000			01660nab a2200181 4500
003			OSt
005			20230718184126.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			230718b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aKaufmann, David _955945
245			_aCapital Cities in Interurban Competition: _bLocal Autonomy, Urban Governance, and Locational Policy Making/
260			_bSage, _c2020.
300			_a Vol 56, Issue 4, 2020:( 1168-1205 p.).
520			_aCapital cities are government cities that tend to lack a competitive political economy. Especially secondary capital cities—defined as capitals that are not the primary economic centers of their nation-states—are pressured to increase their economic competitiveness in today’s globalized interurban competition by formulating locational policies. This article compares the locational policies agendas of Bern, Ottawa, The Hague, and Washington, D.C. The comparison reveals that (1) secondary capital cities tend to formulate development-oriented locational policies agendas, (2) local tax autonomy best explains the variance in locational policies agendas, and (3) secondary capital cities possess urban governance arrangements where public actors dominate and where developers are the only relevant private actors. The challenge for secondary capital cities is to formulate locational policies that enable them to position themselves as government cities, as well as business cities, while not solely relying on the development of their physical infrastructure.
773	0		_09296 _916911 _dSage Publications _tUrban Affairs Review
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1078087418809939
942			_2ddc _cEJR
999			_c13838 _d13838