The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain
Abstract
In this paper we test the hypothesis that municipalities aligned with upper-tier grantor governments (i.e., controlled by the same party) will receive more grants than those that are unaligned. We use a rich Spanish database, which provides information on grants received by nearly 900 municipalities during the period 1993-2003 from three different upper-tier governments (i.e., Central, Regional and Upper-local). Since three elections were held at each tier during this period, we have enough within-municipality variation in partisan alignment to provide differences-in-differences estimates of the effects of alignment on the amount of grants coming from each source. Moreover, the fact that a municipality may simultaneously receive grants from aligned and unaligned grantors allows us to use a triple-differences estimator, which consists of estimating the effects of changing alignment status on the change in grants coming from the aligned grantors relative to the change in grants coming from the unaligned ones. The results suggest that partisan alignment has a sizeable positive effect on the amount of grants received by municipalities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
Baron, D. P., & Ferejohn, J. A. (1989) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1961664 · Cited by 1,970
Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition
Lindbeck, A., & Weibull, J. W. (1987) · Public Choice · doi:10.1007/bf00116710 · Cited by 1,611
The Theory of Public Finance: A Study in Public Economy.
Colm, G., & Musgrave, R. A. (1960) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.2307/2976491 · Cited by 1,428
Electoral Politics as a Redistributive Game
Cox, G. W., & McCubbins, M. D. (1986) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.2307/2131098 · Cited by 1,274
Radio's Impact on Public Spending
Stromberg, D. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839560 · Cited by 729
Positive Economics, Welfare Economics, and Political Economy
Buchanan, J. M. (1959) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/466556 · Cited by 401
Election Goals and the Allocation of Campaign Resources
Snyder, J. M. (1989) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911056 · Cited by 365
Richard A. Musgrave, The Theory of Public Finance -A Study in Public Economy, New York, 1959
Okawa, M. (1960) · Cited by 315
Intergovernmental grants as a tactical instrument: empirical evidence from Swedish municipalities
Johansson, E. (2003) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/s0047-2727(01)00148-7 · Cited by 263
Metadata
- Authors
- Solé-Ollé, A., & Sorribas-Navarro, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Public Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2302-2319
- ISSN
- 0047-2727 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3122749883
- Cited by
- 336
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 22.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.06.014
- The paper
- Solé-Ollé, A., & Sorribas-Navarro, P. (2008). The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain. Journal of Public Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.06.014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.