Home » Uncategorized
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Using a hedonic price model, this paper assesses the impact of the Bull City Connector on single family housing property values in Durham, North Carolina. Residential parcels within 1 km of the 18 bus stations are included in the model as well as independent variables that describe walking distances, property characteristics, neighborhood characteristics and neighborhood amenities. The results suggest that there exists a positive association between proximity to bus stops and property values, though this benefit is not felt evenly throughout all neighborhoods. Bus station areas with low-income families experience the highest proximity effect while some of the high-income neighborhoods experience negative effects. This result might contain upward bias because the accessibility brought by bus stations is strongly correlated with the Main Street amenities effect. Therefore, both pro-downtown development in Durham and investments in transit are likely to have accrued price premiums on housings close to Main Street and the bus stops.
Bombed Cities of Europe Following World War II: Differences In Planning and Reconstruction Under Capitalism and Communism
Following World War II, hundreds of bombed cities across Europe were presented with the opportunity to reconstruct their cities in more efficient manners. Capitalist and Communist cities went about this in different methods in almost all aspects of urban planning. Through it all, certain cities thrived and certain cities failed due to the differences in planning put forth by these different economic ideologies.
The goal of these papers is to dissect the differences in city reconstruction under Communism and Capitalism, with an underlying goal of determining which approach had greater success.
My presentation on the reasons for the success and failures of the Research Triangle Park can be viewed here.
In this presentation I give a brief history of RTP and how it has impacted Durham’s economy.
View it here
The arts have been an integral part of society since the beginnings of civilization, contributing to the culture and economy of communities and improving the quality of life. The art industry’s underlying motive is atypical of modern industries: creating art for the sake of creating art. The arts’ ability to enrich lives, unite people across diverse backgrounds, and help children develop cognitive ability and discipline are just wonderful positive externalities from creating art for the sheer enjoyment. Economically, the arts are also valuable, directly providing a source of jobs and growth in the local economy. The presence of the arts in a community also increases its attractiveness as a place to work, live, and play, bringing in new residents, businesses, and tourists, which makes the arts an undoubted key factor in the economic growth and development of a city.
 Florida, Richard. “The Rise of the Creative Class.” Washington Monthly May 2002.
 Florida, Richard. “Where the Super-Brains Are.” Web log post. Creative Class. 31 Aug. 2010. Web. 1 Nov. 2010. <http://www.creativeclass.com/creative_class/2010/08/31/where-the-super-brains-are/>.
 DCMS (2001), Creative Industries Mapping Document 2001 (2 ed.), London, UK: Department of Culture, Media and Sport, http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/publications/4632.aspx
 Glassberg, Ronnie. “Tobacco campus plans outlined – Capitol hopes to start on downtown project by summer, finish work within five years.” The Herald-Sun 24 February 2000: A1.
 Skalski, Ginny. “Upbeat about downtown After years of hype and dashed hopes, rebirth may finally be on the way.” The Herald-Sun 7 November 2004: A1.
The Construction of the Durham Bulls Athletic Park and Its Effect on the Revitalization of Downtown Durham
In this presentation, I examine the history of the Durham Bulls, their ballpark, and their effect on the revitalization of downtown Durham.
Click here to view the presentation.
In this presentation, I examine the idea that increased crime is associated with economic downturns. I focus especially on crime statistics during the recent financial crisis.
Click here to view the presentation
In this presentation, I examine the relative impact of the nationwide housing crisis on Durham in comparison with other cities.
Click here to view the presentation.
Durham is unquestionably a tobacco town. Throughout the 20th century the city’s growth paralleled that of the tobacco industry. Its skyline is dominated by the smokestacks of cigarette factories; tobacco warehouses line the streets of downtown. Traditionally Durham’s largest employers were tobacco giants Bull Durham, American Tobacco Company, and Liggett & Myers; since these companies’ dissolutions, Duke University and Medical Center—founded by a tobacco magnate—have assumed the role of dominant employers. However, Durham’s dependence on tobacco turned out to be its greatest weakness.
The Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement in 1998 hit Durham hard. In 1999 the city’s last tobacco company, Liggett & Myers, fled for small-town Mebane, NC, effectively ending over one hundred years of cigarette production in Durham (Cohn 23). The loss of the city’s primary industry led not only to unemployment and numerous unoccupied buildings, but also caused upheaval in the agricultural sector. Tobacco was North Carolina’s number one cash crop for the state’s entire existence, but with the drop in demand in the late 1990s it was no longer profitable. Farms with enough available capital switched to other crops; those without failed and were bought up by those that did. Durham County’s agricultural landscape was entirely transformed. As cash crops such as tobacco and cotton were no longer as profitable, North Carolina farmers placed renewed emphasis on cattle ranching, poultry, grain, fruit, and vegetables, as well new areas such as animal aquaculture and greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production.
This paper explores the growth and demise of North Carolina’s tobacco industry, the response of Durham’s farmers, and further options for the future.
Read on here
See the presentation here.
Anderson, Jean Bradley. 1990. Durham County. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Anonymous. 2010. “After Tobacco: Biotechnology in North Carolina.” The Economist. 23 Oct: 36.
Austin, W. David and David Altman. 2000. “Rural Economic Development vs. Tobacco Control? Tensions Underlying the Use of Tobacco Settlement Funds.” Journal of Public Health Policy 21(2): 129-156.
Cohn, Gerry. 2009. Durham County Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Plan. Durham County Government Soil and Water Conservation District. Accessed 1 Nov. 2010. <www.co.durham.nc.us/departments/swcd/documents/durhamfarmplanpublicdraft2.pdf>.
Dohlman, Erik, Linda Foreman, and Michelle Da Pra. 2009. “The Post-Buyout Experience: Peanut and Tobacco Sectors Adapt to Policy Reform.” USDA Economic Research Bulletin Number 60. Accessed 1 Nov. 2010. <http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB60/EIB60.pdf>.
Gross, Cary P., Benny Soffer, Peter B. Bach, Rahul Rajkumar, Howard P. Forman. 2002. “State Expenditures for Tobacco-Control Programs and the Tobacco Settlement.” New England Journal of Medicine 347: 1080-1086.
Jones, Alison Snow, W. David Austin, Robert H. Beach, and David G. Altman. 2007. “Funding of North Carolina Tobacco Programs Through the Master Settlement Agreement.” American Journal of Public Health 97(1): 36-44.
Roberts, Michael. 2008. “Why Are Food Prices Going Up?” NC State Economist. Accessed 1 Nov. 2010. <http://www.ag-econ.ncsu.edu/virtual_library/economist/novdec08.pdf>.
United States Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2007 Census of Agriculture. Dec. 2009. Accessed 1 Nov. 2010.
United States Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1992 Census of Agriculture. Dec. 2009. Accessed 1 Nov. 2010.
United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1950 Census of Agriculture. Fairfax, VA: USDA 1952.
All statistics from 1950/1992/2007 Census of Agriculture unless otherwise noted.