Urban Population and Amenities: The Neoclassical Model of Location

Albouy, David; Stuart, Bryan A.

doi:10.3386/w19919

Cited by 26 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(77 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These reducedform elasticities depend on more "structural" parameters, including these parameters, as well as those describing immobility and substitution elasticities of substitution and immobility. However, Albouy and Stuart (2015) do make a case for certain numerical values of these parameters appear to explain local labor and housing supply elasticities, and in particular, population density differences across metro area. We use these values below.…”

Section: Incorporating Population Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As derived in Albouy and Stuart (2015), solving Equations (12) and (15) identifies each productivity from observable differentialsN j * ,ŵ j , andp j :…”

Section: A3 Inferring Trade and Home Productivity With Population Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perhaps most notable is the income share to wages of 75 percent, taken from Krueger (1999), and the share of income to land of 10 percent. The reduced-form population elasticities are given and explained in Albouy and Stuart (2015), which appear to explain local labor and market and housing supply elasticities, as well as density differences across metro areas. For the immobility parameter, we consider a value of ψ = 0.05 based loosely on values suggested by Notowidigo's (2013) estimates.…”

Section: Parameterization C1 Chosen Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 The population change depends on a complex structural relationship depending on substitution responses in production and consumption, income effects, and output effects in housing. We take the approach of Albouy and Stuart (2015), of modeling this structural relationship as a reduced-form relationship between population and attribute changes. To do this, first consider the perfectly mobile case of ψ = 0.…”

Section: Population and Price Changes With Imperfect Mobilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Valuing Public Goods More Generally: The Case of Infrastructure

Albouy¹,

Farahani²

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the relationship between local public goods, prices, wages, and population in an equilibrium inter-city model. Non-traded production, federal taxes, and imperfect mobility all affect how public goods (or "amenities" more broadly) should be valued from data. Reinterpreting the estimated effects of public infrastructure on prices and wages in Haughwout (2002), we find infrastructure over twice as valuable with our more general model. New estimates based on more years, cities, and data-sets indicate stronger wage and positive population effects of infrastructure. These imply higher values of infrastructure to firms, and also to households if moving costs are substantial.JEL Classification Codes: H54, H2, H4, J3, R2

show abstract

Section: Incorporating Population Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As derived in Albouy and Stuart (2015), solving Equations (12) and (15) identifies each productivity from observable differentialsN j * ,ŵ j , andp j :…”

Section: A3 Inferring Trade and Home Productivity With Population Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Parameterization C1 Chosen Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Population and Price Changes With Imperfect Mobilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Valuing Public Goods More Generally: The Case of Infrastructure

Albouy¹,

Farahani²

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent exception is Albouy and Stuart () which directly estimates a parametrized version of the Rosen‐Roback general equilibrium model. There are also a large number of descriptive papers looking at the relationship between local amenities and migrant settlement decisions, for example, Rodríguez‐Pose and Ketterer ().…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pot Rush: Is Legalized Marijuana a Positive Local Amenity?

Zambiasi

Stillman

2019

Economic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the amenity value of legalized marijuana by analyzing the impact of marijuana legalization on migration to Colorado. Colorado is the pioneering state in this area having legalized medical marijuana in 2000 and recreational marijuana in 2012. We test whether potential migrants to Colorado view legalized marijuana as a positive or negative local amenity. We use the synthetic control methodology to examine in‐ and out‐migration to/from Colorado versus migration to/from counterfactual versions of Colorado that have not legalized marijuana. We find strong evidence that potential migrants view legalized marijuana as a positive amenity with in‐migration significantly higher in Colorado compared with synthetic‐Colorado after the writing of the Ogden memo in 2009 that effectively allowed state laws already in place to be activated, and additionally after marijuana was legalized in 2013 for recreational use. When we employ permutation methods to assess the statistical likelihood of our results given our sample, we find that Colorado is a clear and significant outlier. We find no evidence for changes in out‐migration from Colorado suggesting that marijuana legalization did not change the equilibrium for individuals already living in the state. (JEL I18, R23, K42, C22)

show abstract

National income taxation and the geographic distribution of population

Rattsø

Stokke

2016

Int Tax Public Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study how different national taxation schemes interact with geographic variation in productivity and consumption amenities in determining regional populations. A neoclassical migration equilibrium model is used to analyze the current nominal income tax system in Norway. The analysis is based on estimated regional income differences accounting for both observable and unobservable individual characteristics and the value of experience. Given regional differences in incomes and housing prices, quality of life and productivity are calibrated to model equilibrium. Compared to an undistorted equilibrium with lump-sum taxation, nominal income taxation creates a disincentive to locate in productive high-income regions. The deadweight loss due to locational inefficiencies is 0.18% of gross domestic product (GDP). We study real income taxation and equal real taxes as alternative tax systems. Both alternatives generate a geographic distribution of the population closer to the undistorted equilibrium, and hence with lower deadweight loss. In an extension of the analysis, we take into account payroll taxes. The existing regionally differentiated payroll taxes to the disadvantage of cities generate a deadweight loss of 0.22% of GDP in an economy with lump-sum income taxation. The two distortionary taxes interact and strengthen each other and the combined distortionary effect of income and payroll taxation in the Norwegian system is 0.46% of GDP.

show abstract

Urban Population and Amenities: The Neoclassical Model of Location

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

Valuing Public Goods More Generally: The Case of Infrastructure

Valuing Public Goods More Generally: The Case of Infrastructure

The Pot Rush: Is Legalized Marijuana a Positive Local Amenity?

National income taxation and the geographic distribution of population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About