Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/duk/dukeec/02-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Introducing School Choice into Multi-District Public School Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Nechyba, Thomas J.
Abstract
Predicting the impact of school finance and school choice policies is complicated in large part because of the multitude of household choices that are simultaneously influenced within a general equilibrium setting. Parents choose which neighborhoods in which school districts to reside in, which schools - public or private - to send their children to, and how to participate in political process that affects education policies. As a result of these choices, property values and therefore budget sets change as different policies are introduced, and the nature of schools changes as inputs - including different mixes of children and parents - change. Furthermore, school administrators in both private and public schools may change their behavior under different institutional arrangements. The purpose of this paper is therefore to shed light on how school choice policies change opportunities faced by different types of households and their children as the general equilibrium forces unfold. The analysis employs general equilibrium simulations to accomplish this. These simulations are derived from a three-district model of low, middle and high-income school districts (calibrated to New York data) with housing stocks that vary within and across districts. The advantage of this approach is that, rather than starting from an abstract and idealized public school system, it allows the analysis to proceed from a base model that replicates the actual stylized facts that emerge from the data - including public school systems with wide inter-district variations of school quality, communities with housing stocks similar to those observed in the data, etc. Furthermore, the data are used to infer specific parameters in behavioral equations, parameters that are consistent with the present state of the world. Policies then unfold in the model under the assumptions that household responses will be consistent with these parameters. Previous analysis conducted with this model has yielded a variety of insights regarding the impact of various public school finance systems, the potential role of peer effects, and the likely role of different types of voucher policies. This analysis with respect to school choice is extended in this paper by considering potential school responses to increased competition as well as deriving testable implications regarding families that differ in income and in the number of children in the household.

Suggested Citation

  • Nechyba, Thomas J., 2002. "Introducing School Choice into Multi-District Public School Systems," Working Papers 02-13, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:02-13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.duke.edu/Papers/Abstracts02/abstract.02.13.html
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Epple, Dennis & Filimon, Radu & Romer, Thomas, 1993. "Existence of voting and housing equilibrium in a system of communities with property taxes," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 585-610, November.
    2. Sandra E. Black, 1999. "Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 577-599.
    3. Dennis Epple & Holger Sieg, 1999. "Estimating Equilibrium Models of Local Jurisdictions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 645-681, August.
    4. Epple, Dennis & Platt, Glenn J., 1998. "Equilibrium and Local Redistribution in an Urban Economy when Households Differ in both Preferences and Incomes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 23-51, January.
    5. Bearse, Peter & Glomm, Gerhard & Ravikumar, B., 2000. "On the political economy of means-tested education vouchers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(4-6), pages 904-915, May.
    6. Fernández, Raquel & Rogerson, Richard, 1999. "Education finance reform and investment in human capital: lessons from California," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 327-350, December.
    7. Brunner, Eric & Sonstelie, Jon & Thayer, Mark, 2001. "Capitalization and the Voucher: An Analysis of Precinct Returns from California's Proposition 174," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 517-536, November.
    8. Epple, Dennis & Romano, Richard E., 1996. "Ends against the middle: Determining public service provision when there are private alternatives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 297-325, November.
    9. Epple, Dennis & Romano, Richard E, 1998. "Competition between Private and Public Schools, Vouchers, and Peer-Group Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 33-62, March.
    10. Elizabeth M. Caucutt, 2001. "Peer group effects in applied general equilibrium," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 17(1), pages 25-51.
    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. Thomas J. Nechyba, 2003. "Centralization, Fiscal Federalism, and Private School Attendance," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(1), pages 179-204, February.
    2. Bayer, Patrick & McMillan, Robert, 2012. "Tiebout sorting and neighborhood stratification," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1129-1143.
    3. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2007. "A Unified Framework for Measuring Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(4), pages 588-638, August.
    4. Patrick Bayer & Stephen L. Ross, 2006. "Identifying Individual and Group Effects in the Presence of Sorting: A Neighborhood Effects Application," Working papers 2006-13, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2009.
    5. Yannis M. Ioannides, 2010. "Neighborhood Effects and Housing," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0747, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    6. Raquel Fernandez & Richard Rogerson, 2003. "School Vouchers as a Redistributive Device. An Analysis of Three Alternative Systems," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of School Choice, pages 195-226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Nechyba, Thomas, 2003. "School finance, spatial income segregation, and the nature of communities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 61-88, July.
    8. Francisco Martinez Mora, "undated". "Income Stratification Across Public and Private Education: The Multi-community Case," Discussion Papers 03/01, Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Cohen-Zada, Danny & Justman, Moshe, 2003. "The political economy of school choice: linking theory and evidence," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 277-308, September.
    10. Brunner, Eric J. & Imazeki, Jennifer, 2008. "Tiebout choice and universal school vouchers," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 253-279, January.
    11. Yeşilırmak, Muharrem, 2019. "Bonus pay for teachers, spatial sorting, and student achievement," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 129-158.
    12. Calabrese, Stephen & Epple, Dennis & Romer, Thomas & Sieg, Holger, 2006. "Local public good provision: Voting, peer effects, and mobility," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(6-7), pages 959-981, August.
    13. Schmidheiny, Kurt, 2006. "Income segregation from local income taxation when households differ in both preferences and incomes," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 270-299, March.
    14. Cohen-Zada, Danny & Justman, Moshe, 2005. "The religious factor in private education," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 391-418, May.
    15. Kelly C. Bishop & Christopher Timmins, 2011. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Estimating Marginal Willingness to Pay for Differentiated Products Without Instrumental Variables," NBER Working Papers 17611, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2010. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and its Transformational Role for Policy Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 16349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Eric Hanushek & Kuzey Yilmaz, 2010. "Household Location and Schools in Metropolitan Areas with Heterogeneous Suburbs: Tiebout, Alonso, and Government Policy," Discussion Papers 09-012, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    18. Bishop, Kelly C. & Timmins, Christopher, 2019. "Estimating the marginal willingness to pay function without instrumental variables," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 66-83.
    19. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2003. "A Unified Framework for Estimating Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Working Papers 872, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    20. Thomas J. Nechyba, 1999. "A Model of Multiple Districts and Private Schools: The Role of Mobility, Targeting, and Private School Vouchers," NBER Working Papers 7239, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:duk:dukeec:02-13. 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: Department of Economics Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://econ.duke.edu/ .

    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.