This research examines the regional impact of public transportation infrastructure in the northeast megaregion of the United States: public highways, railways, transit, and airports. Infrastructure stock is valued in monetary terms from 1991 to 2009. A spatial panel approach with fixed effects is adopted to test the hypothesis of spillovers by controlling for spatial dependence. The result suggests that transportation infrastructure, in general, does have a significant impact on regional economic growth, most of which is from spillover effects. Highways have an overwhelming influence through local effects and spillover effects. The impacts from public railways and airports are significant, but transit impacts are insignificant, although a positive spillover effect is found.
AndersonA. E.AnderstigC.HarsmanB. (1990). Knowledge and communications infrastructure and regional economic change. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 20, 359-376.
2.
AnselinL. (1988). Spatial econometrics: Methods and models. New York, NY: Springer.
3.
AschauerD. A. (1989). Is public expenditure productive?Journal of Monetary Economics, 23, 177-200.
4.
AschauerD. A. (1990). Why is infrastructure important? In Proceedings of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Conference on “The Third Deficit: The Shortfall in Public Capital Investment” (Vol. 34, pp. 21-68). Boston, MA: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
5.
AschauerD. A. (1994). Infrastructure and macroeconomic performance: Direct and indirect effects. Paper presented at the OECD Conference on Capital Formation and Employment, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
6.
BerndtE. R.HanssonB. (1992). Measuring the contribution of public infrastructure capital in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94(Suppl.), S151-S168.
7.
BhattaS. D.DrennanM. P. (2003). The economic benefits of public investment in transportation. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22, 288-296.
8.
BlumU. (1982). Effects of transportation investiments on regional growth: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 49, 169-184.
9.
BoC. D.FlorioM.ManziG. (2010). Regional infrastructure and convergence: Growth implications in a spatial framework. Transition Studies Review, 17, 475-493.
10.
BoarnetM G. (1997). Infrastructure services and the productivity of public capital: The case of streets and highways. National Tax Journal, 50, 39-57.
11.
BoarnetM. G. (1998). Spillovers and the locational effects of public infrastructure. Journal of Regional Science, 38, 381-400.
12.
BoarnetM. G.HaughwoutA. F. (2000). Do highways matter? Evidence and policy implications of highways’ influence on metropolitan development (Discussion Paper). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
13.
ButtonK. (1998). Infrastructure investment, endogenous growth and economic convergence. Annals of Regional Science, 32, 145-162.
14.
CantosP.Gumbau-AlbertM.MaudosJ. (2005). Transport infrastructures, spillover effects and regional growth: evidence of the Spanish case. Transport Reviews, 25, 25-50.
15.
ChenZ.HaynesK. (2013). Public surface transportation and regional output: A spatial panel approach. Papers in Regional Science. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/pirs.12092
16.
ChenZ.HaynesK. (2014). Transportation capital in the US: A multimodal general equilibrium analysis. Public Works Management and Policy, 19, 97-117.
17.
CliffA. D.OrdJ. K. (1981). Spatial processes: Models and applications. London, England: Pion.
18.
CohenJ. P. (2007). Economic benefits of investments in transport infrastructure (Discussion Paper No. 2007-13). Paris, France: OECD/ITF.
19.
CohenJ. P.Morrison PaulC. J. (2003). Spatial and supply/demand agglomeration economies: State- and industry-linkages in the U.S. food system. Empirical Economics, 28, 733-751.
20.
CohenJ. P.Morrison PaulC. J. (2004). Public infrastructure investment, interstate spatial spillovers, and manufacturing costs. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 551-560.
21.
CohenJ. P.Morrison PaulC. J. (2007). The impacts of transportation infrastructure on property values: A higher-order spatial econometrics approach. Journal of Regional Science, 47, 457-478.
22.
Duffy-DenoK. T.EbertsR. (1991). Public infrastructure and regional economic development: A simultaneous equations approach. Journal of Urban Economics, 30, 329-343.
23.
ElhorstJ. P. (2014). Matlab software for spatial panels. International Regional Science Review, 37, 389-405.
24.
Federal Railroad Administration. (1998). Privatization of intercity rail passenger service in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.
25.
FernaldJ. G. (1999). Roads to prosperity? Assessing the link between public capital and productivity. American Economic Review, 89, 619-638.
26.
FingletonB.López-BazoE. (2006). Empirical growth models with spatial effects. Papers in Regional Science, 85, 177-198.
27.
FujitaM.KrugmanP. R.VenablesA. J. (1999). The spatial economy: Cities, regions, and international trade. Cambridge: MIT Press.
28.
Garcia-MilaT.McGuireT. J.PorterR. H. (1996). The effect of public capital in state-level production functions reconsidered. Review of Economics and Statistics, 78, 177-180.
29.
GarofaloG. A.YamarikS. (2002). Regional convergence: Evidence from a new state-by-state capital stock series. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 316-323.
30.
GottmannJ. (1961). Megalopolis: The urbanized northeastern seaboard of the United States. New York, NY: Twentieth Century Fund.
31.
GramlichE. M. (1994). Infrastructure investment: A review essay. Journal of Economic Literature, 32, 1176-1196.
32.
GramlichE. M. (2001). Infrastructure and economic development. Remarks by Governor Edward M. Gramlich at the Texas Trade Corridors New Economy Conference, San Antonio, TX.
33.
GrangerC. W. J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37, 424-438.
34.
HarmatuckD. J. (1996). The influence of transportation infrastructure on economic development. Logistics and Transportation Review, 32, 63-76.
35.
Holtz-EakinD. (1993). State-specific estimates of state and local government capital. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 23, 185-209.
36.
Holtz-EakinD.LovelyM. E. (1996). Scale economies, returns to variety, and the productivity of public infrastructure. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 26, 105-123.
37.
Holtz-EakinD.SchwartzA. E. (1995). Spatial productivity spillovers from public infrastructure: Evidence from state highways (Working Paper No. 5004). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
38.
HultenC. R.WykoffF. C. (1981). The estimation of economic depreciation using vintage asset prices: An application of the Box-Cox power transformation. Journal of Econometrics, 15, 367-396.
39.
JiwattanakulpaisarnP.NolandR. B.GrahamD. J.PolakJ. W. (2009). Highway infrastructure and state-level employment: A causal spatial analysis. Papers in Regional Science, 88, 133-159.
40.
JorgensonD. W. (1991). Fragile statistical foundations: The macroeconomics of public infrastructure investment. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
41.
KahnH.WienerA. J. (1967). The year 2000: A framework for speculation on the next thirty-three years. New York, NY: Macmillan.
42.
KatzA. J.HermanS. W. (1997). Improved estimates of fixed reproducible tangible wealth. Survey of Current Business, 77(5), 69-92.
43.
KeelerT. E.YingJ. S. (2008). Measuring the benefits of a large public investment: The case of the U.S. Federal-Aid Highway System. Journal of Public Economics, 36, 69-85.
44.
KelejianH. H.RobinsonD. P. (1997). Infrastructure productivity estimation and its underlying econometric specifications: A sensitivity analysis. Papers in Regional Science, 76, 115-131.
45.
KrugmanP. (1991). Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy, 99, 484-499.
46.
LauS.-H. P.SinC.-Y. (1997). Public infrastructure and economic growth: Time-series properties and evidence. Economic Record, 73(221), 125-135.
47.
LeSageJ. P. (1999). The theory and practice of spatial econometrics. A manual to accompany the Spatial Econometrics Toolbox. Retrieved from http://www.spatial-econometrics.com
48.
LeSageJ. P.PaceR. K. (2009). Introduction to spatial econometrics (1st ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.
49.
LevinA.LinC. F.ChuC. S. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108, 1-24.
50.
LewandowskiP. (2007). PESCADF: Stata module to perform Pesaran’s CADF panel unit root test in presence of cross section dependence (Statistical Software Component No. S456732). Boston College Department of Economics.
51.
MattoonR. (2002). Midwest infrastructure: Assessing the contribution of basic infrastructure to economic growth. Chicago Fed Letter, 184b (Special Issue December).
52.
MohammadM. (2009). Infrastructure investment in Indonesia: process and impact (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Groningen, Netherlands.
53.
MoranP A P. (1950). Notes on continuous stochastic phenomena. Biometrika, 37, 17-23.
54.
MorenoR.López-BazoE. (2007). Returns to local and transport infrastructure under regional spillovers. International Regional Science Review, 30, 47-71.
55.
MunnellA. H. (1992). Policy watch: Infrastructure investment and economic growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 6, 189-198.
56.
MunnellA. H.CookL. M. (1990). How does public infrastructure affect regional economic performance?New England Economic Review, 86, 1095-1111.
57.
NadiriM. I.MamuneasT. P. (1996). Contribution of highway capital to industry and national productivity growth (No. BAT-94-008). Report Prepared for Apogee Research, Inc., for the Federal Highway Administration Office of Policy Development.
58.
OzbayK.Ozmen-ErtekinD.BerechmanJ. (2007). Contribution of transportation investments to county output.Transport Policy, 14, 317-329.
59.
PaelinckJ. H. P.KlaassenL. H. (1979). Spatial econometrics. Farnborough, England: Saxon House.
60.
PesaranM. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312.
61.
PinnoiN. (1994). Public infrastructure and private production measuring relative contributions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 23, 127-148.
62.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2004). Intercity passenger rail: Amtrak’s management of Northeast Corridor improvements demonstrates need for applying best practices (No. GAO-04-94). Washington, DC: Author.
