IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i6p2761-2775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income sorting by specialized services: Service differentiation by overlapping governments

Author

Listed:
  • HyungGun Park

Abstract

Background The flexible boundaries of special districts allow for overlaps with each other that generate various specialized service bundles on a territorial basis. The combined overlapping boundaries may reveal willingness to have more services at additional costs as the special districts generally provide services selectively to those who reside within their boundaries. Objective This study aims to investigate whether overlapping special districts sort citizens by income level as reflected by the Tiebout model. Methods This study utilizes a cross‐sectional block group data of Ventura County in California, taking numbers of vertices of special districts as independent variable and household income as dependent variable. Results Estimation result demonstrates that a greater number of specialized services is associated with higher income levels and varies by service type. Conclusion Findings of this study imply that income segregation could be predetermined by jurisdictional boundary, and that other subjects of urban segregation may have similar pattern.

Suggested Citation

  • HyungGun Park, 2021. "Income sorting by specialized services: Service differentiation by overlapping governments," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2761-2775, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2761-2775
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13078
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13078
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13078?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64, pages 416-416.
    2. Tyler A Scott & Tima Moldogaziev & Robert A Greer, 2018. "Drink what you can pay for: Financing infrastructure in a fragmented water system," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 2821-2837, October.
    3. Randall W. Eberts & Timothy J. Gronberg, 1988. "Can competition among local governments constrain government spending?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, vol. 24(Q I), pages 2-9.
    4. Mark Schneider, 1989. "Intercity competition and the size of the local public work force," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 253-265, December.
    5. Wallace E. Oates & Wallace E. Oates, 2004. "An Essay on Fiscal Federalism," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 22, pages 384-414, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Stephen B. Billings & Deborah A. Carroll, 2012. "“Debrucing” the Link between Tax and Expenditure Limits and Special District Governments," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 273-303, June.
    7. Jered B. Carr & Jayce Farmer, 0. "Contingent Effects of Municipal and County TELs on Special District Usage in the United States," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 41(4), pages 709-733.
    8. Glomm, Gerhard & Lagunoff, Roger, 1998. "A Tiebout theory of public vs private provision of collective goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 91-112, April.
    9. Paul W. Rhode & Koleman S. Strumpf, 2003. "Assessing the Importance of Tiebout Sorting: Local Heterogeneity from 1850 to 1990," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1648-1677, December.
    10. Edel, Matthew & Sclar, Elliott, 1974. "Taxes, Spending, and Property Values: Supply Adjustment in a Tiebout-Oates Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(5), pages 941-954, Sept./Oct.
    11. Gerhard Glomm & Roger Lagunoff, 1999. "A Dynamic Tiebout Theory of Voluntary vs. Involuntary Provision of Public Goods," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 659-677.
    12. Christopher Berry, 2008. "Piling On: Multilevel Government and the Fiscal Common‐Pool," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 802-820, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gürerk, Özgür & Irlenbusch, Bernd & Rockenbach, Bettina, 2014. "On cooperation in open communities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 220-230.
    2. Christopher B Goodman, 2018. "Usage of Specialized Service Delivery: Evidence from Contiguous Counties," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 48(4), pages 686-708.
    3. Grassmueck, Georg & Goetz, Stephan J. & Shields, Martin, 2008. "Youth Out-Migration from Pennsylvania: The Roles of Government Fragmentation vs. the Beaten Path Effect," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    4. Goodman, Christopher B, 2018. "Jurisdictional Overlap & the Size of the Local Public Workforce," SocArXiv jc7yn, Center for Open Science.
    5. Baicker, Katherine & Clemens, Jeffrey & Singhal, Monica, 2012. "The rise of the states: U.S. fiscal decentralization in the postwar period," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1079-1091.
    6. George Crowley & Russell Sobel, 2011. "Does fiscal decentralization constrain Leviathan? New evidence from local property tax competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 5-30, October.
    7. Sigrid Roehrs & David Stadelmann, 2010. "Mobility and local income redistribution," Working Papers 2010/4, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    8. Brueckner, Jan K., 2006. "Fiscal federalism and economic growth," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 2107-2120, November.
    9. Dirk Niepelt, 2018. "Dynamic Tax Externalities and the U.S. Fiscal Transformation in the 1930s," Diskussionsschriften dp1803, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    10. Floriana Cerniglia & Riccarda Longaretti, 2013. "Federalism, education-related public good and growth when agents are heterogeneous," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 271-301, July.
    11. Gonzalez-Eiras, Martín & Niepelt, Dirk, 2020. "Dynamic tax externalities and the U.S. fiscal transformation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 144-158.
    12. Goodman, Christopher B & Leland, Suzanne M., 2017. "Do Cities and Counties Attempt to Circumvent Changes in their Autonomy by Creating Special Districts?," SocArXiv 3rd7v, Center for Open Science.
    13. Goodman, Christopher B, 2019. "Patterns in Special District Creation and Dissolution," SocArXiv zwgjh, Center for Open Science.
    14. Ryan P. Scott & Tyler A. Scott & Robert A. Greer, 2022. "Who owns the pipes? Utility ownership, infrastructure conditions, and methane emissions in United States natural gas distribution," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(2), pages 170-198, March.
    15. Sigrid Röhrs & David Stadelmann, 2014. "Homeownership, Mobility, And Local Income Redistribution," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(4), pages 569-605, August.
    16. Spencer T. Brien & Wenli Yan, 2020. "Are Overlapping Local Governments Competing With Each Other When Issuing Debt?," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 75-92, June.
    17. Sigrid Roehrs & David Stadelmann, 2010. "Mobility and local income redistribution," Working Papers 2010/4, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    18. Fox, William F. & Gurley, Tami, 2006. "Will consolidation improve sub-national governments ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3913, The World Bank.
    19. Barrow, Lisa & Rouse, Cecilia Elena, 2004. "Using market valuation to assess public school spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 1747-1769, August.
    20. Zodrow, George R, 2003. "Tax Competition and Tax Coordination in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 651-671, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2761-2775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.