重新审视地方支出Tiebout理论的微观基础:在住宅选择中,私人社区便利设施是否取代了地方公共服务?

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q2 URBAN STUDIES
K. Canales, Martha E. Kropf, Suzanne M. Leland, Cherie D. Maestas
{"title":"重新审视地方支出Tiebout理论的微观基础:在住宅选择中,私人社区便利设施是否取代了地方公共服务?","authors":"K. Canales, Martha E. Kropf, Suzanne M. Leland, Cherie D. Maestas","doi":"10.1177/10780874221103765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tiebout's theory of local expenditures predicts the efficient provision of local tax and expenditure bundles via market forces occur when individuals “vote with their feet” (Tiebout 1956). Private amenity choices may distort market signals to local governments. Thus we conduct a conjoint experiment to explore how citizens make choices among hypothetical apartment homes, varying public and club good attributes. This allows us to vary both apartment community and city amenities independently to determine whether private club or public amenities are more influential in shaping residency choices. Regardless of the quality of city services, citizens on average are willing to pay for an additional layer of safety provided by an apartment complex. We conclude that the city's tax expenditure bundle is not the only consideration in residential location choice, suggesting that there is disruption in the efficient provision of public goods.","PeriodicalId":51427,"journal":{"name":"Urban Affairs Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"1441 - 1469"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting the Micro-Foundations of the Tiebout Theory of Local Expenditures: Are Private Community Amenities Substitutes for Local Public Services in Residential Choices?\",\"authors\":\"K. Canales, Martha E. Kropf, Suzanne M. Leland, Cherie D. Maestas\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10780874221103765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tiebout's theory of local expenditures predicts the efficient provision of local tax and expenditure bundles via market forces occur when individuals “vote with their feet” (Tiebout 1956). Private amenity choices may distort market signals to local governments. Thus we conduct a conjoint experiment to explore how citizens make choices among hypothetical apartment homes, varying public and club good attributes. This allows us to vary both apartment community and city amenities independently to determine whether private club or public amenities are more influential in shaping residency choices. Regardless of the quality of city services, citizens on average are willing to pay for an additional layer of safety provided by an apartment complex. We conclude that the city's tax expenditure bundle is not the only consideration in residential location choice, suggesting that there is disruption in the efficient provision of public goods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"1441 - 1469\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221103765\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221103765","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

蒂布特的地方支出理论预测,当个人“用脚投票”时,通过市场力量有效地提供地方税收和支出束(蒂布特1956)。私人设施的选择可能会扭曲市场向地方政府发出的信号。因此,我们进行了一个联合实验,探讨公民如何在假设的公寓住宅、不同的公共和俱乐部商品属性中做出选择。这使我们能够独立地改变公寓社区和城市设施,以确定私人俱乐部还是公共设施在塑造居住选择方面更有影响力。不管城市服务的质量如何,平均而言,市民愿意为公寓楼提供的额外一层安全买单。我们的结论是,城市的税收支出束并不是住宅选址选择的唯一考虑因素,这表明公共产品的有效提供存在中断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revisiting the Micro-Foundations of the Tiebout Theory of Local Expenditures: Are Private Community Amenities Substitutes for Local Public Services in Residential Choices?
Tiebout's theory of local expenditures predicts the efficient provision of local tax and expenditure bundles via market forces occur when individuals “vote with their feet” (Tiebout 1956). Private amenity choices may distort market signals to local governments. Thus we conduct a conjoint experiment to explore how citizens make choices among hypothetical apartment homes, varying public and club good attributes. This allows us to vary both apartment community and city amenities independently to determine whether private club or public amenities are more influential in shaping residency choices. Regardless of the quality of city services, citizens on average are willing to pay for an additional layer of safety provided by an apartment complex. We conclude that the city's tax expenditure bundle is not the only consideration in residential location choice, suggesting that there is disruption in the efficient provision of public goods.
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
Urban Affairs Review
Urban Affairs Review URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Urban Affairs Reveiw (UAR) is a leading scholarly journal on urban issues and themes. For almost five decades scholars, researchers, policymakers, planners, and administrators have turned to UAR for the latest international research and empirical analysis on the programs and policies that shape our cities. UAR covers: urban policy; urban economic development; residential and community development; governance and service delivery; comparative/international urban research; and social, spatial, and cultural dynamics.
×
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