IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v44y2006i2p234-248.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Discretionary Federal Spending on Parliamentary Election Results

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas A. Evans

Abstract

Parliamentary rules make it difficult for opposition members of Parliament to influence government spending. As the electorate is aware of this situation discretionary federal spending is expected to affect vote-share differently for majority and opposition incumbents. Consistent estimators yield positive and significant point estimates for the impact of increases in spending for majority incumbents in Canadian federal elections yet yield negative but insignificant point estimates for opposition incumbents. Furthermore, $100 additional federal spending per capita in an electoral district is estimated to increase majority candidates' vote-share, regardless of incumbency, by between 1.5 and 2.5 percentage points. (JEL D72, H59) Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas A. Evans, 2006. "The Effects of Discretionary Federal Spending on Parliamentary Election Results," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(2), pages 234-248, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:44:y:2006:i:2:p:234-248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ei/cbj010
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Spáč, 2021. "Pork barrel politics and electoral returns at the local level," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 479-501, September.
    2. Kim, Kangsoo & Baek, Seunghan & Cho, Hyejin, 2021. "Impact of a Preliminary Feasibility Study on the accuracy of traffic forecasts in the case of Korea," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 197-211.
    3. Thomas Evans, 2007. "An empirical test of why incumbents adopt campaign spending limits," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(3), pages 437-456, September.
    4. Cazor Katz, Andre & Acuña, Hector & Carrasco, Diego & Carrasco, Martín, 2017. "Transferencias como Canal de Ventaja Electoral: El Caso de Chile [Discretionary Government Transfers to Catch Votes: The Case of Chile]," MPRA Paper 83668, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H59 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:44:y:2006:i:2:p:234-248. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.