Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America (1999) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 Recommendations for Research and Policy Choices
5 Recommendations for Research and Policy Choices
Pages 116-134
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 116... ...
They result, at least in part, from the existing system of metropolitan governance, a system characterized by fragmented local governments, each of which is largely dependent on its own tax base for financing and delivering public services for its residents and many of which, for those with general-purpose powers, have control over land use regulation within their boundaries. Efforts to bridge this fragmented system through regional mechanisms have been successful in many cases for common-purpose or system-maintenance 116
|
From page 117... ...
It is very clear that additional research is needed, both with respect to causal processes and, even more so, with respect to the effects of policies that have been proposed and undertaken to deal with unequal spatial opportunity structures and unequal opportunity in metropolitan areas. The ability to conduct such research depends on the availability of relevant data, many of which can be gathered only by the federal government acting as a provider of public goods.
|
From page 118... ...
Research on the causes of suburbanization has been concerned with the extent to which suburbanization has resulted from natural processes, "push" factors related to the condition or characteristics of the central city that movers wish to avoid, and federal policies that have encouraged movement to the suburbs. Additional research is needed to sort out these factors and particularly to identify the nature of these "push" factors and their relative importance.
|
From page 119... ...
Fiscal Capacity Disparities There is substantial research on tax/service disparities among major cities across metropolitan areas, but only scattered research on variation in tax/service capacity among local governments within metropolitan areas. A basic task is to
|
From page 120... ...
. Outcome Disparities Across Metropolitan Areas Disparities in outcomes such as per capita income between central cities and suburbs and between minorities and whites vary, often dramatically, across metropolitan areas.
|
From page 121... ...
The bridging research need is to sort out the portion of inequality of outcomes that is metropolitan in nature from the part that is due to broader causes differences in human capital, changes in the demand for less-skilled labor, racial discrimination in employment and is simply manifested in metropolitan areas because that is where most people live. Metropolitan Place-Related Causes of Outcome Disparities The broad question that we have asked is what is it that accounts for differences in important outcomes outcomes such as income, employment, earnings, etc.
|
From page 122... ...
We know that fiscal disparities lead to some combination of higher tax burdens and lower expenditures for residents of jurisdictions with low fiscal capacity, but empirically, what is the actual nature of the trade-off made, and how and why does it vary among low fiscal capacity jurisdictions? The question of whether unequal spending on services among jurisdictions in metropolitan areas contributes to outcome disparities has been the subject of a very substantial amount of research with respect to education.
|
From page 123... ...
Research is also needed with respect to the effects on outcome disparities of tax policies to address fiscal disparities. Imposing a commuter tax on wages earned by suburban residents who work in the central city is frequently suggested as a means of increasing the fiscal capacity of the central city.
|
From page 124... ...
Fragmentation We have argued that fragmentation of metropolitan areas into large numbers of local governments with land use and taxing powers results in sorting by race and economic status in metropolitan areas, and that this sorting underpins the unequal spatial opportunity structure we have detailed. Fragmentation, in this argument, plays a critical role in the production of inequalities.
|
From page 125... ...
Research is needed on the extent to which such redistribution will occur and who will be the likely winners and losers. To what extent have central cities and their residents been advantaged or disadvantaged with respect to resource distribution, influence and political control as a result of the existence of metropolitan-area-wide institutions such as councils of governments, metropolitan planning organizations, and region-wide special districts, or as a result of more informal third-wave efforts?
|
From page 126... ...
Research to test these propositions would be desirable. Many central cities as jurisdictions suffer from low fiscal capacity, for reasons that have been discussed.
|
From page 127... ...
What are the costs imposed on suburbs and their residents indeed on the entire metropolitan area and on the nation of the decline of central cities? What are the costs imposed on the entire metropolitan area and on the nation of the disparities in outcomes brought about by unequal opportunity structures and thus unequal opportunity in metropolitan areas?
|
From page 128... ...
What is often ignored, however, is that small-scale local governments function best when nested within larger, layered systems of government. This enables them to concentrate on the functions suitable to their scale, enabling the system as a whole to address effectively functions requiring larger scale, such as pollution control, water supply, the construction and operation of major airports, and the like.
|
From page 129... ...
Restructuring the existing system of local government to create a consolidated or comprehensive metropolitan government would risk reducing the very real benefits produced by the existing system. In addition, it would not, in itself, lead to substantial changes in the metropolitan opportunity structure or to a reduction in unequal opportunity or disparities.
|
From page 130... ...
Much of the discussion that follows involves state action, including state action to inhibit the ability of local governments to exclude low- and moderate-income and minority residents from living within their boundaries and to reduce disparities in fiscal capacity and need among local governments. Eliminating Barriers to Equal Access and Opportunity At present, high housing costs prevent low- and moderate-income households from gaining access to many suburban communities.
|
From page 131... ...
The committee recognizes that reducing the ability of jurisdictions to exclude low- and moderate-income households through exclusionary zoning devices may result in some loss of allocative efficiency, by reducing the homogeneity of preferences among local residents as income segregation is reduced (Mills and Oates, 1975~. If so, that would be a cost that we consider worth incurring as a means of reducing inequality of opportunity in metropolitan areas.
|
From page 132... ...
Residents of the central city, and of suburbs with low tax capacity and high expenditure needs, are faced with the dilemma of shouldering a high tax burden in order to finance an adequate level of public services or accepting poor public services at an average tax burden.
|
From page 133... ...
Regional mechanisms as a possible means of reducing fiscal disparities include metropolitan tax base sharing, county assumption of selected city government service functions, and state permission for cities to levy a local income tax, including a tax on the income earned within the city by employees who reside outside the city. Improving Human Capital The committee's charge, as we interpret it, is relatively narrow in scope, focusing on the contribution of spatial opportunity structures in metropolitan areas to unequal opportunity.
|
From page 134... ...
Differences in human capital account for a substantial portion of the disparities in outcomes between minorities and whites and between city and suburban residents. Some of these differences are, in themselves, related to unequal spatial opportunity structures.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.