IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/7946.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Historical Test of the Tiebout Hypothesis: Local Heterogeneity from 1850 to 1990

Author

Listed:
  • Paul W. Rhode
  • Koleman S. Strumpf

Abstract

The Tiebout hypothesis, which states that individuals will costlessly sort themselves across local communities according to their public good preferences, is the workhorse of the local public finance literature. This paper develops a test of the Tiebout hypothesis using historical variation in mobility costs. Our extension of the Tiebout model to incorporate such costs yields the following comparative statics: as mobility costs fall, the heterogeneity across communities of individual public good preferences and, under some standard assumptions, of public good provision must (weakly) increase. Given mobility costs have fallen over time, a natural test of the Tiebout hypothesis is to take these predictions to the data here all US counties over the 1850-1990 period. Contrary to the predictions, we find decreasing heterogeneity between counties in policy outcomes (local education spending and total taxes or revenues) and in a wide variety of proxies for public good preferences (age groups, education levels, election outcomes, home ownership, income, race, and religious affiliation). Using the Boston SMSA as a case study, we show that the heterogeneity trends are similar at the municipal and county levels. These results suggest that forces working in opposition to Tiebout sorting have dominated individual location decisions over the past century.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul W. Rhode & Koleman S. Strumpf, 2000. "A Historical Test of the Tiebout Hypothesis: Local Heterogeneity from 1850 to 1990," NBER Working Papers 7946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:7946
    Note: DAE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w7946.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, 1978. "Statistics," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 17(1), January.
    2. Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, 1978. "Statistics," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 17(2), April.
    3. Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, 1978. "Statistics," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 17(4), October.
    4. Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, 1978. "Statistics," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 17(3), July.
    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. Gravel, Nicolas & Thoron, Sylvie, 2007. "Does endogenous formation of jurisdictions lead to wealth-stratification?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 569-583, January.

    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. Janet Currie, 1994. "Welfare and the Well-Being of Children: The Relative Effectiveness of Cash and In-Kind Transfers," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 8, pages 1-44, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Janet Currie, 1998. "The Effect of Welfare on Child Outcomes: What We Know and What We Need to Know," JCPR Working Papers 26, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    3. Lattimore, Pamela K. & Baker, Joanna R., 1997. "Demand estimation with failure and capacity constraints: An application to prisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 418-431, November.
    4. Gallet, Craig A. & List, John A., 1998. "Elasticities of beer demand revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 67-71, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making
    • H7 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations

    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:nbr:nberwo:7946. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.