Accessibility is a fundamental concept in theories of metropolitan spatial structure. Urban economic models explain urban structure as a function of access to jobs; accessibility is capitalised into land values, which in turn explain the population distribution. Studies of residential land values show that many factors contribute to the value of a given location: the characteristics of the housing unit, its location with respect to social and environmental amenities, as well as access to jobs, services and other economic opportunities. Empirical studies typically use job access as a proxy for more generalised access to economic activities. However, jobs represent many different activities, from retail shopping to heavy manufacturing, and the value of access to these activities may be positive or negative. In this paper, accessibility measures based on industry sectors have been developed, allowing the separating out of possible different effects. Their impacts are tested on residential land values using data from the Los Angeles region. A multilevel modelling approach is used in order to control for neighbourhood-level attributes common to multiple properties. It is found that the various access measures have different and significant effects on land values, but attributes of the dwelling unit, together with access to the coast, explain most of the variation. The multilevel model is confirmed; there is significant correlation among properties within the same neighbourhood.

Research in recent years has reemphasized the importance of institutions that best poise entrepreneurs to succeed. This idea has been enriched over the years with the insights of Joseph Schumpeter F. A. Hayek, Douglass North, and many others. This article surveys recent work in urban economics and suggests that its challenge is to explain how entrepreneurs and others can be spatially poised to succeed. It calls attention to the underestimation of urban structure as a factor explaining affluence. Parallel to Douglass North's explanation that institutions matter, it describes how cities matter. It argues that favorable institutions make it possible to get favorable spatial arrangements, and both of them are essential to economic growth. Furthermore, it argues that urban form matters to economic growth. It also challenges policy discussions that presume planners can and should attempt to reorganize urban structure.