IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v11y1983i3p283-398.html

Using Donor Preferences in Evaluating Public Expenditures: A Suggested Procedure

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory B. Christainsen

    (California State University, Hayward)

Abstract

This article provides a means of assessing the contribution of public expenditures to allocative efficiency, given the preferences of those who make charitable contributions. A test statistic is derived, which, when compared to the actual volume of government subsidies received by enterprises, indicates whether they are over- or under-subsidized. The statistic is couched in terms of parameters for which empirical estimates can be made. Employing existing estimates of these parameters, the use of such a statistic is then illustrated with reference to public expenditures for rehabilitation facilities in which disabled persons perform remunerative work—sheltered workshops.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory B. Christainsen, 1983. "Using Donor Preferences in Evaluating Public Expenditures: A Suggested Procedure," Public Finance Review, , vol. 11(3), pages 283-398, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:11:y:1983:i:3:p:283-398
    DOI: 10.1177/109114218301100302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/109114218301100302
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/109114218301100302?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. Burton Abrams & Mark Schitz, 1978. "The ‘crowding-out’ effect of governmental transfers on private charitable contributions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 29-39, March.
    2. Smith, Vernon L, 1980. "Experiments with a Decentralized Mechanism for Public Good Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(4), pages 584-599, September.
    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. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    2. Bryan Caplan & Edward Stringham, 2003. "Networks, Law, and the Paradox of Cooperation," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 309-326, December.
    3. repec:jpe:journl:1887 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Barlagne, Carla & Bazoche, Pascale & Thomas, Alban & Ozier-Lafontaine, Harry & Causeret, François & Blazy, Jean-Marc, 2015. "Promoting local foods in small island states: The role of information policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 62-72.
    5. Reischmann, Andreas, 2015. "Conditional vs. Voluntary Contribution Mechanism – An Experimental Study," Working Papers 0587, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    6. Hummel Jeffrey Rogers & Lavoie Don, 1994. "National Defense And The Public-Goods Problem," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2-3), pages 353-378, June.
    7. Verteramo Chiu, Leslie J. & Gómez, Miguel I. & Kaiser, Harry M. & Yan, Jubo, 2014. "Socially-Responsible Certification Schemes for Smallholder Coffee Farmers: Economics of Giving and Consumer Utility," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170551, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Behrens, Christoph & Emrich, Eike & Hämmerle, Martin & Pierdzioch, Christian, 2017. "Match quality, crowding out, and crowding in: Empirical evidence for German sports clubs," Working Papers of the European Institute for Socioeconomics 21, European Institute for Socioeconomics (EIS), Saarbrücken.
    9. Thomas Gaube, 2005. "Altruism and charitable giving in a fully replicated economy," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2005_8, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics.
    10. Shogren, Jason F., 1993. "Experimental Markets and Environmental Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 117-129, October.
    11. Marks, Melanie & Croson, Rachel, 1998. "Alternative rebate rules in the provision of a threshold public good: An experimental investigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 195-220, February.
    12. Jeffrey W. Bennett & M. Carter, 1993. "Prospects For Contingent Valuation: Lessons From The South‐East Forests," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 37(2), pages 79-93, August.
    13. Gordon Burtch & Anindya Ghose & Sunil Wattal, 2013. "An Empirical Examination of the Antecedents and Consequences of Contribution Patterns in Crowd-Funded Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 499-519, September.
    14. Cristian Pérez Muñoz & Joshua D Potter, 2014. "Street-level charity: Beggars, donors, and welfare policies," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(1), pages 158-174, January.
    15. Nicholas E. Burger & Charles D. Kolstad, 2009. "Voluntary Public Goods Provision, Coalition Formation, and Uncertainty," NBER Working Papers 15543, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Charles Plott, 2014. "Public choice and the development of modern laboratory experimental methods in economics and political science," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 331-353, December.
    17. Spencer, Michael A. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Shogren, Jason F. & List, John A., 2009. "Rebate rules in threshold public good provision," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(5-6), pages 798-806, June.
    18. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:10:y:2002:i:1:p:1-14 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Lauren Schmitz, 2012. "Do Cultural Tax Districts Buttress Revenue Growth for Budding Arts Organizations?," SCEPA working paper series. 2012-1, Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (SCEPA), The New School.
    20. Yilong Xu & Ginevra Marandola, 2023. "The (negative) effects of inequality on Social Capital," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 1562-1588, December.
    21. Reischmann, Andreas, 2016. "Conditional Contribution Mechanisms for the Provision of Public Goods in Dynamic Settings - Theory and Experimental Evidence," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145613, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    22. Richard Steinberg, 1986. "Charitable Giving as a Mixed Public/Private Good: Implications for Tax Policy," Public Finance Review, , vol. 14(4), pages 415-431, October.

    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:sae:pubfin:v:11:y:1983:i:3:p:283-398. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.