This study introduces a new general equilibrium approach to evaluate economic impact of public transportation capital stock in the United States. By treating public transportation capital as separated factor accounts, the model enables us to assess the economic impact of public transportation stock for four modes: road, air, transit, and water transportation. The study provides a direct and easy way for policy maker and transportation planning practitioner to compare social and economic benefits of different modes of public transportation. Findings reveal that road stock has the highest contribution to the growth of gross domestic product (GDP) and levels of social welfare; public transit and other ground passenger transportation have the least impact on the U.S. economy among the four modes.
AnderssonA. E.AnderstigC.HarsmanB. (1990). Knowledge and communications infrastructure and regional economic change. Regional Science & Urban Economics, 20, 359-376.
2.
ArmingtonP. S. (1969). A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production. Staff Papers—International Monetary Fund, 16, 159-178.
3.
AschauerD. A. (1989). Is public expenditure productive?Journal of Monetary Economics, 23, 177-200.
4.
BerndtE. R.HanssonB. (1992). Measuring the contribution of public infrastructure capital in Sweden. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, S151-S168.
5.
BhattaS. D.DrennanM. P. (2003). The economic benefits of public investment in transportation. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22, 288-296.
6.
BlumU. (1982). Effects of transportation investments on regional growth: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 49, 169-184.
7.
BoarnetM. G. (1997). Infrastructure services and the productivity of public capital: The case of streets and highways. National Tax Journal, 50, 39-57.
8.
BoarnetM. G.HaughwoutA. F. (2000, August). Do highways matter? Evidence and policy implications of highways’ influence on metropolitan development. A Discussion Paper prepared for the Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, Washington, DC.
9.
BröckerJ. (1998). Operational spatial computable general equilibrium modeling. The Annals of Regional Science, 32, 367-387.
10.
BröckerJ. (2004). Computable general equilibrium analysis in transportation economics. In HensherD. A.ButtonK. J.HaynesK. E.StopherP. R. (Eds.), Handbook of transport geography and spatial systems (Chapter 16, pp. 269-281). Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
11.
BröckerJ.KancsA.SchürmannC.WegenerM.SpiekermannK. (2001). Methodology for the assessment of spatial economic impacts of transport projects and policies (EERI Research Paper Series No. EERI_RP_2001_03). Brussels, Belgium: Economics and Econometrics Research Institute.
12.
ButtonK. (1998). Infrastructure investment, endogenous growth and economic convergence. The Annals of Regional Science, 32, 145-162.
13.
CantosP.Gumbau-AlbertM.MaudosJ. (2005). Transport infrastructures, spillover effects and regional growth: Evidence of the Spanish case. Transport Reviews, 25, 25-50.
14.
ChenZ.HaynesK.E. (2014). Public Surface Transportation and Regional Output: A Spatial Panel Approach, Papers in Regional Science.
15.
CohenJ. P. (2010). The broader effects of transportation infrastructure: Spatial econometrics and productivity approaches. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 46, 317-326.
16.
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.
17.
CohenJ. P.Morrison PaulC. J. (2004). Public infrastructure investment, interstate spatial spillovers, and manufacturing costs. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 551-560.
18.
DixonP. B.RimmerM. T. (2000). MONASH: A dynamic, computable general equilibrium model of the Australian economy. Clayton, Victoria, Australia: Centre of Policy Studies, Monash University.
19.
Duffy-DenoK. T.EbertsR. (1991). Public infrastructure and regional economic development: A simultaneous equations approach. Journal of Urban Economics, 30, 329-343.
20.
FernaldJ. G. (1999). Roads to prosperity? Assessing the link between public capital and productivity. The American Economic Review, 89, 619-638.
21.
Goce-DakilaC.MizokamiS. (2007). Identifying transport infrastructure investment with maximum impact: A SAM-based SCGE approach. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 7, 376-391.
22.
GramlichE. M. (1994). Infrastructure investment: A review essay. Journal of Economic Literature, 32, 1176-1196.
23.
HaddadE. A.HewingsG. J. D. (2005). Market imperfections in a spatial economy: Some experimental results. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 45, 476-496.
24.
HarmatuckD. J. (1996). The influence of transportation infrastructure on economic development. Logistics and Transportation Review, 32, 63-76.
25.
HaynesK. E.NijkampP. (2006). Infrastructure: the glue of megacities (Vol. 9). Kenniscentrum Grote Steden.
26.
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.
27.
IvanovaO. (2004). Evaluation of infrastructure welfare benefits in the spatial computable general equilibrium (SCGE) framework. Oslo, Norway: Department of Economics, University of Oslo.
28.
JohansenL. (1960). A multisectoral study of economic growth (Contributions to Economic Analysis, No. 21, p. 177). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland Publishing.
29.
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.
30.
KelejianH. H.RobinsonD. P. (1997). Infrastructure productivity estimation and its underlying econometric specifications: A sensitivity analysis. Papers in Regional Science, 76, 115-131.
31.
LauS.-H. P.SinC.-Y. (1997). Public infrastructure and economic growth: Time-series properties and evidence. The Economic Record, 73, 125-135.
32.
LeSageJ.PaceR. K. (2009). Introduction to spatial econometrics (1st ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
33.
LöfgrenH.HarrisR. L.RobinsonS. (2002). A standard computable general equilibrium (CGE) model in GAMS (Vol. 5). Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
34.
MamuneasT. P.NadiriM. I. (2006). Production, consumption and the rates of return to highway infrastructure capital. Unpublished manuscript, University of Cyprus, Nicosia.
35.
MattoonR. (2002). Midwest infrastructure: Assessing the contribution of basic infrastructure to economic growth (Chicago Fed Letter, 184b, Special Issue December). Chicago, IL: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
36.
McDonaldS. (2005). The PROVIDE Project Standard Computable General Equilibrium Model: Version 2 (Technical Paper Series 15625). Elsenburg, South Africa: PROVIDE Project.
37.
MiyagiT. (2006). Evaluation of economic impacts from the accessibility-change by transportation investment: A SCGE modeling approach (Working Paper). Gifu, Japan: Regional Studies, Gifu University.
38.
MoonmawR. L.MullenJ. K.MartinW. (1995). The interregional impact of infrastructure capital. Southern Economic Journal, 61, 830-845.
39.
MunnellA. H. (1990). Why has productivity growth declined? Productivity and public investment. New England Economic Review, 30, 3-22.
40.
MunnellA. H.CookL. M. (1990). How does public infrastructure affect regional economic performance?New England Economic Review, (September), 11-33.
41.
NadiriM. I.MamuneasT. P. (1996, September). Contribution of highway capital to industry and national productivity growth (No. BAT-94-008). Report prepared for Apogee Research, for the Federal Highway Administration Office of Policy Development, Bethesda, MD.
42.
NarayananG. B.AngelA.RobertM. (Eds.). (2012). Global trade, assistance, and production: The GTAP 8 data base. West Lafayette, IN: Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.
43.
OzbayK.Ozmen-ErtekinD.BerechmanJ. (2007). Contribution of transportation investments to county output. Transport Policy, 14, 317-329.
44.
SundbergM. (2005). Spatial computable general equilibrium modeling-static and dynamic approaches (Introduction to Licentiate Thesis). KTH (Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolan), Infrastructure, Stockholm, Sweden.
45.
VarianH. R. (1992). Microeconomic analysis (3rd ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
