Recent processes of European integration have influenced profoundly the fortunes of cities across Western Europe. Although some cities have benefited, others have been impacted adversely. Income inequalities result from economic growth differentials occurring between different cities over time. The theoretical literature differs on whether increased integration promotes or reduces income disparities. The European Union (EU) assumes that rising inequalities will impair EU growth and lead to even greater disparities. Empirical analysis has concentrated on the EU-defined regions because of problems of urban data availability and comparability. Using regional data, I identified that the overall level of inequalities changed little for the metropolitan regions between the early 1980s and the early 1990s. Urban disparities were cyclical—decreasing during strong EU growth and increasing in slower growth years. Factors outside direct local government control, including relative location within Europe, reinforced the traditional strong-core—weak-periphery spatial pattern of development. I argue that additional factors specific to cities, such as limited EU urban policy and funding, contributed to overall higher and more sharply rising inequalities since the late 1980s for cities compared with regions. The positive linear relationship between levels of national income and urban disparities has implications for economic polarization within richer member states and for EU efforts to reduce inequalities by raising the level of development in poorer countries.
The economic downturn that began in 2007–2008 was blamed by some commentators on neoliberalism and pro‐business policies. So we might expect U.S. state and local governments to have responded with policy changes affecting their neoliberal economic development strategies. Based on this assumption, this paper is a theoretically informed examination of recent high‐profile bidding wars in Wisconsin. The highest profile example was in 2009 when General Motors chose a plant in Michigan over Wisconsin and Tennessee for a new small car line. Wisconsin's Commerce Secretary characterized Michigan's $1.2 billion incentive offer as “absolutely crazy” (compared with his state's $409 million offer!). My main research question is how have Wisconsin state and local governments adjusted their neoliberal economic development efforts in these bidding wars given the recent economic downturn and weak economy? This paper uses the largest incentive offers in Wisconsin during the tenure of the current and previous state governors within the context of ten themes drawn from the literature to problematize the neoliberal policy of bidding for big business. It concludes by considering the implications for economic development policies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.