Some of the material in is restricted to members of the community. By logging in, you may be able to gain additional access to certain collections or items. If you have questions about access or logging in, please use the form on the Contact Page.
What factors account for local institutional choices such as adoption of impact fees? Is there a pattern to impact fee adoptions? These questions are of critical importance because in the United States, local governments are primarily responsible for defining property rights concerning how people use land and providing basic public services to citizens. The theoretical framework to investigate impact fee adoption combines political market approaches based in interest group theories of property rights and diffusion theories of innovation. This framework identifies the local demanders and suppliers, intergovernmental institutions, administrative capacity, diffusion, and financial conditions. Empirical analysis focuses on adoption of impact fees—transportation, parks, fire/EMS, police/corrections, school, and library—in 66 Florida counties from 1977 to 2001, using event history analysis. The first impact fee in Florida was parks impact fees adopted by Broward County in 1977. The first ten adoptions occurred in counties located in the southern and central regions of Florida except for Holmes County, and the adoptions spread to the northern counties in the mid- and late 1980s. Counties have frequently changed impact fee schedules. Parks impact fees have been changed more often—about 4 times on average—than any other type of fees. The empirical results regarding determinants of impact fee adoptions provide several key lessons. First, the results suggest that interest groups such as high-income citizens and the development community have a significant influence on impact fee adoptions. Second, motivations of local government decision makers promote controversial impact fee adoptions such as school impact fees. Third, Florida counties experienced significant increase in the impact fee adoptions after the Growth Management Act of 1985 and case laws in 1983. Fourth, counties are more likely to adopt impact fees if more neighboring counties have adopted impact fees. Fifth, administrative capacity as a critical resource influences impact fee adoptions. Counties having employees with professional and skilled expertise are more likely to adopt impact fees. Sixth, previous studies on determinants of impact fee adoptions attributed the adoption of impact fees to local growth, especially population growth. The empirical findings provide consistent and strong effects of local growth on impact fee adoptions.
Fiscal Stress, Infrastructure, Land Use, Growth Manament, Geimpact Fees
Date of Defense
July 6, 2004.
A Dissertation submitted to the Askew School of Public Administration and Policy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Includes bibliographical references.
Richard C. Feiock, Professor Directing Dissertation; Keith Ihlanfeldt, Outside Committee Member; Frances S. Berry, Committee Member; Robert B. Bradley, Committee Member; Earle Klay, Committee Member; Gabriela S. Wolfson, Committee Member.
Florida State University
Use and Reproduction
This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). The copyright in theses and dissertations completed at Florida State University is held by the students who author them.