IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_2248.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why not in your Backyard? On the Location and Size of a Public Facility

Author

Listed:
  • Giorgio Bellettini
  • Hubert Kempf

Abstract

In this paper, we tackle the issue of locating a public facility which provides a public good in a closed and populated territory. This facility generates differentiated benefits to neighborhoods depending on their distance from it. In the case of a Nimby facility, the smaller is the distance, the lower is the individual benefit. The opposite is true in the case of an anti-Nimby facility. We first characterize the optimal location which would be chosen by a social planner. Then we introduce a common-agency lobbying game, where agents attempt to influence the location and provision decisions by the government. Some interesting results arise in the case where only a subset of neighborhoods lobby. First, the solution of the lobbying game can replicate the optimal solution. Second, under-provision and over-provision of the public good may be obtained both in the Nimby and the anti-Nimby cases. The provision outcome depends on the presence of either a congestion effect or an agglomeration effect. Third, some non-lobbying neighborhoods may be better off than in the case where all neighborhoods lobby, which raises the possibility of free-riding at the lobbying stage.

Suggested Citation

  • Giorgio Bellettini & Hubert Kempf, 2008. "Why not in your Backyard? On the Location and Size of a Public Facility," CESifo Working Paper Series 2248, CESifo Group Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp2248.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    2. Munoz-Perez, Jose & Saameno-Rodriguez, Juan Jose, 1999. "Location of an undesirable facility in a polygonal region with forbidden zones," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 372-379, April.
    3. Leonardo Felli & Antonio Merlo, 2006. "Endogenous Lobbying," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 180-215, March.
    4. Ottaviano, Gianmarco I. P. & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2002. "Integration, agglomeration and the political economics of factor mobility," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 429-456, March.
    5. Gabriel Ahlfeldt & Wolfgang Maennig, 2010. "Impact of sports arenas on land values: evidence from Berlin," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 44(2), pages 205-227, April.
    6. Minehart, Deborah & Neeman, Zvika, 2002. "Effective Siting of Waste Treatment Facilities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 303-324, March.
    7. Thisse, Jacques-Francois & Wildasin, David E., 1992. "Public facility location and urban spatial structure : Equilibrium and welfare analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 83-118, June.
    8. Kunreuther, Howard & Kleindorfer, Paul R, 1986. "A Sealed-Bid Auction Mechanism for Siting Noxious Facilities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 295-299, May.
    9. Eli Feinerman & Israel Finkelshtain & Iddo Kan, 2004. "On A Political Solution to the NIMBY Conflict," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 369-381, March.
    10. Ingberman Daniel E., 1995. "Siting Noxious Facilities: Are Markets Efficient?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 20-33, November.
    11. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(1), pages 1-31.
    12. Wellisch Dietmar, 1995. "Locational Choices of Firms and Decentralized Environmental Policy with Various Instruments," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 290-310, May.
    13. repec:ags:afjare:141665 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Martin Besfamille & Jean-Marie Lozachmeur, 2010. "NIMBY and mechanism design under different constitutional constraints," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 17(2), pages 114-132, April.
    15. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Eichenberger, Reiner, 1996. "The Old Lady Visits Your Backyard: A Tale of Morals and Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1297-1313, December.
    16. Timothy Besley & Stephen Coate, 2001. "Lobbying and Welfare in a Representative Democracy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 67-82.
    17. Per Fredriksson, 2000. "The Siting of Hazardous Waste Facilities in Federal Systems: The Political Economy of NIMBY," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 15(1), pages 75-87, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General

    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:ces:ceswps:_2248. 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: (Klaus Wohlrabe). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.