Electoral Rules, Forms of Government, and Political Budget Cycles in Transition Countries
Recent studies have suggested the existence of election-year economics in fiscal policy in transition countries. This study asks whether such electoral cycles in aggregate measures (overall expenditures, revenues and balance) and spending composition (broad vs. targeted outlays) differ among countries with different political systems. This question is motivated by a sharp division between majoritarianpresidential systems in Central Asia and Eastern Europe, and proportional-parliamentary systems in the Baltics, Central and Southeastern Europe. Further, in the absence of context-sensitive theories, the paper asks whether observed outcomes in the transition process conform to the theoretical priors developed for conditions in stable democracies. Finally, the paper attempts to normatively establish whether either of the alternative combinations yields more optimal policy outcomes. The results suggest that the differences indeed exist, primarily on the revenue side and in the composition of expenditures. These results differ markedly from those for stable democracies, especially in the case of composition of spending. Normatively, presidentialism yields suboptimal outcomes in comparison to parliamentarianism, likely due to inefficient system of constitutionally intended checks and balances..
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.:
- Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini & Francesco Trebbi, 2001.
"Electoral Rules and Corruption,"
NBER Working Papers
8154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini & Francesco Trebbi, . "Electoral Rules and Corruption," Working Papers 182, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini & Francesco Trebbi, 2001. "Electoral Rules and Corruption," CESifo Working Paper Series 416, CESifo Group Munich.
- Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido & Trebbi, Francesco, 2001. "Electoral Rules and Corruption," CEPR Discussion Papers 2741, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Jorge Streb & Daniel Lema & Gustavo Torrens, 2005.
"Discretional political budget cycles and separation of powers,"
CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo.
286, Universidad del CEMA.
- Jorge M. Streb & Daniel Lema & Gustavo Torrens, 2009. "Checks and Balances on Political Budget Cycles: Cross-Country Evidence," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 426-447, 08.
- repec:dgr:uvatin:20000085 is not listed on IDEAS
- Drazen, Allan & Eslava, Marcela, 2010. "Electoral manipulation via voter-friendly spending: Theory and evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 39-52, May.
- James E. Alt & David Dreyer Lassen, 2005. "The Political Budget Cycle is Where You Can't See It: Transparency and Fiscal Manipulation," EPRU Working Paper Series 05-03, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:voj:journl:v:55:y:2008:i:2:p:185-218. 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: (Ivana Horvat)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Ivana Horvat to update the entry or send us the correct address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.