Funding Mechanisms for State Road Maintenance

The deferred maintenance practices for road infrastructure will result in increasing life-cycle costs and deteriorating economic productivity. Governments have addressed the issue by expanding revenue sources, but we don’t know much about the revenue allocation mechanisms. This research reviewed 50 states’ constitutions and statutes to find the similarities and differences in the institutional features of the funding mechanisms for road maintenance. As of 2020, it found that ten states had strict earmarking mechanisms for securing resources for road maintenance; four states had less strict earmarking mechanisms. Furthermore, this research found wide variations in the designs of 50 states’ transportation/highway trust funds and their uses. The research developed the eight propositions to examine the relationship between the funding mechanisms and state highway maintenance spending. Overall, this research contributes to the current literature and policymakers to enhance our understanding of the funding mechanisms of 50 states for road maintenance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Works Management & Policy
Published
2024-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724x241287493
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.26
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Funding Mechanisms for State Road Maintenance

Jiseul Kim
1 citations
Public Works Management & Policy
Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
0.26
article

Funding Mechanisms for State Road Maintenance

Jiseul Kim
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The deferred maintenance practices for road infrastructure will result in increasing life-cycle costs and deteriorating economic productivity. Governments have addressed the issue by expanding revenue sources, but we don’t know much about the revenue allocation mechanisms. This research reviewed 50 states’ constitutions and statutes to find the similarities and differences in the institutional features of the funding mechanisms for road maintenance. As of 2020, it found that ten states had strict earmarking mechanisms for securing resources for road maintenance; four states had less strict earmarking mechanisms. Furthermore, this research found wide variations in the designs of 50 states’ transportation/highway trust funds and their uses. The research developed the eight propositions to examine the relationship between the funding mechanisms and state highway maintenance spending. Overall, this research contributes to the current literature and policymakers to enhance our understanding of the funding mechanisms of 50 states for road maintenance.

Public Works Management & PolicyVol. 30(1)
The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
0.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.