Rent Seeking, Policy and Growth under Electoral Uncertainty: Theory and Evidence

We construct an otherwise standard general equilibrium model of economic growth and endogenously chosen fiscal policy, in which individuals compete with each other for extra fiscal transfers and two political parties compete with each other for staying in power. The main prediction is that relatively large public sectors in pre-election periods distort incentives by pushing individuals away from productive work to rent seeking activities. In turn, distorted incentives hurt growth. We test this prediction by using a panel data set of a group of 25 OECD countries over the period 1982-1996, as well as a cross-section of 108 industrial and developing countries over the decade 1990-2000. There is evidence that electoral and/or political instability cause relatively large public sectors, which in turn increase rent seeking (as measured by the ICRG index), and this is bad for economic growth.Political uncertainty, economic growth, incentives

Fiscal Policy, Rent Seeking and Growth under Electoral Uncertainty Theory and Evidence from the OECD

We construct a general equilibrium model of economic growth and optimally chosen fiscal policy, in which individuals compete with each other for a share of government spending and two political parties can alternate in power according to an exogenous reelection probability. The main prediction is that uncertainty about remaining in power results in increased fiscal spending, which in turn distorts incentives by pushing individuals away from productive work to rent-seeking activities; then distorted incentives hurt growth. This receives empirical support in a dataset of 25 OECD countries over the period 1982-1996. In particular, electoral uncertainty leads to larger government consumption shares in GDP, which in turn exert an adverse effect on the ICRG index measuring incentives and this is bad for growth. Actually, estimation by IV methods and confidence intervals that are robust to (potentially) weak instruments, reveal that OLS under-estimates the effects of government spending on rent extraction activities and of such activities on economic growth.Fiscal policy; rent seeking; economic growth; elections.

Should Green Governments Give Priority to Environmental Policies over Growth-Enhancing Policies?

This paper studies the properties of second-best optimal policy in a standard general equilibrium model of growth augmented with renewable natural resources. The government chooses its policy instruments (the income tax rate and the allocation of collected tax revenues between public investment and environmental policy) to solve a Ramsey-type policy problem. The main result is that, the more the citizens care about the environment, the more growth-enhancing policies the government finds it optimal to choose in the long run. This is because when citizens care about the environment, this requires tax revenues for environmental policy and can be only achieved by large tax bases and high growth. Thus, only growing economies can afford to care about the environment. This is the case even if pollution occurs as a by-product of output produced.second-best policy, natural resources, economic growth

Pollution and Resource Extraction: Do they Matter for the Dynamics of Growth?

This paper shows that whether pollution occurs as a by-product of economic activity (which is supposed to be the case in DCs), or as resource extraction (which is supposed to be the case in LDCs), matters for the dynamics of the optimal growth-environment-policy link. The context is a dynamic general equilibrium model of endogenous growth, in which private agents treat natural resources as a public good and the government chooses second-best environmental policy. We show that resource extraction can lead to indeterminacy, i.e. many different equilibrium transition paths. This can partly explain the observed persistent differences in growth among LDCs with similar fundamentals and endowments.Pollution and resource extraction, growth, dynamics, second-best policy

Environmental public good provision under robust decision making

We study public good provision in a two-country dynamic setup with environmental externalities. In this framework, we examine robust decision making under potential misspecification of the process that describes the evolution of the environmental public good. Robust policies, arising from fear of model misspecification, help to correct for the inefficiencies associated with free riding and thus increase the provision of the public good. As a result, there can be welfare gains from robust policies even when the fear of model misspecification proves to be unfounded

Public Providers, versus Private Providers, of Public Goods: A General Equilibrium Study of the Role of the State

This paper studies the difference between public production and public finance of public goods in a dynamic general equilibrium setup. By public finance, we mean that the public good is produced by private providers with the government financing their costs. When the model is calibrated to match fiscal data from the UK economy, the main result is that, ceteris paribus, a switch from public production to public finance can have substantial aggregate and distributional implications. Public providers cannot beat private providers in terms of aggregate efficiency. We finally design a transfer scheme that can make a switch to private provision welfare improving for all agents including public employees.public goods, growth, welfare

What is the best environmental policy?Taxes, permits and rules under economic and environmental uncertainty

We welfare rank different types of second-best environmental policy. The focus is on the roles of uncertainty and public finance. The setup is the basic stochastic neoclassical growth model augmented with the assumptions that pollution occurs as a by-product of output produced and environmental quality is treated as a public good. To compare different policy regimes, we compute the welfare-maximizing value of the second-best policy instrument in each regime. In all cases studied, pollution permits are the worst recipe, even when their revenues are used to finance public abatement. When the main source of uncertainty is economic, the best recipe is to levy taxes (on pollution or output) and use the collected tax revenues to finance public abatement. However, when environmental uncertainty is the dominant source of extrinsic uncertainty, Kyoto-like rules for emissions, being combined with tax-financed public abatement, are better than taxes. Finally, comparing pollution and output taxes, the latter are better.General equilibrium; uncertainty; environmental policy

What is the best environmental policy? Taxes, permits and rules under economic and environmental uncertainty

We welfare rank different types of second-best environmental policy. The focus is on the roles of uncertainty and public finance. The setup is the basic stochastic neoclassical growth model augmented with the assumptions that pollution occurs as a by-product of output produced and environmental quality is treated as a public good. To compare different policy regimes, we compute the welfaremaximizing value of the second-best policy instrument in each regime. In all cases studied, pollution permits are the worst recipe, even when their revenues are used to finance public abatement. When the main source of uncertainty is economic, the best recipe is to levy taxes (on pollution or output) and use the collected tax revenues to finance public abatement. However, when environmental uncertainty is the dominant source of extrinsic uncertainty, Kyoto-like rules for emissions, being combined with tax-financed public abatement, are better than taxes. Finally, comparing pollution and output taxes, the latter are betterGeneral equilibrium; uncertainty; environmental policy.

Elections, Fiscal Policy and Growth: Revisiting the Mechanism

This short paper reconsiders the popular result that the lower the probability of getting reelected, the stronger the incumbent politicians’ incentive to follow short-sighted, inefficient policies. The set-up is a general equilibrium model of endogenous growth and optimal fiscal policy, in which two political parties can alternate in power. We show that re-election uncertainty is not enough to produce the popular result. Specifically, re-election uncertainty must be combined with the hypothesis that politicians care about economic outcomes more when in power than when out of power, and - more importantly - that this preference over being in power is ad hoc. That is, if politicians can also choose how much to care about economic outcomes when in and out of power, it is optimal to care the same and hence shortsighted policies do not arise. Therefore, such policies presuppose a degree of irrationality on the part of political parties.politics, fiscal policy, economic growth, general equilibrium