Competition in the public school sector: Evidence on strategic interaction among US school districts

Journal of Urban Economics

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 352-369

  Rincke, Johannes ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

School choice; School districts; Spatial probit; Strategic interaction

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645951657     PISSN: 00941190     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2005.12.003     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. D. Arsen, D. Plank, R. Sykes, School choice policies in Michigan: The rules matter, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1999
2. Baicker K. The spillover effects of state spending. Journal of Public Economics 89 (2005) 529-544
3. Beron K.J., and Vijverberg W.P.M. Probit in a spatial context: A Monte Carlo analysis. In: Anselin L. (Ed). Advances in Spatial Econometrics (2004), Springer, Heidelberg 169-196
4. Besley T., and Case A. Incumbent behavior: Vote-seeking, tax-setting and yardstick competition. American Economic Review 85 (1995) 25-45
5. Blundell R., Griffith R., and Van Reenen J. Dynamic count data models of technological innovation. Economic Journal 105 (1995) 333-344
6. Bordignon M., Cerniglia F., and Revelli F. In search of yardstick competition: A spatial analysis of Italian municipality property tax setting. Journal of Urban Economics 54 (2003) 199-217
7. Brett C., and Pinkse J. Those taxes are all over the map: A test for spatial dependence of municipal tax rates in British Columbia. International Regional Science Review 20 1997 (2003) 131-151
8. Brueckner J.K. Testing for strategic interaction among local governments: The case of growth controls. Journal of Urban Economics 44 1998 (2003) 438-467
9. Brueckner J.K. Strategic interaction among governments: An overview of empirical studies. International Regional Science Review 26 (2003) 175-188
10. Büttner T. Local business taxation and competition for capital: The choice of the tax rate. Regional Science and Urban Economics 31 (2001) 215-245
11. Brueckner J.K., and Saavedra L.A. Do local governments engage in strategic property tax competition?. National Tax Journal 54 (2001) 203-229
12. Case A. Neighborhood influence and technological change. Regional Science and Urban Economics 22 (1992) 491-508
13. Case A., Hines J.R., and Rosen H.S. Budget spillovers and fiscal policy interdependence: Evidence from the states. Journal of Public Economics 52 (1993) 285-307
14. Couch J.F., Shugart W.F., and Williams A.L. Private school enrollment and public school performance. Public Choice 76 (1993) 301-312
15. Dee T.S. Competition and the quality of public schools. Economics of Education Review 17 (1998) 419-427
16. Egger P., Paffermayr M., and Winner H. An unbalanced spatial panel data approach to US state tax competition. Economics Letters 88 (2005) 329-335
17. Epple D., and Romano R.E. Competition between private and public schools, vouchers, and peer-group effects. American Economic Review 88 (1998) 33-62
18. Fredriksson P.G., and Millimet D.L. Strategic interaction and the determination of environmental policy across US states. Journal of Urban Economics 51 (2002) 101-122
19. Grosskopf S., Hayes K.J., Taylor L.L., and Weber W.L. On the determinants of school district efficiency: Competition and monitoring. Journal of Urban Economics 49 2001 (2002) 453-478
20. Hayashi M., and Boadway R. An empirical analysis of intergovernmental tax interaction: The case of business income taxes in Canada. Canadian Journal of Economics 34 (2000) 481-503
21. Hoxby C.M. School choice and school productivity (Or could school choice be a rising tide that lifts all boats?). In: Hoxby C.M. (Ed). The Economics of School Choice (2003), Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago 287-341
22. Hoxby C.M. Does competition among public schools benefit students and taxpayers?. American Economic Review 90 (2000) 1209-1238
23. Hoxby C.M. The Productivity of schools and other local public goods producers. Journal of Public Economics 74 (1999) 1-30
24. C.M. Hoxby, Do private schools provide competition for public schools? Working paper 4978, NBER, 1994
25. C. Kotsogiannis, R. Schwager, On the incentives to experiment in federations, Working paper 1585, CESifo, 2005
26. McMillen D.P. Probit with spatial autocorrelation. Journal of Regional Science 32 (1992) 235-248
27. Michigan Department of Treasury, School finance reform in Michigan, proposal A: Retroperspective, Office of Revenue and Tax Analysis, 2002
28. Newmark C.M. Another look at whether private schools influence public school quality: Comment. Public Choice 82 (1995) 365-373
29. Pinkse J., and Slade M.E. Contracting in space: an application of spatial statistics to discrete-choice models. Journal of Econometrics 85 (1998) 125-154
30. Rapp G.C. Agency and choice in education: Does school choice enhance the work effort of teachers?. Education Economics 8 (2000) 37-63
31. Reback R. House prices and the provision of local public services: Capitalization under school choice programs. Journal of Urban Economics 57 (2005) 275-301
32. F. Revelli, Performance rating and yardstick competition in social service provision, Journal of Public Economics, in press
33. Revelli F. On spatial public finance empirics. International Tax and Public Finance 12 (2005) 475-492
34. Sandström F.M., and Bergström F. School Vouchers in practice: Competition will not hurt you. Journal of Public Economics 89 (2005) 351-380
35. Strumpf K.S. Does government decentralization increase policy innovation?. Journal of Public Economic Theory 4 (2002) 207-241
36. Vedder R., and Hall J. Private school competition and public teacher salaries. Journal of Labor Research 21 (2000) 161-168