Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

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 Parker, R. A.
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. 34, No. 11, 1831-1850 (1997)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098975277
© 1997 Urban Studies Journal Limited

A Stealth Urban Policy in the US? Federal Spending in Five Large Metropolitan Regions, 1984-93

R. Andrew Parker

School of Public Affairs, Baruch College, The City University of New York, 17 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY10010, USA, arpbb{at}cunyvm.cuny.edu

New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and San Francisco are examined using the US Bureau of the Census, Consolidated Federal Funds Reports. These data are examined in terms of the age-adjusted, per capita receipt of funds and show that spending in central cities increased at a faster rate than in their suburbs. In major categories of spending, such as procurement and grants, as well as for the majority of agencies and grants examined, the central cities experienced a marked relative improvement. Correlation of federal receipts with a composite urban hardship index at the beginning and end of the decade confirms this general equity improvement. Concerns remain with trends in direct payments to individuals that are not needs-based, and with direct loans and insurance programmes that strongly favour the suburbs.


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
A. Forsyth
Who Built Irvine? Private Planning and the Federal Government
Urban Stud, December 1, 2002; 39(13): 2507 - 2530.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
P. Joassart-Marcelli and J. A. Musso
The Distributive Impact of Federal Fiscal Policy: Federal Spending and Southern California Cities
Urban Affairs Review, November 1, 2001; 37(2): 163 - 183.
[Abstract] [PDF]