首页> 外文学位 >Beyond the economic catalyst debate: Can consumption benefits justify a municipal stadium investment?
【24h】

Beyond the economic catalyst debate: Can consumption benefits justify a municipal stadium investment?

机译:超越经济催化剂的争论:消费利益能证明市政体育场投资合理吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The issue of public investment in sports facilities has garnered a great deal of attention from economists and public affairs researchers; however, relevant empirical research has become mired in a stagnant discussion of whether sports stadiums can serve as economic catalysts. A host of empirical studies have indicated that stadiums and arenas have no significant impact on metropolitan area income or employment. In light of this evidence, the continued proliferation of public investment in sports facilities, begs the question: is there some other justification for this spending, or are policymakers simply acting against the public interest (either irrationally, or in response to political-economic influences)? A possibility that has not been fully explored in the current debate and literature is the notion that stadiums and teams generate tangible and intangible consumption benefits that could support some level of public investment.; This research moves discussion beyond the economic catalyst debate by providing an empirical measure of the consumption benefits that accrue to a region as the result of hosting a major league sports team, in order to determine the extent to which such benefits justify municipal investment. A contingent valuation survey is used to quantify the consumption benefits that would be associated with the relocation of a Major League Baseball team to Portland, Oregon. An empirical measure of the region's willingness-to-pay for the benefits associated with hosting a team is disaggregated into option and existence values, which can be compared to any proposed level of public contribution to a new stadium.; The findings indicate that consumption benefits would only support a capital investment of approximately {dollar}74 million; a figure far smaller than the typical stadium subsidy. The majority of projected benefits are associated with expected public goods and externalities, rather than anticipated attendance, indicating that an equitable financing plan should employ non-user revenue sources. The level of projected benefits does not vary by locality within the metropolitan area, which argues for a regional cost-sharing approach. The willingness of residents to pay for stadium construction is tempered by a concern about other pressing social needs and a reaction to the current tax climate.
机译:体育设施的公共投资问题引起了经济学家和公共事务研究人员的极大关注。然而,有关体育馆是否可以作为经济催化剂的停滞讨论已使相关的经验研究陷入困境。大量的经验研究表明,体育馆和竞技场对都会区的收入或就业没有重大影响。根据这些证据,公共对体育设施的投资持续增长,引出了一个问题:这种支出是否还有其他理由,或者决策者只是在不符合公共利益的情况下采取行动(要么不合理,要么是出于对政治经济影响的回应) )?在当前的辩论和文献中尚未充分探讨的可能性是,体育馆和球队产生有形和无形的消费利益,可以支持一定程度的公共投资。这项研究通过提供经验性指标来衡量由于主办一支大型联赛运动队而给该地区带来的消费利益,从而使讨论超出了经济催化剂的辩论范围,从而确定了这种利益在多大程度上证明了市政投资的合理性。临时评估调查用于量化与美国职棒大联盟球队迁至俄勒冈州波特兰市相关的消费收益。以经验的方式衡量该地区支付与组队有关的利益的意愿,将其分为选择和存在价值,可以与提议的对新体育场的公共贡献水平进行比较。调查结果表明,消费利益只能支持大约7400万美元的资本投资;这个数字远远小于典型的体育馆补贴。大部分预计利益与预期的公共物品和外部性相关,而不是预期的出勤率,这表明公平的融资计划应采用非用户收入来源。预计收益的水平不会因大都市区内的地理位置而异,这主张采用区域成本分摊方法。人们对其他紧迫的社会需求的担忧以及对当前税收环境的反应,削弱了居民支付体育场建设费用的意愿。

著录项

  • 作者

    Santo, Charles Andrew.;

  • 作者单位

    Portland State University.;

  • 授予单位 Portland State University.;
  • 学科 Economics General.; Political Science Public Administration.; Urban and Regional Planning.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2005
  • 页码 174 p.
  • 总页数 174
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 经济学;政治理论;区域规划、城乡规划;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号