This paper examines the uneven regional pattern in the amenity-driven growth in the USA. It proposes that the uneven pattern could be driven by the dual nature of natural amenities, considering both their quality-of-life effects on households and their productivity effects on firms. A quantitative spatial equilibrium model (QSE) is modified to generate a spatially varying effect of natural amenities on local population growth. The modified QSE model also justifies the introduction of a partially linear spatially varying coefficient model and the adoption of a statistical learning method: the Bivariate Penalized Spline Estimation over Triangulation (BPST). By highlighting the importance of the spatially varying productivity effects, the research shows that natural-amenity-driven growth is not a panacea for rural community development.
This study investigates the non-linear effects of establishment births versus deaths on regional employment, which show asymmetric pathways between intra-regional versus inter-regional spillovers. Using state-year data on establishment births, deaths, and employment for service sectors in the 48 contiguous U.S. states from 1980 to 2014, the study implements three-stage least squares (3SLS) regressions to test competing forces of multiplier versus competition effects, with endogeneity and spatial and temporal dependencies addressed. Empirical results support the following ‘four’ non-linear, asymmetric relationships as hypothesized: (i) establishment births initially increase total employment within a focal U.S. state, but decrease it with excessive establishment births within the state (i.e., inverted U-shaped); (ii) establishment births in the neighboring states of a focal U.S. state initially decrease total employment in the focal state, but increase it with excessive establishment births in the neighboring states (i.e., U-shaped); (iii) establishment deaths initially decrease total employment within a focal U.S. state, but increase it with excessive establishment deaths within the state (i.e., U-shaped); and (iv) establishment deaths in the neighboring states of a focal U.S. state initially increase total employment in the focal state, but decrease it with excessive establishment deaths in the neighboring states (i.e., inverted U-shaped). These findings also hold at the fine-grained geographic level of metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) and under diverse contextual conditions. The study contributes to the literature by testing the theoretical thresholds at which the dominance between multiplier and competition effects can be reversed in non-linear pathways, and by empirically estimating the asymmetric interdependences of regional employment between intra-regional versus inter-regional spillovers of establishment births and deaths.
Considering the declining population growth and increasing intra-provincial migration in China, the population issue becomes crucial for the sustainable development of the Chinese economy. We utilize data of 2010 and 2020 China Census to study the impact of the “spread-backwash” effects of large cities on county-level population dynamics over the past decade and investigate the potential mechanisms. We find that the spillover effects generated by cities have significantly increased the population of neighboring counties. Regarding the mechanism, the “spread-backwash” effects of large cities facilitate the integration of county-level secondary industries into urban industrial chains, leading to new enterprise investments and job creation. In counties where spillover effects are significant, the number of new enterprises in the tertiary industry is higher, positively impacting local population growth.
We use a newly created measure of state-level capital per worker to test whether tax structures can explain long-standing differences in capital investment and productivity across U.S. states. A standard neoclassical growth model shows that differences in marginal tax rates on property, sales, capital gains, and corporate income will lead to persistent differences in capital per worker across states, predictions that are borne out in the data. We also show that the factors that drive state variation in capital-labor ratios are consistent with their impacts on per capita income and labor productivity, results that are also consistent with predictions from the theory. Persistent differences in capital-labor ratios across states are leading to rising income inequality between states.
