Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, J.
Right arrow Articles by Twomey, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 25, No. 3, 228-242 (1988)
DOI: 10.1080/00420988820080311
© 1988 Urban Studies Journal Limited

The Movement of Manufacturing Industry in Great Britain: An Inter-County Analysis, 1972-1981

Jim Taylor

Department of Economics at the University of Lancaster

Jim Twomey

Department of Economics and Economic History at Manchester Polytechnic

This paper is concerned with the movement of manufacturing industry between GB counties during the period 1972-81. After discussing the nature of movement data, the inter-regional and inter-county movement of manufacturing establishments is examined for the period 1972-81. The main focus of the paper, however, lies in the development of a model of industrial movement based upon a stock-adjustment approach distinguishing between actual and optimal moves and leading to an empirical test of various explanations of industrial movement via a binomial probability model. The main findings are that inter-county differences in industrial rates and in the cost of premises had a significant effect on movement during the period 1972-81. Distance, as expected, also played a critical role in explaining the geographical pattern of movement though labour availability and labour costs were found to be unrelated to this pattern. Finally, the impact of regional financial incentives is found to be negligible but this result may be due to the spatially restricted nature of certain data items which limit the subsequent application of the model.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Urban StudHome page
B. Fingleton
The Location of Employment in High-technology Manufacturing in Great Britain
Urban Stud, December 1, 1992; 29(8): 1265 - 1276.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
H.D. Watts
Plant Closures in Urban Areas: Towards a Local Policy Response
Urban Stud, October 1, 1991; 28(5): 803 - 817.
[Abstract] [PDF]