The importance of modeling spatial spillovers in public choice analysis
- 706 Downloads
It is frequently assumed that regional observations on local government behavior, voters, regional taxes, etc. can be analyzed using ordinary least-squares (OLS) methods. We discuss spatial regression models in empirical studies of public choice issues using impacts arising from population migration on the provision of county-level government services as an illustration. Spatial regressions allow an examination of the direct and indirect (spatial spillover) effects which taken together determine the total impact (on the dependent variable) arising from a change in the explanatory variables. This decomposition should be quite useful in empirical public choice studies.
KeywordsSpatial dependence Spatial regression models Spatial spillovers
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Besley, T., & Case, A. (1995). Incumbent behavior: vote-seeking, tax-setting, and yardstick competition. American Economic Review, 85(1), 25–45. Google Scholar
- Bureau of Business and Economic Research (2003). How well did we retain and attract highly educated workers? (Vol. 9, pp. 1–6). Morgantown: College of Business and Economics, West Virginia University. Google Scholar
- Cushing, B., & Rogers, C. (1996). Income and poverty in Appalachia. In Socio-economic review of Appalachia. Morgantown: Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University. Google Scholar
- Fischel, W. A. (2001). The homevoter hypothesis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
- Goetz, S. T., & Debertin, D. L. (1999). Rural education and the 1990 Kentucky educational reform act: funding, implementation and research issues. Lexington, KY: Agricultural Economics Research Report 54, University of Kentucky. Google Scholar
- Hall, J., & Ross, J. (2010, forthcoming). Tiebout competition, yardstick competition, and tax instrument choice: evidence from Ohio school districts. Public Finance Review. Google Scholar
- Mazie, S. M. (1986). The form crisis of the 1980’s. In Rural development perspectives 2, 3. Washington: USDA/ERS. Google Scholar
- Nesbit, T. M., & Kreft, S. F. (2009). Federal grants, earmarked revenues, and budget crowd-out: State highway funding. Public Budgeting & Finance, 94–110. Google Scholar
- Pace, R. K., & LeSage, J. P. (2010). Omitted variables biases of OLS and spatial lag models. In A. Páez, J. Le Gallo, R. Buliung, & S. Dall’erba (Eds.), Advances in Spatial Science, Progress in spatial analysis: theory and computation, and thematic applications (pp. 17–28). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar