Lindahl prices solve the NIMBY problem
The siting of public facilities such as prisons or waste disposal facilities typically faces rejection by local populations (the "NIMBY" syndrome, for Not In My BackYard). These public goods exhibit a private bad aspect creating an asymmetry: all involved communities benefit from their existence, but only the host bears the local negative externality. We show that the well-known Lindahl pricing scheme constitutes the only cost-sharing method satisfying a set of properties specifically designed to handle the siting problem.
Volume (Year): 30 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| |
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Laurent-Lucchetti, Jérémy & Leroux, Justin, 2011.
"Choosing and sharing,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 296-300, September.
- Jérémy Laurent-Lucchetti & Justin Leroux, 2007. "Choosing and Sharing," Cahiers de recherche 07-13, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
- Laurent-Lucchetti, Jérémy & Leroux, Justin, 2009. "Choosing and Sharing," MPRA Paper 14929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- David Pérez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, 2002. "Choosing Wisely: A Multibidding Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1577-1587, December.
- O'Sullivan Arthur, 1993. "Voluntary Auctions for Noxious Facilities: Incentives to Participate and the Efficiency of Siting Decisions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 12-26, July. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)