Federal grants and yardstick competition

Journal of Urban Economics

Volumn 52, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 53-64

  Boarnet, Marlon G ^a   Glazer, Amihai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Federalism; Fly paper effect; Yardstick competition

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036045580     PISSN: 00941190     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0094-1190(02)00001-3     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. The flypaper effect: Identifying areas for further research
2. Anomalies: The flypaper effect
3. Elections and macroeconomic policy cycles
4. Equilibrium political budget cycles
5. Incumbent behavior: Vote seeking, tax-setting, and yardstick competition
6. Budget spillovers and fiscal policy interdependence-evidence from the states
7. Estimation methods for spatial autoregressive structures: A study in spatial econometrics
8. Spatial Econometrics: Methods Spatial Econometrics and Models
9. On the Use of spatial autoregressive models in demand analysis. Discussion Paper Number 135
10. Advanced Spatial Statistics
11. The monocentric model and employment location
12. Testing for strategic interaction among local governments: The case of growth controls
13. Spatial patterns in household demand
14. Neighborhood influence and technological change
15. Spatial autocorrelation and neighborhood quality
16. Do states play welfare games?
17. A model of welfare competition with Evidence from AFDC
18. Estimation and inference in non-linear structural models
19. Unobserved tastes and the determination of municipal services
20. State and local fiscal behavior and federal grant policy
21. Simple diagnostic tests for spatial dependence
22. Is local government revenue response to federal aid symmetrical? Evidence from Pennsylvania county governments in an era of retrenchment
23. Welfare reform and the race to the bottom: Theory and evidence
24. An empirical analysis of the welfare magnet debate using the NLSY
25. State response to the TRA86 revenue windfalls: A new test of the flypaper effect
26. Tax structure and public sector growth