Policy spillovers in a regional target-setting regime

The present UK government has introduced a decentralised, target-driven framework for the delivery of regional policy in England. This paper analyses the operation of such a regime when there are spatial spillovers about which the government is uninformed. It stresses the simple idea that spillovers in such a setting normally lead to a sub-optimal allocation of policy expenditures. A key result is that the existence of negative spillovers on some policies generates expenditure switching towards those policies. The extent of the expenditure switching is related to a number of factors: the size of the spillovers; the initial policy weights in the government's welfare function; the number of agencies; the extent of their knowledge of spillovers; and their degree of collusion. Such expenditure switching is generally not welfare maximising

Exploring key economic sectors and groups of sectors in Scotland; 1998, 2004, 2007

Different methods and criteria exist for determining ‘key’ economic sectors. The Scottish Government identifies a number of ‘key’ sectors, although it is not clear which metrics it used to choose these. It is likely that these sectors are considered to be ‘key’ in delivering the Scottish Government’s policy priorities. This differs from a more formally defined economic approach to determining key sectors. However, even within the economics literature, there are different ways of thinking about which sectors are ‘key’. This short paper presents one approach to determining individual and groups of ‘key’ sectors. We will explain why these approaches are not necessarily equivalent, and what value is added in moving from considering sectors individually to analysing the impact of sectors in groups. We begin with a non-technical overview of the methods we employ, before discussing the database used in this analysis. We then present the results of applying this method for Scotland for three time periods: 1998, 2004, and 2007. We mainly focus on sectoral output, but we also include one set of results which look at key employment sectors. In the discussion of our results we concentrate on two things. First, we are interested in which sectors are identified as important in Scotland in each time period. Second, we investigate how those sectors have changed between 1998, 2004 and 2007

An input-output based alternative to 'ecological footprints' for tracking pollution generation in a small open economy

The usefulness, rigour and consistency of Input-Output (IO) as an accounting framework is well known. However, there is concern over the appropriateness of the standard IO attribution approach, particularly when applied to environmental issues (Bicknell et al. 1998). It is often argued that the source and responsibility for pollution should be located in human private or public consumption. An example is the "ecological footprint" approach of Wackernagel and Rees (1996). However, in the standard IO procedure, the pollution attributed to consumption, particularly private consumption, can be small or even zero. Here we attempt to retain the consumption-orientation of the "ecological footprint" method within an IO framework by implementing a neo-classical linear attribution system (NCLAS) which endogenises trade flows. We argue that this approach has practical and conceptual advantages over the "ecological footprint". The NCLAS method is then applied to the small, open economy of Jersey

Devolution and the economy : a Scottish perspective

In their interesting and challenging chapter John Adams and Peter Robinson assess the consequences for economic development policy of the devolution measures enacted by the UK Labour government post 1997. Their chapter ranges widely over current UK regional disparities, the link between devolution and economic growth, the balance of responsibilities in policy between Whitehall and the devolved administrations, and finally, they raise questions about the developing "quasi-federal" role of Whitehall in regulating or coordinating the new devolved policy landscape. In response, we propose to focus on four issues that we believe are key to understanding the economic consequences of devolution both at the Scottish and UK levels. First, we argue that the view of Scotland's devolutionary experience in economic policy is partial and so does not fully capture the nature and extent of change post 1999. Secondly, we examine the role of devolution in regional economic performance. There is much in their paper on this topic with which we agree but we contend that there are significant omissions in the analysis, which are important for policy choice. Our third section highlights an area not discussed in depth by Adams and Robinson's paper: the funding of the devolution settlement. Here we consider some of the implications of funding arrangements for economic performance and the options for a new funding settlement. Finally, we deal with the difficult issue of co-ordination between the centre and the devolved regions. We contend that co-ordination is largely conspicuous by its absence. Moreover, where coordination is deployed it reflects an inadequate understanding of the extent to which the economies of the regions and devolved territories of the UK are linked

The macroeconomic consequences of Scottish fiscal autonomy: inverted haavelemo effects in a general equilibrium analysis of the tartan tax

In 1997 the Scottish people voted both for the creation of a legislative Parliament and to endow the Parliament with tax-varying powers. The establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 2000 heralded the most radical innovation in the regional fiscal system in modern U.K. history. This development has been the subject of considerable controversy, however, especially in respect of the decision to afford the Parliament the power to alter the basic rate of income tax by up to 3p in either direction. The fact that Scotland, at least according to official data, receives a substantial net fiscal transfer from the rest of the UK, and has traditionally had higher public expenditure per capita than England, leads most commentators to believe that the power to change the standard rate will, in practice, be restricted to the power to increase it (Blow et al, 1996; McGregor et al 1997). Accordingly, while the Parliament allows the use of the power to generate a balancedbudget contraction in expenditure, we focus here on the impact of a balanced-budget fiscal expansion. While Labour, SNP and the Liberal Democrats in Scotland all supported the introduction of a Parliament with tax-raising powers, the Conservatives labelled this scheme the “tartan tax” and claim that its use would be detrimental to Scotland, leading to a reduction in Scottish employment and to net out-migration. This political controversy, together with the national Labour Party’s desire to shed its reputation as a Party of high taxation, in part accounted for the Scottish Labour Party’s commitment not to exercise the tax-varying power during the lifetime of the first Scottish Parliament, despite the fact that others have meanwhile been vigorously arguing the case for full fiscal autonomy. In this paper we focus primarily on the consequences for the Scottish economy if the Parliament chooses to exercise the degree of fiscal autonomy that it already possesses. However, the factors that govern the likely macroeconomic impact of a balanced budget change also prove critical to the analysis of any region-specific tax or expenditure change, whether generated as a consequence of, for example, rigorous adherence to the Barnett formula (that, at least in principle, governs the allocation of government expenditure to the devolved authorities in the UK, et al 2003, 2007) or movement towards greater fiscal autonomy. Accordingly, we also identify the implications of our analysis for the wider debate on regional fiscal issues in general and greater fiscal autonomy in particular

"Policy Scepticism" and the Impact of Welsh Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) on their Host Region : Accounting for Regional Budget Constraints

This paper replicates the analysis of Scottish HEIs in Hermannsson et al (2010b) for the case of Wales in order to provide a self-contained analysis that is readily accessible by those whose primary concern is with the regional impacts of Welsh HEIs. A "policy scepticism" has emerged that challenges the results of conventional regional HEI impact analyses. This denial of the importance of the expenditure impacts of HEIs appears to be based on a belief in either a binding regional resource constraint or a regional public sector budget constraint. In this paper we provide a systematic critique of this policy scepticism. However, while rejecting the extreme form of policy scepticism, we argue that it is crucial to recognise the importance of the publicsector expenditure constraints that are binding under devolution. We show how conventional impact analyses can be augmented to accommodate regional public sector budget constraints. While our results suggest that conventional impact studies overestimate the expenditure impacts of HEIs, they also demonstrate that the policy scepticism that treats these expenditure effects as irrelevant neglects some key aspects of HEIs, in particular their export intensity

Construction of a multi-sectoral inter-regional IO and SAM database for the UK

The purpose of this paper is to explain the construction of the input-output (IO) and social accounting matrix (SAM) databases for the inter-regional computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the UK developed as part of the project 'An Analysis of National and Devolved Economic Policies' undertaken as part of the ESRC Devolution and Constitutional Change research programme. We identify four main regions of the UK: Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England. However, in Section 2, we begin by constructing a set of two-region accounts where we focus on Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland with the other aggregate 'region' labelled 'rest of the UK' or RUK. Then, in Section 3, we extend to a three-region framework where we identify Scotland, Wales and RUK. Finally, in Section 4, we extend further to construct the full 4-region IO and SAM

The welfare impacts of discriminatory price tariffs

This paper looks at the use of asymmetric tariffs as a regulatory instrument. We use a monopolistic market setup with two markets and we introduce price controls in one of the two. The purpose of the regulator is to maximise consumer welfare through this price discriminatory practice. We consider cases where the welfare of the consumers in the two markets is weighted equally and cases where it is not. In some cases we allow for the two markets to be linked through a monopsonistic input market. The paper focuses on the welfare implications of this regulatory approach, with the firm operating under a profit restriction. Results suggest that having only one price-controlled market is in certain cases a good option from a welfare perspective

The regional distribution of public expendictures in the UK : an exposition and critique of the Barnett formula

The Barnett formula is the official basis upon which increments to public funds are allocated to the devolved regions of the UK for those parts of the budget that are administered locally. There is considerable controversy surrounding the implications of its strict application for the relevant regions. The existing literature focuses primarily on the equity of the spatial changes to government per capita expenditure that would accompany such a change. In contrast, in this paper we attempt to quantify the system-wide economic consequences-the real, relative resource squeeze that accompanies the financial relative squeeze-on one devolved region, Scotland. The analysis uses a multisectoral regional computable general equilibrium modelling approach. We highlight the importance of population endogeneity, particularly since the population proportions used in the formula are now regularly updated