IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juecon/v67y2010i2p169-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the land tax help curb urban sprawl? Evidence from growth patterns in Pennsylvania

Author

Listed:
  • Banzhaf, H. Spencer
  • Lavery, Nathan

Abstract

Urban sprawl has become a policy concern of national prominence. One tool that has been suggested for combating sprawl is the land or split-rate tax. In theory, such taxes can raise the ratio of housing capital to land. This in turn can raise the density of housing units where it is applied, if the average size of housing units does not increase enough to offset an effect on the number of housing units. This research explores these issues, looking at a panel of land uses and demographics in Pennsylvania. We confirm the theoretical prediction that the split-rate tax raises the capital/land ratio. We also find that the primary effect is in more housing units, rather than bigger units, suggesting the split-rate tax is potentially a powerful anti-sprawl tool. We find adoption of the split-rate tax increases the number of housing units, and that these units follow a more dense pattern of development.

Suggested Citation

  • Banzhaf, H. Spencer & Lavery, Nathan, 2010. "Can the land tax help curb urban sprawl? Evidence from growth patterns in Pennsylvania," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 169-179, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:juecon:v:67:y:2010:i:2:p:169-179
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094-1190(09)00057-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    2. Song, Yan & Zenou, Yves, 2006. "Property tax and urban sprawl: Theory and implications for US cities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 519-534, November.
    3. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Powers, Shawn M., 2006. "Explaining the appearance and success of voter referenda for open-space conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 373-390, July.
    4. Oates, Wallace E. & Schwab, Robert M., 1997. "The Impact of Urban Land Taxation: The Pittsburgh Experience," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 50(1), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Glaeser, Edward L. & Kahn, Matthew E., 2004. "Sprawl and urban growth," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics,in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 56, pages 2481-2527 Elsevier.
    6. Capozza, Dennis & Li, Yuming, 1994. "The Intensity and Timing of Investment: The Case of Land," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 889-904, September.
    7. David Card & Alexandre Mas & Jesse Rothstein, 2008. "Tipping and the Dynamics of Segregation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 123(1), pages 177-218.
    8. Marcy Burchfield & Henry G. Overman & Diego Puga & Matthew A. Turner, 2006. "Causes of Sprawl: A Portrait from Space," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(2), pages 587-633.
    9. Feldstein, Martin S, 1977. "The Surprising Incidence of a Tax on Pure Rent: A New Answer to an Old Question," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(2), pages 349-360, April.
    10. Thomas J. Nechyba & Randall P. Walsh, 2004. "Urban Sprawl," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 177-200, Fall.
    11. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    12. Brueckner, Jan K & Kim, Hyun-A, 2003. "Urban Sprawl and the Property Tax," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(1), pages 5-23, January.
    13. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    14. Bento, Antonio M. & Franco, Sofia F. & Kaffine, Daniel, 2006. "The efficiency and distributional impacts of alternative anti-sprawl policies," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 121-141, January.
    15. Oates, Wallace E. & Schwab, Robert M., 1997. "The Impact of Urban Land Taxation: The Pittsburgh Experience," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 50(1), pages 1-21, March.
    16. McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2006. "Zoning, TDRs and the density of development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 440-457, May.
    17. Peter F. Colwell & Geoffrey K. Turnbull, 2003. "Frontage tax and the optimally compact city," Chapters,in: The Property Tax, Land Use and Land Use Regulation, chapter 10 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Plassmann, Florenz & Tideman, T. Nicolaus, 2000. "A Markov Chain Monte Carlo Analysis of the Effect of Two-Rate Property Taxes on Construction," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 216-247, March.
    19. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, January.
    20. H. Spencer Banzhaf & Randall P. Walsh, 2008. "Do People Vote with Their Feet? An Empirical Test of Tiebout," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 843-863, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bento, Antonio M. & Franco, Sofia F. & Kaffine, Daniel, 2011. "Is there a double-dividend from anti-sprawl policies?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 135-152, March.
    2. Bento, Antonio M. & Franco, Sofia F. & Kaffine, Daniel T., 2011. "Welfare Effects of Anti-Sprawl Policies in the Presence of Urban Decline," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(3), December.
    3. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Fernandez Milan, Blanca & Schwerhoff, Gregor & Jakob, Michael & Hahnen, Maren & Creutzig, Felix, 2017. "Fiscal Instruments for Sustainable Development: The Case of Land Taxes," MPRA Paper 78652, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. repec:kap:itaxpf:v:24:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10797-016-9403-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Ermini, Barbara & Santolini, Raffaella, 2015. "Differentiated property tax and urban sprawl in Italian urbanized areas," MPRA Paper 65460, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Miriam Hortas-Rico, 2014. "Urban sprawl and municipal budgets in Spain: A dynamic panel data analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(4), pages 843-864, November.
    7. Bartolini, David & Ninka, Eniel & Santolini, Raffaella, 2017. "Tax Decentralisation, Labour productivity and Employment," MPRA Paper 81070, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Jaren C. Pope, 2013. "The Value of Residential Land and Structures during the Great Housing Boom and Bust," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 1-29.

    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:eee:juecon:v:67:y:2010:i:2:p:169-179. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622905 .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.