{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025823686553873553, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003561887800534283, 'mean_word_length': 5.8121212121212125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Dimensions of Economic Development and Growth Management Policy Choices

This article integrates the urban politics, growth management, and economic development literatures to examine how voter characteristics, community context, local government structure and capacity, and state policy and regional contexts influence the adoption of development incentives and growth management policy instruments. Using a 2004 national survey of city economic development directors, U.S. Census, U.S. Department of Agriculture Atlas of Rural and Small-town America, U.S. Census of Governments, and U.S. Election Atlas voting data, we develop two scaled Poisson policy count models. Only wealth and growth rates play large, significant roles in explaining both location incentives and growth management, while local government structure and bureaucratic capacity does not significantly affect adoption for either policy type. We conclude that location incentive and growth management policy adoption decisions are driven by a community’s political economic context: its voter characteristics, community context, and the regional context.