After years of debate, there is still much disagreement about the economic impacts of highway infrastructure. This article suggests that recent empirical evidence can help reconcile the divergent views on the role of highways in the economy. The resolution illuminates two ideas that should be more prominent in transportation policy. First, highways are associated with both local economic gains (often near a project) and economic losses (often distant from a project). In a system of centralized highway finance, this creates the possibility of a geographic mismatch between the areas that pay for highway projects and the areas that benefit from those projects. Second, efficiently using the available highway capital is potentially as effective as building additional highway stock in enhancing the local economic impacts of highways. Both ideas suggest the need for more decentralized, project-specific highway finance that includes a role for efficient pricing. The policy implications of a more decentralized highway finance system are discussed in the closing section of the article.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aaron, H. J. (1990). Discussion of“Why is infrastructure important?” In A. H. Munnell (Ed.), Is there a shortfall in public capital investment?Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
2.
Aschauer, D. A. (1989). Is public expenditure productive?Journal of Monetary Economics, 23, 177-200.
3.
Aschauer, D. A. (1993). Public capital and economic growth. In Public infrastructure investment: Abridge to productivity growth?(Public Policy Brief No. 4). Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College.
4.
Bartik, T. J. (1991). Who benefits from state and local economic development policy?Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
5.
Boarnet, M. G. (1997a). Highways and economic productivity: Interpreting recent evidence. Journal of Planning Literature, 11, 476-486.
6.
Boarnet, M. G. (1997b). Infrastructure services and the productivity of public capital: The case of streets and highways. National Tax Journal, 50(1), 39-57.
7.
Boarnet, M. G. (1998). Spillovers and the locational effects of public capital. Journal of Regional Science, 38, 381-400.
8.
Campbell, J. Y. ,& Perron, P. (1991). Pitfalls and opportunities: What macroeconomists should knowabout unit roots. In O. Blanchard & S. Fisher (Eds.), NBER macroeconomics annual 1991. Boston: MIT Press.
9.
Cochrane, J. R. (1991). Comment on Campbell and Perron. In O. Blanchard& S. Fisher (Eds.), NBER macroeconomics annual 1991. Boston: MIT Press.
10.
Czamanski, S. (1966). Effects of public investments on urban land values. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 32, 204-217.
11.
Davidson, R. , & MacKinnon, J. G. (1993). Estimation and inference in econometrics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12.
Downs, A. (1962). The law of peak-hour expressway congestion. Traffic Quarterly, 16, 393-409.
13.
Downs, A. (1992). Stuck in traffic: Coping with peak-hour traffic congestion. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
14.
Environmental Defense Fund . (1998). Escape from gridlock: Implementing express lanes on I-80 and beyond, summary report. Oakland, CA: Author.
15.
Evans, P. , & Karras, G. (1994). Are government activities productive?Evidence from a panel of U.S. states. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(1), 1-11.
16.
Forkenbrock, D. J. , & Foster, N.S.J. (1990). Economic benefits of a corridor highway investment. Transportation Research, 24A, 303-312.
17.
Forkenbrock, D. J. ,& Plazak, D. J. (1986). Economic development and state-level transportation policy. Transportation Quarterly, 40, 143-157.
18.
Friedlaender, A. F. (1965). The interstate highway system: Astudy in public investment. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
19.
Garcia-Mila, T. , McGuire, T. J., & Porter, R. H. (1996). The effect of public capital in state-level production functions reconsidered. Review of Economics and Statistics, 78, 177-180.
20.
Giuliano, G. (1989).Research and policy review 27: New directions for understanding transportation and land use. Environment and Planning A, 21, 145-159.
21.
Giuliano, G. (1992). Anassessment of the political acceptability of congestion pricing. Transportation, 19, 335-358.
22.
Gomez-Ibanez, J. A. , & Meyer, J. R. (1993). Going private: The international experience with transport privatization. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
23.
Gramlich, E. M. (1994). Infrastructure investment: A review essay. Journal of Economic Literature, 32, 1176-1196.
24.
Holtz-Eakin, D. (1994). Public-sector capital and the productivity puzzle. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(1), 12-21.
25.
Jorgenson, D. W. (1991, February). Fragile statistical foundations: The macroeconomics of public infrastructure investment. Paper presented at the American Enterprise Institute.
26.
Kirshner, D. (1998). Escape from gridlock: Implementing express lanes on I-80 and beyond, technical report. Oakland, CA: Environmental Defense Fund.
27.
Langley, C. J., Jr. (1976a). Adverse impacts of theWashington beltway on residential property values. Land Economics, 52, 54-65.
28.
Langley, C. J., Jr. (1976b). Time series effects of a limited-access highway on residential property values. Transportation Research Record, no. 583, pp. 36-44.
29.
Lemer, A. C. (1992). We cannot afford not to have a national infrastructure policy. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58, 362-367.
30.
Logan, J. R. ,& Molotch, H. L. (1987). Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Berkeley: University of California Press.
31.
Miron, J. A. (1991). Comment on Campbell and Perron. In O. Blanchard & S. Fisher (Eds.), NBER macroeconomics annual 1991. Boston: MIT Press.
32.
Mohring, H. (1961).Land values and the measurement of highway benefits. Journal ofPolitical Economy, 79, 236-249.
33.
Mohring, H. , & Harwitz, M. (1962). Highway benefits: An analytical framework. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
34.
Morrison, C. J. , & Schwartz, A. E. (1996). State infrastructure and productive performance. American Economic Review, 86(5), 1095-1111.
35.
Munnell, A. H. (Ed.). (1990). Is there a shortfall in public capital investment?Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
36.
Munnell, A. H. (1992). Policy watch: Infrastructure investment and economic growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 6(4), 189-198.
37.
Nadiri, M. I. (1994). Infrastructure capital and productivity analysis: Cost- and profit-function approaches. In Infrastructure in the 21st century economy: An interim report, Vol. 2(Federal Infrastructure Strategy Program, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute forWater Resources Report No. 94-FIS-8). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
38.
Nadiri, M. I. , & Mamuneas, T. P. (1994). The effects of public infrastructure and R&D capital on the cost structure and performance of U.S. manufacturing industries. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76, 22-37.
39.
Nathan, R. P. (1992). Needed: AMarshall Plan for ourselves. In R. W. Caves (Ed.), Exploring urban America: An introductory reader. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40.
National Research Council . (1994). Curbing gridlock: Peak-period fees to relieve traffic congestion(Vol. 2) (National Research Council Special Report 242). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
41.
Netzer, R. (1992). Do we really need a national infrastructure policy?Journal of the American Planning Association, 58, 139-143.
42.
Payne-Maxie Consultants& Blaney-Dyett, Urban and Regional Planners . (1980). The land use and urban development impacts of beltways(Final Report DOT-OS-90079 for the U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Housing). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
43.
Peterson, P. E. (1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Peterson, P. E. (1995). The price of federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
45.
Pickrell, D. H. (1992). A desire named streetcar—Fantasy and fact in rail transit planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58, 158-176.
46.
Pund, E. E. (1997, March 10). Way down south. Riverside Press Enterprise.
47.
Rose, M. H. (1990). Interstate: Express highway politics, 1939-1989.Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.
48.
Seskin, S. N. (1990). Comprehensive framework for highway economic impact assessment: Methods and results. Transportation Research Record, 1274, 24-34.
49.
Small, K. A. , Winston, C.,& Evans, C. A. (1989). Road work: A new highway pricing and investment policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
50.
Stock, J. H. ,& Watson, M. W. (1988). Variable trends in economic time series. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(3), 147-174.
51.
Stone, K. (1996, August 4). Breaking driving habits. Los Angeles Daily News.
52.
Sullivan, E. C. ,& El Harake, J. (1998, January 11-15). The California Route 91 toll lanes—Observed impacts and other observations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
53.
Tatom, J. A. (1991). Public capital and private sector performance. St. LouisFederal Reserve Bank Review, 73(3), 3-15.
54.
Taylor, B. (1995). Public perceptions, fiscal realities, and freeway planning—The California case. Journal of the American Planning Association, 61(1), 43-56.
55.
United States Bureau of Transportation Statistics . (1997). Federal, state and local transportation financial statistics: Fiscal years 1982-1994(Report No. BTS97-E-02). Washington, DC: Author.
56.
United States Office of Management and Budget . (1997). Analytical perspectives: Budget of the United States government, fiscal year 1998. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
57.
Vickrey, W. S. (1963). Pricing in urban and suburban transport. American Economic Review, 53, 452-465.
58.
Wachs, M. (1994). Will congestion pricing ever be adopted? In Access(No. 4). Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center.
59.
Weisbrod, G. E. , & Beckwith, J. (1992). Development benefits for highway decision-making: The Wisconsin case. Transportation Quarterly, 46(1), 57-79.
