职业体育设施的公共融资与毒品资产没收

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Benjamin Blemings, Brad Humphreys
{"title":"职业体育设施的公共融资与毒品资产没收","authors":"Benjamin Blemings, Brad Humphreys","doi":"10.1177/10911421241232444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Local governments provide many crucial services from limited budgets, yet often subsidize the profitable, private businesses in professional sports leagues in the United States. Policing represents one important public service. Policing typically constitutes large portions of government budgets and also generates revenue through fines and forfeitures. Existing evidence suggests that large municipal expenditures in other areas can have an ambiguous effect on policing outcomes. This paper addresses the question of whether large public expenditures on sports facilities affect drug asset forfeiture using two-way fixed effects (TWFE) and generalized dynamic model specifications (GDMS). The results are similar across estimation methods, with static TWFE results suggesting a treatment effect of $1,274–5,589 in additional forfeiture per million in subsidies and results from the newer GDMS estimators suggesting $7,703 per million in subsidies. The results imply that, beyond generating no tangible local economic benefits, public subsidization of sports facilities also leads police to make up budget shortfalls by more aggressive policing, which has important implications for racial equity.","PeriodicalId":46919,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","volume":"2014 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Financing of Professional Sports Facilities and Drug Asset Forfeiture\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Blemings, Brad Humphreys\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10911421241232444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Local governments provide many crucial services from limited budgets, yet often subsidize the profitable, private businesses in professional sports leagues in the United States. Policing represents one important public service. Policing typically constitutes large portions of government budgets and also generates revenue through fines and forfeitures. Existing evidence suggests that large municipal expenditures in other areas can have an ambiguous effect on policing outcomes. This paper addresses the question of whether large public expenditures on sports facilities affect drug asset forfeiture using two-way fixed effects (TWFE) and generalized dynamic model specifications (GDMS). The results are similar across estimation methods, with static TWFE results suggesting a treatment effect of $1,274–5,589 in additional forfeiture per million in subsidies and results from the newer GDMS estimators suggesting $7,703 per million in subsidies. The results imply that, beyond generating no tangible local economic benefits, public subsidization of sports facilities also leads police to make up budget shortfalls by more aggressive policing, which has important implications for racial equity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"volume\":\"2014 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421241232444\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421241232444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

地方政府用有限的预算提供许多重要服务,但却经常补贴美国职业体育联盟中有利可图的私营企业。警务就是一项重要的公共服务。治安工作通常占政府预算的很大一部分,同时还通过罚款和没收获得收入。现有证据表明,市政当局在其他领域的巨额支出可能会对警务结果产生模糊影响。本文利用双向固定效应(TWFE)和广义动态模型规格(GDMS)研究了体育设施方面的巨额公共支出是否会影响毒品资产没收的问题。不同估算方法的结果相似,静态 TWFE 的结果表明,每百万美元的补贴会产生 1,274-5,589 美元的额外没收处理效应,而较新的 GDMS 估算结果表明,每百万美元的补贴会产生 7,703 美元的额外没收处理效应。这些结果表明,对体育设施的公共补贴除了不会产生有形的地方经济效益外,还会导致警方通过更积极地维持治安来弥补预算不足,这对种族公平具有重要影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Public Financing of Professional Sports Facilities and Drug Asset Forfeiture
Local governments provide many crucial services from limited budgets, yet often subsidize the profitable, private businesses in professional sports leagues in the United States. Policing represents one important public service. Policing typically constitutes large portions of government budgets and also generates revenue through fines and forfeitures. Existing evidence suggests that large municipal expenditures in other areas can have an ambiguous effect on policing outcomes. This paper addresses the question of whether large public expenditures on sports facilities affect drug asset forfeiture using two-way fixed effects (TWFE) and generalized dynamic model specifications (GDMS). The results are similar across estimation methods, with static TWFE results suggesting a treatment effect of $1,274–5,589 in additional forfeiture per million in subsidies and results from the newer GDMS estimators suggesting $7,703 per million in subsidies. The results imply that, beyond generating no tangible local economic benefits, public subsidization of sports facilities also leads police to make up budget shortfalls by more aggressive policing, which has important implications for racial equity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Public Finance Review is a professional forum devoted to US policy-oriented economic research and theory, which focuses on a variety of allocation, distribution and stabilization functions within the public-sector economy. Economists, policy makers, political scientists, and researchers all rely on Public Finance Review, to bring them the most up-to-date information on the ever changing US public finance system, and to help them put policies and research into action. Public Finance Review not only presents rigorous empirical and theoretical papers on public economic policies, but also examines and critiques their impact and consequences. The journal analyzes the nature and function of evolving US governmental fiscal policies at the national, state and local levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信