The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp 235–249 | Cite as

Matching estimation, casino gambling and the quality of life

Original Paper

Abstract

Little consensus exists in the literature as to the impact of casino gambling on regional economic development. This paper uses a propensity score matching estimator to assess the bottom line impact of casino gambling on the welfare of local residents. It extends the literature in two important ways. First, the traditional matching estimation model is extended to consider a kernel weighting formula that corrects for correlation between the outcome error term and characteristics of the regressors used in generating the propensity scores. Second, by using the matching procedure to control for selection bias in the casino location decision, this paper generates improved estimates for the impact of casino gambling on key economic variables and on local quality of life. Casinos are found to have no statistically significant net impact on the quality of life in their host counties, though Native American casinos do generate some additional economic activity in the form of increased population, employment, and housing starts.

JEL Classification

O12 R1 R13 R58 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Gaming Association (2006) State of the States: The AGA Survey of Casino Entertainment. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Blomquist GC, Berger MC, Hoehn JP (1988) New estimates of quality of life in urban areas. Am Econ Rev 78(1):89–107Google Scholar
  3. Evans WN, Topoleski JH (2002) The social and economic impact of Native American casinos. NBER Working Paper No. 9198Google Scholar
  4. Grinols EL, Mustard DB (2006) Casinos, crime, and community costs. Rev Econ Stat 88(1):28–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grinols EL, Mustard DB (2001) Business profitability versus social profitability: evaluating industries with externalities, the case of casinos. Manage Decis Econ 22:143–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heckman JJ, Ichimura H, Todd P (1997) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Rev Econ Stat 64(4):605–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heckman JJ, Ichimura H, Todd P (1998) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Rev Econ Stud 65(2):261–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holmes TJ (1998) The effect of state policies on the location of manufacturing: evidence from state borders. J Polit Econ 106(4):667–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McMillen DP (2004) Locally weighted regression and time-varying distance gradients. In: Getis A, Mur J, Zoller H (eds) Spatial econometrics and spatial statistics. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 232–249Google Scholar
  10. Roback J (1982) Wages, rents, and the quality of life. J Polit Econ 90(6):1257–1278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rosen S (1974) Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. J Polit Econ 82(1):34–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Todd P (1999) A practical guide to implementing matching estimators (unpublished manuscript)Google Scholar
  14. Walker DM (2003) Methodological issues in the social cost of gambling. J Gambl Stud 19(2):149–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Walker DM, Barnett AH (1999) The social costs of gambling: an economic perspective. J Gambl Stud 15(3):181–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wenz M (2006) Casino gambling and economic development. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. Wenz M (2007) The impact of casino gambling on housing markets: a hedonic approach. J Gambl Bus Econ 1(2):1–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics and FinanceWinona State UniversityWinonaUSA

Personalised recommendations