The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Flypaper Effect
Open accessAbstract
The flypaper effect results when a dollar of exogenous grants-in-aid leads to significantly greater public spending than an equivalent dollar of citizen income: Money sticks where it hits.Viewing governments as agents for a representative citizen voter, this empirical result is an anomaly.Four alternative explanations have been offered.First, it's a data problem; matching grants have been mis-classified as exogenous aid.Second, it's an econometric problem; exogenous aid is correlated with omitted variables leading to a downward bias in estimates of income's effects and an upward bias in estimates of aid's effects.Third, it's a specification problem: the representative citizen either fails to observe lump-sum aid, or sees aid but mis-perceives its impact as an average price effect, or finally, sees and understands aid's budgetary effects but allocates "public" and "private" monies through separate "mental accounts."The empirical evidence suggests none of these explanations is sufficient.A fourth explanation seems most promising: It's politics.Rather than an anomaly, the flypaper effect is best seen as an outcome of political institutions and the associated incentives of elected officials.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“From a representative citizen perspective, the increase in transfers should partially be rebated to citizens through tax decreases (Inman, 2008)”
From Losing to Gain: Revenue Shortfalls and Fiscal Capacity in Brazil (2024) · cites this paper as Inman, 2008
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
Still being checked.
Cited by
Losing to Gain: Revenue Shortfalls and Fiscal Capacity in Brazil
Ferraz, C., Foremny, D., & Santini, J. F. (2024) · doi:10.3386/w32440 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Inman, R.
- Affiliations
- National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
- Corresponding author
- Inman, Robert
- Venue
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Publisher
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Published
- 2008-12
- OpenAlex
- W1497948746
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Local Government Finance and Decentralization
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Fiscal Policies and Political Economy
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth
- Keywords
- flypaper effect, fiscal transfers, matching grants, government spending, citizen income, fiscal federalism, political institutions, mental accounts, budget impact, omitted variable bias
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 Flypaper Effect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3386/w14579
- The paper
- Inman, R. (2008). The Flypaper Effect. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w14579
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.