Public Capital Maintenance, Decentralization and U.s. Productivity Growth
AbstractData published by the U.S. Congressional Budget Office show that over the last fifty years expenditures for infrastructureÃƒÂ¢Ã¯Â¿Â½Ã¯Â¿Â½s operations and maintenance (O&M) have roughly equalled those for new capital. We use this dataset to investigate the productive impact of public infrastructure spending taking into account its composition for each government level. We find that a rise (fall) in infrastructure expenditures by states and localities (the federal government) would enhance future productivity growth and that the rise in state and local spending should mainly come from additional O&M outlays in the transport sector.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Athens University of Economics and Business in its series DEOS Working Papers with number 1126.
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Publication status: Forthcoming in Public Finance Review
capital; maintenance; fiscal decentralization; private productivity;
Other versions of this item:
- Sarantis Kalyvitis & Eugenia Vella, 2011. "Public Capital Maintenance, Decentralization, and US Productivity Growth," Public Finance Review, , vol. 39(6), pages 784-809, November.
- E22 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomics: Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Capital; Investment; Capacity
- E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy
- H54 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Infrastructures
- H76 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Other Expenditure Categories
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Feltenstein, Andrew & Iwata, Shigeru, 2005. "Decentralization and macroeconomic performance in China: regional autonomy has its costs," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 481-501, April.
- Ward Romp & Jakob de Haan, 2007.
"Public Capital and Economic Growth: A Critical Survey,"
Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik,
Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8(s1), pages 6-52, 04.
- Romp, Ward & de Haan, Jakob, 2005. "Public capital and economic growth: a critical survey," EIB Papers 2/2005, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
- Chandra, Amitabh & Thompson, Eric, 2000. "Does public infrastructure affect economic activity?: Evidence from the rural interstate highway system," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 457-490, July.
- Kalaitzidakis, Pantelis & Kalyvitis, Sarantis, 2004. "On the macroeconomic implications of maintenance in public capital," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 695-712, March.
- Sugata Ghosh & Andros Gregoriou, 2008. "The composition of government spending and growth: is current or capital spending better?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 484-516, July.
- Akai, Nobuo & Sakata, Masayo, 2002. "Fiscal decentralization contributes to economic growth: evidence from state-level cross-section data for the United States," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 93-108, July.
- Estache, A., 1995.
"Decentralizing Infrastructure. Advantages and Limitations,"
World Bank - Discussion Papers
290, World Bank.
- Antonio Estache, 1995. "Decentralizing Infrastructure: Advantages and Limitations," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/44118, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Rioja, Felix K., 2003. "Filling potholes: macroeconomic effects of maintenance versus new investments in public infrastructure," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(9-10), pages 2281-2304, September.
- Dioikitopoulos, Evangelos V. & Kalyvitis, Sarantis, 2008. "Public capital maintenance and congestion: Long-run growth and fiscal policies," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 3760-3779, December.
- Iimi, Atsushi, 2005. "Decentralization and economic growth revisited: an empirical note," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 449-461, May.
- Tao Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 2001.
"Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China,"
CEMA Working Papers
58, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
- Zhang, Tao & Zou, Heng-fu, 1998. "Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 221-240, February.
- Tao Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 1996. "Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1608, The World Bank.
- Oates, Wallace E., 1993. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Development," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 46(2), pages 237-43, June Cita.
- Thornton, John, 2007. "Fiscal decentralization and economic growth reconsidered," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 64-70, January.
- Michael Bleaney & Norman Gemmell & Richard Kneller, 2001. "Testing the endogenous growth model: public expenditure, taxation, and growth over the long run," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 36-57, February.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekaterini Glynou).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.