IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/feddwp/97-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Allocative inefficiency and school competition

Author

Listed:
  • Shawna Grosskopf
  • Kathy J. Hayes
  • Lori L. Taylor
  • William Weber

Abstract

A substantial literature indicates that the public school system in the United States is inefficient. Some have posited that this inefficiency arises from a lack of competition in the education market. On the other hand, the Tiebout hypothesis suggests that public schools may already face significant competition. In this paper, the authors examine the extent to which competition for students influences public school inefficiency in Texas. They use a Shephard input distance function to model education production and use bootstrapping techniques to examine allocative inefficiencies. Switching regressions estimation suggests that school districts in noncompetitive metropolitan areas are more than twice as allocatively inefficient as school districts in competitive metropolitan areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Shawna Grosskopf & Kathy J. Hayes & Lori L. Taylor & William Weber, 1997. "Allocative inefficiency and school competition," Working Papers 9708, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:feddwp:97-08
    Note: Published as: Grosskopf, Shawna, Kathy Hayes, Lori L. Taylor and William L. Webster (1998), "Allocative Inefficiency and School Competition," Proceedings, Annual Conference on Taxation and Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the National Tax Association 91: 282-290.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/research/papers/1997/wp9708.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Figlio, David N. & Stone, Joe A., 2001. "Can Public Policy Affect Private School Cream Skimming?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 240-266, March.

    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:fip:feddwp:97-08. 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: Amy Chapman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbdaus.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.