IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v131y2021i635p1081-1104..html

School Choice Design, Risk Aversion and Cardinal Segregation

Author

Listed:
  • Caterina Calsamiglia
  • Francisco Martínez-Mora
  • Antonio Miralles

Abstract

We embed the problem of public school choice design in a model of local provision of education. We define cardinal (student) segregation as that emerging when families with identical ordinal preferences submit different rankings of schools in a centralised school choice procedure. With the Boston Mechanism (BM), when higher types are less risk-averse, and there is sufficient vertical differentiation of schools, any equilibrium presents cardinal segregation. Transportation costs facilitate the emergence of cardinal segregation as does competition from private schools. Furthermore, the latter renders the best public schools more elitist. The Deferred Acceptance mechanism is resilient to cardinal segregation.

Suggested Citation

  • Caterina Calsamiglia & Francisco Martínez-Mora & Antonio Miralles, 2021. "School Choice Design, Risk Aversion and Cardinal Segregation," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(635), pages 1081-1104.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:635:p:1081-1104.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueaa095
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Basteck, Christian & Klaus, Bettina & Kübler, Dorothea, 2021. "How lotteries in school choice help to level the playing field," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 198-237.
    2. Laverde, Mariana & Mykerezi, Elton & Sojourner, Aaron & Sood, Aradhya, 2025. "Gains from Alternative Assignment? Evidence from a Two-Sided Teacher Market," IZA Discussion Papers 17696, IZA Network @ LISER.
    3. Kutscher, Macarena & Nath, Shanjukta & Urzúa, Sergio, 2023. "Centralized admission systems and school segregation: Evidence from a national reform," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    4. Zhang, Jun, 2021. "Level-k reasoning in school choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-17.
    5. Caterina Calsamiglia & Francisco Martínez-Mora & Antonio Miralles, 2021. "Random assignments and outside options," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(3), pages 557-566, October.
    6. Li Chen, 2023. "Timing of preference submissions under the Boston mechanism," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 25(4), pages 803-820, August.
    7. Erik Stivens PadillaGalviz & Montserrat Vilalta-Bufí, 2023. "Educational Assortative Mating in the European Regions," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2023/458, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Francisco Silva & Juan Pereyra, 2020. "Optimal object assignment mechanisms with imperfect type veri?cation," Documentos de Trabajo 540, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation

    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:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:635:p:1081-1104.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.