Yardstick Competition and Political Agency Problems

This paper analyzes the role of yardstick competition for improving political decisions. We examine how performance comparisons across jurisdictions affect the agency problem resulting from uncertainty about politicians (adverse selection) and their policies (moral hazard). We study two forms of inefficiency: the provision of non-valuable programmes (over-provision) and the failure to provide valuable programmes (under-provision). We find a general neutrality result: yardstick competition does not affect the chance that at least one type of politician in one jurisdiction will take inefficient decision, nor does it affect the risk of underproviding good programmes. However, performance comparisons reduce the risk of providing bad programmes in both jurisdictions.Electoral competition, Yardstick competition

Yardstick Competition and Policy Innovation

A simple model of yardstick competition between jurisdictions is presented. Governments of jurisdictions face the alternative to choose between an old and a new policy with stochastic payoffs. The new policy is superior to the old policy in one state of the world, and inferior in the other. Governments are either benevolent, serving the interest of the voter, or rent-seeking. An equilibrium with yardstick competition is shown to exist where bad governments having a good government in their neighborhood choose the new policy more often compared to an equilibrium without relative performance evaluation. Overall, the probability of policy innovations is increased by yardstick competition. The model has a testable empirical implication saying that policy innovations should show spatial correlation.

Yardstick Competition and Policy Innovation

A simple model of yardstick competition between jurisdictions is presented. Governments of jurisdictions face the alternative to choose between an old and a new policy with stochastic payoffs. The new policy is superior to the old policy in one state of the world, and inferior in the other. Governments are either benevolent, serving the interest of the voter, or rent-seeking. An equilibrium with yardstick competition is shown to exist where bad governments having a good government in their neighborhood choose the new policy more often compared to an equilibrium without relative performance evaluation. Overall, the probability of policy innovations is increased by yardstick competition. The model has a testable empirical implication saying that policy innovations should show spatial correlation. --

Decentralization as an incentive scheme when regional differences are large

It has been suggested that large regional differences could be an obstacle to that part of the political accountability of office-holders which is based on yardstick competition among governments. The paper addresses that question and concludes that the obstacle is not too serious in general. The second part of the paper is devoted to the persistent economic underperformance of some regions in countries such as Germany, Italy and (with regard to regions overseas) France. How is it that the mechanism of yardstick competition induces a convergence of economic performance among European Union member countries, even those particularly poor initially, but fails to induce all the underperforming regions of these countries to catch up? A small model is used to explore that question. In the case of the persistently underperforming regions, it turns out that the degree of regional differentiation is not sufficient for yardstick competition to work and bring about an improvement in performance. The yardstick competition framework remains useful if it helps to understand more clearly why this is so.yardstick competition;political competition;regional development

Yardstick competition in a Federation: Theory and Evidence from China

While some scholars argue that fiscal decentralization gave Chinese local officials strong incentives to promote local economic growth, traditional fiscal federalism theories are not directly relevant to explain such an effect in the particular context of China. In this paper, we explain the existence of interjurisdictional competition among Chinese local officials using a model of yardstick competition "from the top", in which the central government (and not local voters) creates a competition among local officials by rewarding or punishing them on the basis of relative economic performance. Our model predicts that, in this context, local governments are forced to care about what other incumbents are doing and that public spending settings are strategic complements. Then, by estimating a spatial lag dynamic model for a panel data of 29 Chinese provinces from 1980 to 2004, we provide empirical evidence of the existence of such public spending interactions. We propose a rigorous empirical framework which takes into account heterogeneity, simultaneity and endogeneity problems and spatial error dependence. The results are encouraging to the view that there are some strategic interactions among Chinese provinces, resulting from a yardstick competition created by the central government.decentralization;China;public spending interactions;yardstick competition;spatial panel data

Comparing Airport regulation in Europe: Is there need for a European Regulator?

This paper provides an overview of how the major airports are regulated in Europe. In order to eliminate the potential of airports to exercise market power and protect the public interest, it has become increasingly necessary to set a common regulatory framework. We intend to discuss the need of a single regulator in Europe to monitor or establish the quality of service and the charges practiced by the airports, to ensure cost-relatedness, transparency and non-discrimination. The existing regulatory approaches regarding aeronautical charges and their economic implications are also analyzed. We propose the creation of a European Observatory for this sector.airports, economic regulation, European Observatory

Where do we stand on transport infrastructure deregulation and public-private partnership?

The evolution of transport public-private partnerships (PPPs) in developing and developed countries since the early 1990s seems to be following a similar path: private initiatives work for a while but after a shock to the sector takes place the public sector returns as regulator, owner or financier; after a while the public sector runs into problems and eventually finds a hybrid solution to ensure the survival of the sector. This paper reviews the effectiveness of transport infrastructure deregulation from three angles: efficiency, fiscal and users'viewpoint. The paper emphasizes the difficulties and strong political commitments required to make the reforms sustainable and argues that governments willing to make corrections to the reform path are faced with the need to address recurrent and emerging issues in transport systems: tariff structure, quality (timetable, safety, environment), access rules for captive shippers, the trend toward rebundling and decrease in intrasectoral competition, multimodalism and the stimulus through yardstick competition.Decentralization,Banks&Banking Reform,Environmental Economics&Policies,Health Economics&Finance,Municipal Financial Management,Banks&Banking Reform,Health Economics&Finance,Municipal Financial Management,Environmental Economics&Policies,Public Sector Economics&Finance

Review of Economic Theories of Regulation

This paper reviews the economic theories of regulation. It discusses the public and private interest theories of regulation, as the criticisms that have been leveled at them. The extent to which these theories are also able to account for privatization and deregulation is evaluated and policies involving re-regulation are discussed. The paper thus reviews rate of return regulation, price-cap regulation, yardstick regulation, interconnection and access regulation, and franchising or bidding processes. The primary aim of those instruments is to improve the operating efficiency of the regulated firms. Huge investments will be needed in the regulated network sectors. The question is brought up if regulatory instruments and institutions primarily designed to improve operating efficiency are equally well-placed to promote the necessary investments and to balance the resulting conflicting interests between for example consumers and investors.Regulation, Deregulation, Public Interest Theories, Private Interest Theories, Interest Groups, Public Choice, Market Failures, Price-cap Regulation, Rate of Return Regulation, Yardstick Competition, Franchise Bidding, Access Regulation.