Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP1555
Authors: Mark Hallerberg; Jurgen von Hagen
Abstract: Two literatures in political economy argue that differences in political institutions help explain variation in the fiscal performance of countries. They indentify electoral systems and institutions that structure the formation of the budget as important determinants of the budget deficit. In this paper we indicate that these two arguments complement one another. Electoral institutions matter because they restrict the type of budgetary institution a state has at its disposal to solve the coordination problem involved in the budget negotiations. The theory and the empirical results indicate a strong relationship between one-party governments and strong finance minister solutions on the one hand, and multi-party or minority governments and the use of formal budget targets on the other. Pooled time series regression supports our contention that the presence of one of these budgetary institutions matters more than the plurality/proportional respresentations dichotomy.
Keywords: government budgeting; public debt; deficits; electoral systems; political economy
JEL Codes: H60; H61; H62; K40
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| one-party governments (D72) | strong finance minister solutions (H69) |
| strong finance minister solutions (H69) | lower budget deficits (H69) |
| multiparty governments (D72) | negotiated budget targets (H61) |
| negotiated budget targets (H61) | higher budget deficits (H69) |
| electoral systems (K16) | budgetary institutions (H61) |
| budgetary institutions (H61) | fiscal outcomes (H68) |
| one-party governments (D72) | lower budget deficits (H69) |
| multiparty governments (D72) | higher budget deficits (H69) |