IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v76y2018icp193-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voter support for environmental bond referenda

Author

Listed:
  • Hawkins, Christopher V.
  • Chia-Yuan, Yu

Abstract

Open space and recreation land protection can provide a variety of community benefits. Limited government resources, however, may preclude land acquisition and enhancement activities. State governments have thus turned to “bond referenda” as a mechanism to increase financial resource capacity to provide public goods. The purpose of this study is to explore two groups of factors (resident characteristics and land use types) related to voter support for an environmental bond in the state of Rhode Island, USA. A spatial regression model is used to explore these relationships. The results show that voting districts with high-density residential land use and a non-white population are more supportive of the environmental bond referendum, as are voting districts with more open space that is publicly accessible and that have recreational amenities. Voting districts with a high percentage of natural habitat land are less supportive of the bond referendum. The findings suggest government agencies should pay more attention to the equitable distribution of public goods and to providing more open space land that is public accessible.

Suggested Citation

  • Hawkins, Christopher V. & Chia-Yuan, Yu, 2018. "Voter support for environmental bond referenda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 193-200.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:193-200
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.05.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717317039
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.05.006?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
    ---><---

    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. Michael Howell‐Moroney, 2004. "What Are the Determinants of Open‐Space Ballot Measures? An Extension of the Research," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(1), pages 169-179, March.
    2. Cho, Wendy K Tam & Rudolph, Thomas J, 2008. "Emanating Political Participation: Untangling the Spatial Structure Behind Participation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 273-289, April.
    3. Shultz, Steven D & King, David A, 2001. "The Use of Census Data for Hedonic Price Estimates of Open-Space Amenities and Land Use," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 239-252, March-May.
    4. Margot Lutzenhiser & Noelwah R. Netusil, 2001. "The Effect Of Open Spaces On A Home'S Sale Price," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 19(3), pages 291-298, July.
    5. repec:bla:devpol:v:23:y:2005:i:5:p:553-566 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Heintzelman, Martin D. & Walsh, Patrick J. & Grzeskowiak, Dustin J., 2013. "Explaining the appearance and success of open space referenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 108-117.
    7. Wu, Xiaoyu & Cutter, Bowman, 2011. "Who votes for public environmental goods in California?: Evidence from a spatial analysis of voting for environmental ballot measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 554-563, January.
    8. Francine Romero & Adrian Liserio, 2002. "Saving Open Spaces: Determinants of 1998 and 1999 “Antisprawl” Ballot Measures," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 341-352, March.
    9. Espey, Molly & Owusu-Edusei, Kwame, 2001. "Neighborhood Parks And Residential Property Values In Greenville, South Carolina," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-6, December.
    10. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Bowker, James Michael & Park, William M., 2006. "Measuring the Contribution of Water and Green Space Amenities to Housing Values: An Application and Comparison of Spatially Weighted Hedonic Models," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(3), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Seth B. Payton & John R. Ottensmann, 2015. "The implicit price of urban public parks and greenways: a spatial-contextual approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(3), pages 495-512, March.
    12. Jeffrey E. Zabel & Robert W. Paterson, 2006. "The Effects of Critical Habitat Designation on Housing Supply: An Analysis of California Housing Construction Activity," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 67-95, February.
    13. Nelson, Erik & Uwasu, Michinori & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Voting on open space: What explains the appearance and support of municipal-level open space conservation referenda in the United States?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 580-593, May.
    14. Jeffrey A. Dubin & D. Roderick Kiewiet & Charles Noussair, 1992. "Voting On Growth Control Measures: Preferences And Strategies," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 191-213, July.
    15. Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1998. "Measuring heterogeneous preferences for preserving farmland and open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 211-224, August.
    16. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Jeffrey B. Lewis, 2004. "Beyond the Median: Voter Preferences, District Heterogeneity, and Political Representation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1364-1383, December.
    17. Kahn, Matthew E & Matsusaka, John G, 1997. "Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 137-173, April.
    18. Dehring, Carolyn A. & Depken II, Craig A. & Ward, Michael R., 2008. "A direct test of the homevoter hypothesis," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 155-170, July.
    19. Druckman, James N. & Fein, Jordan & Leeper, Thomas J., 2012. "A Source of Bias in Public Opinion Stability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 430-454, May.
    20. Sonstelie, Jon C. & Portney, Paul R., 1980. "Take the money and run: A theory of voting in local referenda," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 187-195, September.
    21. 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.
    22. Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1994. "Using Referendum Data to Characterize Public Support for Purchasing Development Rights to Farmland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 223-233.
    23. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    24. Deacon, Robert T & Shapiro, Perry, 1975. "Private Preference for Collective Goods Revealed Through Voting on Referenda," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 943-955, December.
    25. Matthew E. Kahn, 2002. "Demographic change and the demand for environmental regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 45-62.
    26. Smith, V. Kerry & Poulos, Christine & Kim, Hyun, 2002. "Treating open space as an urban amenity," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 107-129, February.
    27. Powell, L.M. & Slater, S. & Chaloupka, F.J. & Harper, D., 2006. "Availability of physical activity-related facilities and neighborhood demographic and socioeconomic characteristics: A national study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(9), pages 1676-1680.
    28. William D. Solecki & Robert J. Mason & Shannon Martin, 2004. "The Geography of Support for Open‐Space Initiatives: A Case Study of New Jersey's 1998 Ballot Measure," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(3), pages 624-639, September.
    29. Goff, Brian L & Grier, Kevin B, 1993. "On the (Mis)measurement of Legislator Ideology and Shirking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 76(1-2), pages 5-20, June.
    30. H. Spencer Banzhaf & Wallace E. Oates & James N. Sanchirico, 2010. "Success and design of local referenda for land conservation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 769-798.
    31. Anderson, Soren T. & West, Sarah E., 2006. "Open space, residential property values, and spatial context," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 773-789, November.
    32. Felix Schläpfer & Nick Hanley, 2003. "Do Local Landscape Patterns Affect the Demand for Landscape Amenities Protection?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 21-34, March.
    33. Matthew E. Kahn, 2000. "The environmental impact of suburbanization," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 569-586.
    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. Joshua C. Hall & Jeremy Horpedahl & E. Frank Stephenson, 2021. "Collective Action Problems and Direct Democracy: An Analysis of Georgia’s 2010 Trauma Care Funding Amendment," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-9, April.
    2. Cicatiello, Lorenzo & Ercolano, Salvatore & Gaeta, Giuseppe Lucio & Pinto, Mauro, 2020. "Willingness to pay for environmental protection and the importance of pollutant industries in the regional economy. Evidence from Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).

    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. Edmund M. Balsdon, 2012. "Property Value Capitalization and Municipal Open Space Referenda," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 201-232.
    2. Prendergast, Patrick & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna & Lang, Corey, 2019. "The individual determinants of support for open space bond referendums," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 258-268.
    3. Nelson, Erik & Uwasu, Michinori & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Voting on open space: What explains the appearance and support of municipal-level open space conservation referenda in the United States?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 580-593, May.
    4. Uwasu, Michinori & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2005. "Voting on Open Space: An Analysis of the Decision to Hold a Referendum and of Referendum Results," Staff Papers 13837, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    5. 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.
    6. Heintzelman, Martin D. & Walsh, Patrick J. & Grzeskowiak, Dustin J., 2013. "Explaining the appearance and success of open space referenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 108-117.
    7. Waltert, Fabian & Schläpfer, Felix, 2010. "Landscape amenities and local development: A review of migration, regional economic and hedonic pricing studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 141-152, December.
    8. Kreye, Melissa M. & Adams, Damian C. & Kline, Jeffrey D., 2019. "Gaining voter support for watershed protection," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Lang, Corey, 2018. "Assessing the efficiency of local open space provision," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 12-24.
    10. Chad Chriestenson & Dawn Thilmany, 2020. "Do factors contributing to appearance and success of conservation referenda in the West differ from those found in other regions of the United States?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 65(1), pages 83-104, August.
    11. Altonji, Matthew & Lang, Corey & Puggioni, Gavino, 2016. "Can urban areas help sustain the preservation of open space? Evidence from statewide referenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 82-91.
    12. Lang, Corey & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna, 2022. "Aggregate data yield biased estimates of voter preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    13. Seong-Hoon Cho & Christopher D. Clark & William M. Park & Seung Gyu Kim, 2009. "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Housing Market Values of Lot Size and Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 51-73.
    14. Robert Deacon & Felix Schläpfer, 2010. "The Spatial Range of Public Goods Revealed Through Referendum Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 305-328, November.
    15. Matthew J. Holian & Matthew E. Kahn, 2015. "Household Demand for Low Carbon Policies: Evidence from California," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(2), pages 205-234.
    16. Walsh, Patrick J. & Bird, Stephen & Heintzelman, Martin D., 2015. "Understanding Local Regulation of Fracking: A Spatial Econometric Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(2), pages 1-26, August.
    17. Schumacher, Ingmar, 2014. "An Empirical Study of the Determinants of Green Party Voting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 306-318.
    18. Wu, Xiaoyu & Cutter, Bowman, 2011. "Who votes for public environmental goods in California?: Evidence from a spatial analysis of voting for environmental ballot measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 554-563, January.
    19. Maennig, Wolfgang & Ahlfeldt, Gabriel M. & Steenbeck, Malte, 2016. "Après nous le déluge? Direct democracy and intergenerational conflicts in aging societies," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145793, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    20. Poudyal, Neelam C. & Hodges, Donald G. & Tonn, Bruce & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2009. "Valuing diversity and spatial pattern of open space plots in urban neighborhoods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 194-201, May.

    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:lauspo:v:76:y:2018:i:c:p:193-200. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.