IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/udc/esteco/v39y2012i1p27-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

¿Por qué el distanciamiento ideológico disminuye la provisión de bienes públicos?; una explicación basada en el empleo clientelar

Author

Listed:
  • Leonardo A. Gatica Arreola

Abstract

Este artículo presenta un modelo de competencia política para analizar el efecto que tiene la distancia ideológica que hay entre dos partidos políticos que compiten por el apoyo de los ciudadanos sobre la provisión de bienes públicos. El principal resultado argumenta que la distancia ideológica entre los partidos y los ciudadanos tiene una relación negativa con la provisión de bienes públicos. En contraste con otros modelos teóricos, este resultado no se debe a problemas de cooperación o conflicto debido a la fragmentación y polarización de la ciudadanía, sino a la rentabilidad política del uso clientelar del empleo burocrático.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonardo A. Gatica Arreola, 2012. "¿Por qué el distanciamiento ideológico disminuye la provisión de bienes públicos?; una explicación basada en el empleo clientelar," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 39(1 Year 20), pages 27-51, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:udc:esteco:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:27-51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.uchile.cl/uploads/publicacion/b37ea71c6882c1e269b86bb1ba99e9619dd9dea0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Assar Lindbeck & Jörgen Weibull, 1987. "Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 273-297, January.
    2. Fernández, Raquel & Levy, Gilat, 2008. "Diversity and redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 925-943, June.
    3. Lindqvist, Erik & ÖStling, Robert, 2010. "Political Polarization and the Size of Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 543-565, August.
    4. Iversen, Torben & Soskice, David, 2006. "Electoral Institutions and the Politics of Coalitions: Why Some Democracies Redistribute More Than Others," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(2), pages 165-181, May.
    5. repec:fth:oxesaf:98-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Svensson, Jakob, 1998. "Investment, property rights and political instability: Theory and evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(7), pages 1317-1341, July.
    7. William Easterly & Ross Levine, 1997. "Africa's Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(4), pages 1203-1250.
    8. Dahlberg, Matz & Johansson, Eva, 2002. "On the Vote-Purchasing Behavior of Incumbent Governments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(1), pages 27-40, March.
    9. Dixit, Avinash & Londregan, John, 1995. "Redistributive Politics and Economic Efficiency," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 856-866, December.
    10. James A. Robinson & Thierry Verdier, 2013. "The Political Economy of Clientelism," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 115(2), pages 260-291, April.
    11. Albert Alesina & Stephan Danninger & Massimo Rostagno, 2001. "Redistribution Through Public Employment: The Case of Italy," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(3), pages 1-2.
    12. Alesina, Alberto & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1170-1188, December.
    13. Alberto Alesina & Reza Baqir & William Easterly, 1999. "Public Goods and Ethnic Divisions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(4), pages 1243-1284.
    14. Eliana La Ferrara & Robert H. Bates, 2001. "Political Competition in Weak States," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 159-184, July.
    15. Case, Anne, 2001. "Election goals and income redistribution: Recent evidence from Albania," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 405-423, March.
    16. Wittman, Donald, 1989. "Why Democracies Produce Efficient Results," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1395-1424, December.
    17. H.J. Manning & Ciaran O'Faircheallaigh, 2000. "Papua New Guinea," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 385-395, November.
    18. Paul Collier, 1998. "The political economy of ethnicity," CSAE Working Paper Series 1998-08, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    19. Peter Coughlin, 1986. "Elections and income redistribution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 27-91, January.
    20. Paul Collier, 1998. "The political economy of ethnicity," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/1998-08, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    21. Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-927, October.
    22. Wittman, Donald A., 1997. "The Myth of Democratic Failure," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226904238, September.
    23. Johansson, Eva, 2003. "Intergovernmental grants as a tactical instrument: empirical evidence from Swedish municipalities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(5-6), pages 883-915, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sugata Ghosh & Andros Gregoriou & Anirban Mitra, 2013. "On the Role of Democracy in the Ethnicity-Growth Relationship: Theory and Evidence," CEDI Discussion Paper Series 13-02, Centre for Economic Development and Institutions(CEDI), Brunel University.
    2. Ghosh, Sugata & Mitra, Anirban, 2016. "Ethnic Diversity, Public Spending and Political Regimes," MPRA Paper 75546, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Lindqvist, Erik & ÖStling, Robert, 2010. "Political Polarization and the Size of Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 543-565, August.
    4. Hanes, Niklas, 2007. "Temporary grant programmes in Sweden and central government behaviour," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 1160-1174, December.
    5. Amin, Saqib & Mehmood, Waqas & Sharif, Arshian, 2022. "Blessing or curse: The role of diversity matters in stimulating or relegating environmental sustainability—a global perspective via renewable and non-renewable energy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 927-937.
    6. Nawaz Ahmad & Saqib Amin, 2020. "Does ethnic polarization stimulate or relegate trade and environmental performance? A global perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6513-6536, October.
    7. Kim, Kwang-ho, 2007. "Favoritism and reverse discrimination," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 101-123, January.
    8. Dana Schüler & Julian Weisbrod, 2006. "Ethnic Fractionalization, Migration and Growth," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 148, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Bohn, Frank, 2007. "Polarisation, uncertainty and public investment failure," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 1077-1087, December.
    10. Sharif, Iffath A., 2011. "Does political competition lessen ethnic discrimination? Evidence from Sri Lanka," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 277-289, March.
    11. Subhasish Dey & Kunal Sen, 2016. "Is partisan alignment electorally rewarding? Evidence from village council elections in India," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-063-16, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    12. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1999. "The size and scope of government:: Comparative politics with rational politicians," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 699-735, April.
    13. Alberto Alesina & Edward Glaeser & Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Why Doesn't The US Have a European-Style Welfare State?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1933, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    14. Dana Schüler & Julian Weisbrod, 2010. "Ethnic fractionalisation, migration and growth," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 457-486, October.
    15. Micael Castanheira & Gaëtan Nicodème & Paola Profeta, 2012. "On the political economics of tax reforms: survey and empirical assessment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(4), pages 598-624, August.
    16. Stefan Krasa & Mattias Polborn, 2014. "Social Ideology and Taxes in a Differentiated Candidates Framework," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(1), pages 308-322, January.
    17. Keefer, Philip & Khemani, Stuti, 2003. "Democracy, public expenditures, and the poor," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3164, The World Bank.
    18. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Sorribas-Navarro, Pilar, 2008. "The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(12), pages 2302-2319, December.
    19. Mark Gradstein & Moshe Justman, 2002. "Education, Social Cohesion, and Economic Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1192-1204, September.
    20. Bodea, Cristina & Elbadawi, Ibrahim A., 2008. "Political violence and economic growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4692, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Polarización; Competencia política; Eficiencia gubernamental; Empleo gubernamental; Clientelismo.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:udc:esteco:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:27-51. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

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