96
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Implementing Homeland Security Technologies

Differences in Willingness to Pay

, &
Pages 7-28 | Published online: 08 Dec 2014

References

  • Beck, P., & Dye, T. (1982). Sources of public opinion on taxes: The Florida case. Journal of Politics, 44, 172-182.
  • Blomquist, G. C., Newsome, M. A., & Stone, D. B. (2004). Public preferences for program tradeoffs: Community values for budget priorities. Public Budgeting and Finance, 24(1), 50-71.
  • Blumenschein, K., Blomquist, G. C., Johannesson, M., Horn, N., & Freeman, P. (2008). Eliciting willingness to pay without bias: Evidence from a field experiment. Economic Journal, 118(January), 114-137.
  • Boyne, G. A. (2002). Concepts and indicators of local authority performance: An evaluation of the statutory framework in England and Wales. Public Money and Management, 22(2), 17-24.
  • Brubaker, E. R. (2004). Eliciting the public's budgetary preferences: Insights from contingent valuation. Public Budgeting and Finance, 24(1), 72-95.
  • Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Available at www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv3Contents.html
  • Carafano, J. J. (2009, May 7). Homeland security grant tail wags state spending dog. Available at www.heritage.org
  • Chanley, V. A. (2002). Trust in government in the aftermath of 9/11: Determinants and consequences. Political Psychology, 23(3), 469-483.
  • Citrin, J. (1979). Do people want something for nothing? National Tax Journal, 32, 113-130.
  • Cole, R. L., & Kincaid, J. (2006). Public opinion on U. S. federal and intergovernmental issues in 2006: Continuity and change. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations report. Publius, 36(3), 443-460.
  • Congressional Research Service. (2005). Risk-based funding in homeland security grant legislation: Analysis of issues for the 109th Congress. CRS Report for Congress RL33050.
  • Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 202-261). New York: Free Press.
  • Courant, P., Gramlich, E., & Rubinfeld, D. (1980). Why voters support tax limitation amendments: The Michigan case. National Tax Journal, 33, 1-20.
  • Cummings, R., Brookshire, D., & Schulze, W. (1986). Valuing environmental goods. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Davis, R. K. (1963). Recreation planning as an economic problem. Natural Resources Journal, 3, 239-249.
  • Department of Homeland Security. (2009). Budget-in-brief fiscal year 2010. Available at www.dhs.gov
  • Donahue, A. K., & Miller, J. M. (2005). Citizen preferences and paying for municipal police. aJournal of Urban Affairs, 27(4), 419-435.
  • Donahue, A. K., & Miller, J. M. (2006). Experience, attitudes, and willingness to pay for public safety. American Review of Public Administration, 36(4), 395-418.
  • Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Fowler, F. (1974). Citizen attitudes toward local government, services, and taxes. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
  • Gerber, B. J., & Neeley, G. W. (2005). Perceived risk and citizen preferences for governmental management of routine hazards. Policy Studies Journal, 33(3), 395-414.
  • Glaser, M. A., & Hildreth, B. W. (1999). Service delivery satisfaction and willingness to pay taxes: Citizen recognition of local government performance. Public Productivity & Management Review, 23(1), 48-67.
  • Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.). (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2008a). DHS improved its risk-based grant programs' allocation and management methods, but measuring programs' impact on national capabilities remains a challenge. GAO-08-488T (March 11).
  • Government Accountability Office. (2008b). DHS risk-based grant methodology is reasonable, but current version's measure of vulnerability is limited. GAO-08-852 (June).
  • Greenberg, M., Irving, W., & Zimmerman, R. (2009). Allocating U. S. Department of Homeland Security funds to states with explicit equity, population and energy facility security criteria. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 43(4), 229-239.
  • Hardy, M. (1993). Regression with dummy variables. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Johnson, E. J., & Tversky, A. (1983). Affect, generalization and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 20-31.
  • Kelly, J. M., & Swindell, D. (2002). A multiple-indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: Correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review, 62, 610-622.
  • Krosnick, J. A., and Telhami, S. (1995). Public attitudes toward Israel: A study of the attentive and issue publics. International Studies Quarterly, 59, 535-554.
  • La Porte, T. M., O'Neill, P., Japson, S., Ebert, M., Bowman, M., & Melmed, A. (2005). Critical infrastructure protection, vulnerability and public confidence. Final report. [Vol. 15 of Critical infrastructure protection in the National Capital Region Risk-Based Foundations for Resilience and Sustainability Critical Infrastructure Protection Program, George Mason University].
  • Lasker, R. D. (2004). Redefining readiness: Terrorism planning through the eyes of the public. New York: New York Academy of Medicine.
  • Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475-507.
  • Lilienthal, S. (2005, December 19). Gambling on risk allocation. Accuracy in Media. Available at www.aim.org
  • Mackenzie, G., & Labiner, J. (2002). Opportunity lost: The rise and fall of trust and confidence in government after September 11. Washington, DC: Center for Public Service, Brookings Institution Press.
  • MacLeod, C., & Campbell, L. (1992). Memory accessibility and probability judgments: An experimental evaluation of the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 890-902.
  • Mitchell, R. C., & Carson, R. T. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (1993). Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register, 58(10), 4602-4614.
  • O'Hanlon, M. E. (2006, June 3). Big apple pie. Wall Street Journal. Available at http://online.wsj.com
  • Priest, D., & Arkin, W. M. (2010, July 19). A hidden world, growing beyond control. Washington Post.
  • Redlener, I., Grant, R., Berman, D. A., Johnson, D., & Abramson, D. M. (2006). Where the American public stands on terrorism, security, and disaster preparedness five years after September 11, one year after Hurricane Katrina. National Center for Disaster Preparedness (Mailman School of Public Health)/Children's Health Fund, New York.
  • Robbins, M. D., Simonsen, B., & Feldman, B. (2004). The impact of tax price on spending preferences. Public Budgeting and Finance, 24(3), 82-97.
  • Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers: Experiments on question form, wording, and context in attitude surveys. New York: Academic Press.
  • Sears, D., & Citrin, J. (1982). Tax revolt: Something for nothing in California. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Simonsen, B., & Robbins, M. D. (2000). The influence of fiscal information on preferences for city services. Social Science Journal, 37(2), 195-214.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207-232.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
  • United States Conference of Mayors Homeland Security Monitoring Center. (2004, January). Second Mayors' report to the nation: Tracking federal Homeland Security funds sent to the 50 state governments (A 215-city/50-state survey).
  • USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001), Public Law 107-56.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.