N RECENT YEARS, public and professional interest in schools has been heightened by a spate of reports, many of them critical of current school policy.' These policy documents have added to persistent and long-standing concerns about the cost, effectiveness, and fairness of the current school structure, and have made schooling once again a serious public issue. As in the past, however, any renewed interest in education is likely to be short-lived, doomed to dissipate as frustration over the inability of policy to improve school practice sets in. This frustration about school policy relates directly to knowledge about the educational production process and in turn to underlying research on schools. Although the educational process has been extensively researched, clear policy prescriptions flowing from this research have been difficult to derive.2 There exists, however, a consistency to the research findings that does have an immediate application to school policy: Schools differ dramatically in "quality,"

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2725865.pdf

The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in Public Schools.

vogue. Both in the industrialized and in the developing world, nations are turning to devolution to improve the per- formance of their public sectors. In the United States, the central government has turned back significant portions of federal authority to the states for a wide range of major programs, including wel- fare, Medicaid, legal services, housing, and job training. The hope is that state and local governments, being closer to the people, will be more responsive to the particular preferences of their con- stituencies and will be able to find new and better ways to provide these ser- vices. In the United Kingdom, both Scot- land and Wales have opted under the Blair government for their own regional parliaments. And in Italy the movement toward decentralization has gone so far as to encompass a serious proposal for the separation of the nation into two in- dependent countries. In the developing world, we likewise see widespread inter- est in fiscal decentralization with the ob- jective of breaking the grip of central planning that, in the view of many, has failed to bring these nations onto a path of self-sustaining growth. But the proper goal of restructuring the public sector cannot simply be de- centralization. The public sector in nearly all countries consists of several different levels. The basic issue is one of aligning responsibilities and fiscal in- struments with the proper levels of gov- ernment. As Alexis de Toqueville ob- served more than a centuty ago, "The federal system was created with the in- tention of combining the different ad- vantages which result from the magni- tude and the littleness of nations" (1980, v. I, p. 163). But to realize these "dif- ferent advantages," we need to under- stand which functions and instruments are best centralized and which are best placed in the sphere of decentralized levels of government. This is the sub- ject matter of fiscal federalism. As a subfield of public finance, fiscal feder- alism addresses the vertical structure of the public sector. It explores, both in normative and positive terms, the roles of the different levels of government and the ways in which they relate to one another through such instruments as intergovernmental grants.2

/pdf/an-essay-on-fiscal-federalism-10yjc9cqdb.pdf

An Essay on Fiscal Federalism

How internationally mobile is the world's supply of capital? Does capital flow among industrial countries to equalize the yield to investors? Alternatively, does the saving that originates in a country remain 'to be invested there? Or does the truth lie somewhere between these two extremes? The answers to these questions are not only important for understanding the international capital market but are also critical for analyzing a wide range of issues including the nation's optimal rate of saving and the incidence of tax changes. (This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

/pdf/domestic-saving-and-international-capital-flows-3bqykct5pr.pdf

Domestic Saving and International Capital Flows

This paper considers the empirical literature on the nature and sources of urban increasing returns, also known as agglomeration economies. An important aspect of these externalities that has not been previously emphasized is that the effects of agglomeration extend over at least three different dimensions. These are the industrial, geographic, and temporal scope of economic agglomeration economies. In each case, the literature suggests that agglomeration economies attenuate with distance. Recently, the literature has also begun to provide evidence on the microfoundations of external economies of scale. The best known of these sources are those attributed to Marshall (1920): labor market pooling, input sharing, and knowledge spillovers. Evidence to date supports the presence of all three of these forces. In addition, there is also evidence that natural advantage, home market effects, consumption opportunities, and rent-seeking all contribute to agglomeration.

Evidence on the Nature and Sources of Agglomeration Economies

Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies

https://www.socsci.uci.edu/~jkbrueck/course%20readings/Econ%20272B%20readings/zodrow-mieszkowski.pdf

Pigou, Tiebout, Property Taxation, and the Underprovision of Local Public Goods

The authors analyze causes and consequences of metropolitan suburbanization with a focus on trends in the United States. The effect of employment transportation and travel considerations is compared with the impact of urban problems such as taxes public school quality crime and environmental quality. (ANNOTATION)

Peter Mieszkowski

Papers

Pigou, Tiebout, Property Taxation, and the Underprovision of Local Public Goods

The Causes of Metropolitan Suburbanization

The property tax: An excise tax or a profits tax?

Peer group effects and educational production functions

Current issues in urban economics