The effect of NEA grants on the contributions to nonprofit dance companies

Journal of Arts Management Law and Society

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 98-113

  Smith, Thomas M ^a,b  

^a Center for Economic Education   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 64949112926     PISSN: 10632921     EISSN: 19307799     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10632920309596569     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. American Ans Alliance. 1995. Myths and facts about national support of the arts and culture. Available at http://www.tmn.com/Oh/Artswire/www/aaa/myth.html.
2. Bergstrom. Theodore, Lawrence Bloom, and Hal Varian. 1986. On the private provisions of public goods. Journal of Public Economics 29 (1): 25-49.
3. Brooks, A. 1999. Do public subsidies leverage private philanthropy for the arts? Empirical evidence on symphony orchestras. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 28 (1): 32-45.
4. Brooks, A. 2000a. Is there a dark side to government support for nonprofits? Public AdministrationReview 60 (3): 211-18.
5. Brooks, A. 2000b. Public subsidies and charitable giving: Crowding out, crowding in, or both? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19 (3): 451-64.
6. Brooks, A. 2003. Taxes, subsidies, and listeners like you: Public policy and contributions to public radio. Public Administration Review, forthcoming.
7. Illinois Economic Association. 2001. The state of the arts: A panel on the economics and finances of performing arts in Illinois. Chicago: University of Illinois at Chicago.
8. Kingma, B. 1989. An accurate measure of the crowd-out effect, income effect, and price effect for charitable contributions. Journal of Political Economy 97: 1197-1207.
9. Kotler, P., and J. Scheff. 1997. Standing room only: Strategies for marketing the performing arts. Boston: Harvard UP.
10. Munger, J. 2001. Dancing with dollars in the millennium: A ten year summary of trends. Dance Magazine. April, 3-14.
11. National Endowment for the Arts. 1998. Did you know …? Available at http://arts.endow.gov/guide/facts.htm.
12. Netzer, D. 1978. The subsidized muse: Public support for the arts in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Nichols, B., and T. M. Smith. 2001. Growth in the U.S. dance field: Evidence from the 1987, 1992, and 1997 economic census. National Endowment for the Arts Research Report. http://www.nea.gov/pub/Eric-Reports.html.
14. Okten, C., and B. Weisbrod. 2000. Determinants of donations in private nonprofit markets. Journal of Public Economics 75: 255-72.
15. Payne, A. 2001. Measuring the effect of federal research funding on private donations at research universities: Is federal research funding more than a substitute for private donations. International Tax and Public Finance 8: 731-51.
16. SAS Institute. 1993. SAS/ETS software: Applications guide 2-Econometric modeling, simulation and forecasting. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
17. Smith, T. M. 2001a. Economic conditions of the nonprofit dance field 1986-1999: Evidence from the National Endowment for the Arts-Dance applicant database. National Endowment for the Arts Research Report. http://www.nea.gov/pub/Eric-Reports.html.
18. Smith, T. M. 2001b. Economic conditions of the nonprofit dance field 1989-1999: Evidence from the unified database of arts organizations. National Endowment for the Arts Research Report. http://www.nea.gov/pub/Eric-Reports.html.