Should the Government Finance Public Goods in Rural Areas? A Review of Arguments

Martin Petrick

Staff Paper Series from University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics

Abstract: This paper reviews three arguments why government should not directly finance public goods provision in the countryside: (1) sorting and voting of residents leads to efficient local public goods provision, (2) community governance better copes with incomplete contracting in public goods, and (3) public provision drives out voluntary private provi-sion of public goods. Theory and empirical evidence partly support these arguments. The adequate level of rural governance appears to be often below the national or Euro-pean level, and policy should focus on the institutional premises of public goods provi-sion rather than on centralized payments to public good providers.

Date: 2006-04
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap497.pdf
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not Found (http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap497.pdf [301 Moved Permanently]--> https://aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap497.pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Should the Government Finance Public Goods in Rural Areas? A Review of Arguments (2006)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ecl:wisagr:497

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Staff Paper Series from University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().