IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/phs/prejrn/v50y2013i2p28-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

State capacity, stakeholder buy-in, and collective action problems: the budget allocation case

Author

Listed:
  • Raul V. Fabella

    (UP School of Economics, Center for National Policy and Strategy)

Abstract

Weak state capacity can lead to poor economic performance owing to an inability to solve collective action problems associated with lumpy but highly productive infrastructure projects. We formulate a stakeholder buy-in game where two players (regions) must unanimously approve a lumpy infrastructure program in which one region first gets the total budget in period one to finance a lumpy and productive project and the other region gets all the budget generated in period two. The program involves the state undertaking several tax-andtransfer steps in the implementation phase. Both would be better off if the program succeeds. But weak capacity is reflected in the probability that the state fails to deliver at each step. If either player rejects the program, the default allocation is Òdivideby- NÓ, where each player gets an Nth part of the given budget, which can finance only small and less productive projects. When state capacity exceeds a certain threshold, unanimous approval is a unique evolutionarily stable strategy. If not, the Òdivide-by-NÓ rule dominates. A higher return on lumpy projects reduces the hurdle probability and improves the likelihood of stakeholder buy-in. A higher degree of myopia among the players has the opposite effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Raul V. Fabella, 2013. "State capacity, stakeholder buy-in, and collective action problems: the budget allocation case," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 50(2), pages 28-36, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:phs:prejrn:v:50:y:2013:i:2:p:28-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pre.econ.upd.edu.ph/index.php/pre/article/view/896/796
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dani Rodrik & Arvind Subramanian & Francesco Trebbi, 2004. "Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions Over Geography and Integration in Economic Development," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 131-165, June.
    2. Stephen Knack & Philip Keefer, 1997. "Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1251-1288.
    3. Keefer, Philip, 2011. "Collective Action, Political Parties, and Pro-Development Public Policy," Asian Development Review, Asian Development Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 94-118.
    4. Easterly, William & Levine, Ross, 2003. "Tropics, germs, and crops: how endowments influence economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 3-39, January.
    5. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    6. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Florencio B. Abad, 2014. "On the cusp of budget transformation: the work for an inclusive budget process under the Aquino administration," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 51(1), pages 28-59, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public goods provision; weak state; stakeholder buy-in game; Òdivide-by-NÓ rule;

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    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:phs:prejrn:v:50:y:2013:i:2:p:28-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Reuben T. Campos) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/seupdph.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.