background): “…that do not require consistency among jurisdictions' planning activities (such as in Georgia) and/or that rely on concurrency (such as in Florida) may inadvertently contribute to sprawl, thereby raising the cost of services (for an analysis demonstrating these results, see Carruthers, 2002b).”
The Influence of Local Urban Containment Policies and Statewide Growth Management on the Size of United States Urban Areas (2006, background): “Weitz (1999), Carruthers (2002), and Dawkins and Nelson (2003) all have noted that statewide growth management programs are not the same and one should consider accounting for this when evaluating their impact on promoting compact urban development.”
Does Urban Sprawl Increase the Costs of Providing Local Public Services? Evidence from Spanish Municipalities (2010, unknown): “sense, the increasing provision costs of public goods and services, as well as additional consequences related to urban sprawl, have been used by critics of this phenomenon to justify the use of growth control programmes and co-operation policies among jurisdictions that promote more compact urban a”
Compactness versus Sprawl (2015, background): “Carruthers (2002) examined the impact that alternative state planning frameworks have on five dimensions of urban development: density, the spatial extent of urbanized land area, property value, public expenditures on infrastructure, and population change.”
COMPACT CITY AND URBAN SPRAWL (2004, background): “…system has an important impact on the way metropolitan regions develop (see, for instance, Faludi and Van der Valk, 1994; Williams et al., 2000; Dieleman et al., 1999; Salet et al., 2003; Abbott, 1997; Carruthers, 2002; Jacobs, 2003 for reviews of some of this literature and the main arguments).”
The potential effect of national growth-management policy on urban sprawl and the depletion of open spaces and farmland (2004, background): “Concomitantly, the lack of empirical evidence of the success of the adopted policy indeed harms the ability to convince the authorities to adopt it (Burchell et al., 1998; Johnson, 2001; Carruthers, 2002).”