IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Growth in the Real Size of Government Since 1970

From at least 1893 economists have viewed income as an important determinant of government size and the hypothesis that government size increases with income is now enshrined in the literature as Wagner’s Law. More recently, however, public choice economists and growth theorists have tended to reverse that causality by questioning whether government size is a constraint on (or promulgator of) economic growth. Typically, increases in government size arising from increased consumption are viewed as constraints on growth, while increases in size that arise from government investment are viewed as positive in their effect on growth. In this paper we are concerned with the two-way interrelationship between government size and income growth highlighted by these separate literatures and investigate this relationship in three distinct stages. In the first part of the paper we set out what has actually happened to the real size of government for twenty OECD countries over the period since 1970 and survey some of the newer factors and approaches used to explain its more recent evolution. The second part re-estimates the parameters of the demand curve for government allows us to speculate whether the changing pattern of government growth represents a break in the structure of the model determining government size or, more simply, represents a change in the variation of the underlying variables. We find that the same model works at least as well as it did in earlier periods with coefficients that are close to their earlier estimates. We follow this by estimating a simple growth model that highlights the size of government consumption in relation to income and output growth for the same countries over the same time period. Increases in size do appear to constrain economic growth. The third part of our paper recognizes that while each of the two causal relationships has received considerable attention in their own right, less attention has been given to effecting a separation of their co-mingled effects. To do so, we estimate the two relationships simultaneously in the context of our panel. This allows us assess whether ignoring the simultaneity of the two-way relationship seriously biases the measure of either the income effect (in determining government size) and/or the measure of government’s effect on economic growth when each are estimated separately. While our discussion suggests that single equation estimates of the income elasticity in Wagner’s Law may have been biased upwards (in absolute terms) and the constraining effect of government size on growth biased downwards, our three stage estimates finds only modest support in the data. The paper concludes by exploring the interrelationship between government size and government regulation. In particular, we test the hypothesis that the appearance of slower growth in government side is due to the increased substitution of indirect control of private production for direct governmental output. On cross sectional data, we find the opposite. In our sample, larger government size is associated with more rather than less regulation.

If 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.

File URL: http://www1.carleton.ca/economics/research/working-papers/carleton-economic-papers-cep-2001-2010
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Carleton University, Department of Economics in its series Carleton Economic Papers with number 01-06.

as
in new window

Length: 35 pages
Date of creation: 01 Sep 2001
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published: Revised version in Kluwer Handbook in Public Finance, ed. Juergen Backhaus and Richard Wagner, Kluwer Academic Press, 2004, pp. 77–108
Handle: RePEc:car:carecp:01-06
Contact details of provider: Postal: C870 Loeb Building, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa Ontario, K1S 5B6 Canada
Phone: 613-520-3744
Fax: 613-520-3906

Order Information: Email:


References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Gandhi, Ved P, 1971. "Wagner's Law of Public Expenditure: Do Recent Cross-Section Studies Confirm it?," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 26(1), pages 44-56.
  2. James Enelow & Melvin Hinich, 1989. "A general probabilistic spatial theory of elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 101-113, May.
  3. Peltzman, Sam, 1980. "The Growth of Government," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 209-87, October.
  4. Alan T. Peacock & Jack Wiseman, 1979. "Approaches To the Analysis of Government Expenditure Growth," Public Finance Review, , vol. 7(1), pages 3-23, January.
  5. Fölster, Stefan & Henrekson, Magnus, 1997. "Growth and the Public Sector: A Critique of the Critics," Working Paper Series 492, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 10 Jun 1998.
  6. Kormendi, Roger C. & Meguire, Philip G., 1985. "Macroeconomic determinants of growth: Cross-country evidence," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 141-163, September.
  7. Alberto F. Ades & Edward L. Glaeser, 1999. "Evidence On Growth, Increasing Returns, And The Extent Of The Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(3), pages 1025-1045, August.
  8. Karras, Georgios, 1993. "Employment and Output Effects of Government Spending: Is Government Size Important?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 354-69, July.
  9. Barro, Robert J, 1990. "Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages S103-26, October.
  10. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1990. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 3541, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Coughlin, Peter & Nitzan, Shmuel, 1981. "Electoral outcomes with probabilistic voting and Nash social welfare maxima," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 113-121, February.
  12. Barro, Robert J, 1981. "Output Effects of Government Purchases," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(6), pages 1086-1121, December.
  13. James E. Rauch & Diana Weinhold, 1999. "Openness, Specialization, and Productivity Growth in Less Developed Countries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(4), pages 1009-1027, August.
  14. Beck, Morris, 1979. "Public Sector Growth: A Real Perspective," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 34(3), pages 313-56.
  15. Kristov, L. & Lindert, P. & Mcclelland, R., 1990. "Pressure Groups And Redistribution," Papers 66, California Davis - Institute of Governmental Affairs.
  16. Friedrich Schneider, 2000. "The Increase of the Size of the Shadow Economy of 18 OECD Countries: Some Preliminary Explanations," CESifo Working Paper Series 306, CESifo Group Munich.
  17. Payne, James E & Ewing, Bradley T, 1996. "International Evidence on Wagner's Hypothesis: A Cointegration Analysis," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 51(2), pages 258-74.
  18. Ganti, Subrahmanyam & Kolluri, Bharat R, 1979. "Wagner's Law of Public Expenditures: Some Efficient Results for the United States," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 34(2), pages 225-33.
  19. Bohl, Martin T, 1996. "Some International Evidence on Wagner's Law," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 51(2), pages 185-200.
  20. Bird, Richard M, 1971. "Wagner's o Law' of Expanding State Activity," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 26(1), pages 1-26.
  21. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 997-1032, October.
  22. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 2000. "Endogenous growth in a cross-section of countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 335-362, August.
  23. Zak, Paul J & Knack, Stephen, 2001. "Trust and Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 295-321, April.
  24. 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 914-27, October.
  25. Baumol, William J, 1972. "Macroeconomics of Unbalanced Growth: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 150, March.
  26. Peacock, Alan & Scott, Alex, 2000. " The Curious Attraction of Wagner's Law," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 102(1-2), pages 1-17, January.
  27. Borcherding, Thomas E & Deacon, Robert T, 1972. "The Demand for the Services of Non-Federal Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 891-901, December.
  28. Ram, Rati, 1986. "Causality between Income and Government Expenditure: A Broad International Perspective," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 41(3), pages 393-414.
  29. Islam, Nazrul, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-70, November.
  30. Bergstrom, Theodore C & Goodman, Robert P, 1973. "Private Demands for Public Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 280-96, June.
  31. Henrekson, Magnus, 1993. "Wagner's Law--A Spurious Relationship?," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 48(3), pages 406-15.
  32. Granger, C. W. J. & Newbold, P., 1974. "Spurious regressions in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 111-120, July.
  33. James Kau & Paul Rubin, 1981. "The size of government," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 261-274, January.
  34. Magnus Henrekson & Johan Lybeck, 1988. "Explaining the growth of government in Sweden: A disequilibrium approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 213-232, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:car:carecp:01-06. 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: (Sabrina Robineau)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.