Equity and resources: An analysis of education finance systems

Raquel Fernandez, Richard Rogerson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    We analyze five education finance systems: local, state, foundation, power equalizing with recapture (PER), and power equalizing without recapture (PEN). In a calibrated model, we find that finance systems have large effects on educational resources and equity. The trade-off between equity and resources, however, is not monotone. Ranking systems by expected utility, we find that PER consistently ranks highest, though it provides fewer resources to education than the foundation and PEN systems and is less equitable than a state system. We prove that for an important subset of preferences, PER will win in majority voting comparisons with the other systems.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)858-897
    Number of pages40
    JournalJournal of Political Economy
    Volume111
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Aug 2003

    Fingerprint

    Resources
    Education finance
    Equity
    Education
    Trade-offs
    Finance
    Majority voting
    Ranking
    Expected utility

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Economics and Econometrics

    Cite this

    Equity and resources : An analysis of education finance systems. / Fernandez, Raquel; Rogerson, Richard.

    In: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 111, No. 4, 08.2003, p. 858-897.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Fernandez, Raquel ; Rogerson, Richard. / Equity and resources : An analysis of education finance systems. In: Journal of Political Economy. 2003 ; Vol. 111, No. 4. pp. 858-897.
    @article{d222ee2f8d82428981962a2da15f410e,
    title = "Equity and resources: An analysis of education finance systems",
    abstract = "We analyze five education finance systems: local, state, foundation, power equalizing with recapture (PER), and power equalizing without recapture (PEN). In a calibrated model, we find that finance systems have large effects on educational resources and equity. The trade-off between equity and resources, however, is not monotone. Ranking systems by expected utility, we find that PER consistently ranks highest, though it provides fewer resources to education than the foundation and PEN systems and is less equitable than a state system. We prove that for an important subset of preferences, PER will win in majority voting comparisons with the other systems.",
    author = "Raquel Fernandez and Richard Rogerson",
    year = "2003",
    month = "8",
    doi = "10.1086/375381",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "111",
    pages = "858--897",
    journal = "Journal of Political Economy",
    issn = "0022-3808",
    publisher = "University of Chicago",
    number = "4",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Equity and resources

    T2 - An analysis of education finance systems

    AU - Fernandez, Raquel

    AU - Rogerson, Richard

    PY - 2003/8

    Y1 - 2003/8

    N2 - We analyze five education finance systems: local, state, foundation, power equalizing with recapture (PER), and power equalizing without recapture (PEN). In a calibrated model, we find that finance systems have large effects on educational resources and equity. The trade-off between equity and resources, however, is not monotone. Ranking systems by expected utility, we find that PER consistently ranks highest, though it provides fewer resources to education than the foundation and PEN systems and is less equitable than a state system. We prove that for an important subset of preferences, PER will win in majority voting comparisons with the other systems.

    AB - We analyze five education finance systems: local, state, foundation, power equalizing with recapture (PER), and power equalizing without recapture (PEN). In a calibrated model, we find that finance systems have large effects on educational resources and equity. The trade-off between equity and resources, however, is not monotone. Ranking systems by expected utility, we find that PER consistently ranks highest, though it provides fewer resources to education than the foundation and PEN systems and is less equitable than a state system. We prove that for an important subset of preferences, PER will win in majority voting comparisons with the other systems.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141872380&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141872380&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1086/375381

    DO - 10.1086/375381

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:0141872380

    VL - 111

    SP - 858

    EP - 897

    JO - Journal of Political Economy

    JF - Journal of Political Economy

    SN - 0022-3808

    IS - 4

    ER -