Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:21:41.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Identifying Resource Barriers to Local Economy Growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Kenneth J. Roberts*
Affiliation:
Clemson University, stationed at the Marine Resources Center, Charleston, South Carolina

Extract

Congress and the majority of coastal states have recognized the complexity of public decisions concerning growth in coastal areas. The preponderance of common pool resources and regional goods in coastal areas has prompted lawmarkers to pass coastal zone management legislation prior to a national land use bill. New state level institutions have been fostered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management. However, it is at the local level where resulting institutional rules represent self-imposed natural resource barriers to growth. Communities face the task of improving income streams from expansion of existing business activity or opting for new industries. Local governments have scurried to consultants and universities for solutions of community development and natural resource problems. The study described here represents one type of response. Although an Oregon county was the researcher's focus, it involved the pith of local economy growth—income generation and natural or self-imposed resource barriers.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Stevens, Joe B. and Youmans, Russell C.. “Growth in Spite of Natural Resources.” Unpublished paper at the Natural Resource Economics Institute, Oregon State University, 1969.Google Scholar
[2] Collin, Theodore G.An Interindustry Analysis of the Effects of a New Industry on the Public and Private Sectors in Clatsop County, Oregon.” Unpublished Master's thesis, Oregon State University, 1970.Google Scholar
[3] Roberts, Kenneth J.Economic and Environmental Trade-Offs in an Estuarine Based Economy: A Modified Input-Output Model of Clatsop County, Oregon.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Oregon State University, 1973.Google Scholar
[4] Kneese, Allen V., Ayres, Robert V., and d'Arge, Ralph C.. Economics and the Environment: A Materials Balance Approach. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1970.Google Scholar
[5] Leontief, Wassily. “Environmental Reprecussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 52:262271, 1970.Google Scholar
[6] Hite, James C. and Laurent, Eugene A.. “Economic Analysis and Environmental Goods in the Coastal Zone.” A Report to the Coastal Plains Regional Commission, contract No. 10042023, Clemson University, 1971.Google Scholar
[7] Isard, Walter et al. Ecologic—Economic Analysis for Regional Development. New York: The Free Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[8] Hite, James C. et al. “Economic Evaluation of Zoning Alternatives in South Carolina.” Water Research Institute, Clemson University, 1972.Google Scholar