IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ekd/009007/9358.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regional Growth and Convergence in Spain: Is the Decentralization Model Important?

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Usabiaga
  • E. Macarena Hernández-Salmerón

Abstract

This work is rooted on the analysis of growth and convergence at the regional level in Spain. Our contribution to that field is concentrated on the period 1980-2014, period characterized by a weak narrowing of the income per capita gap within regions. Several factors could explain that result. We focus our attention on the role of the political decentralization process in Spain, which actually began in the early eighties, on regional economic growth, a controversial and yet not enough studied issue. In Spain there are different models of decentralization, and even for each model, the different regions involved could follow different speeds gaining new administrative roles. Our econometric methodology is based on the system Generalized Method of Moments estimator. After using a general Mankiw-Romer-Weil approach, which fits well the Spanish data, our empirical work will implement other augmented growth regressions, which allow including a large set of explanatory variables. For such purpose, we try specifications with different proxies for the decentralization variable, as well as interactions with other variables that we think are linked to it, to capture the whole effect of decentralization. To sum up, our results, reinforced by several robustness exercises, are not conclusive on the relevance and sign of the effect of the decentralization path followed by the Spanish regions on growth and convergence, and points out to the importance of alternative factors. This result can contribute to the current debate in Spain on these topics. Several panel data analyses implemented with Stata. This work is rooted on the analysis of growth and convergence at the regional level in Spain. Our contribution to that field is concentrated on the period 1980-2014, period characterized by a weak narrowing of the income per capita gap within the territory. Several factors could explain that result. We focus our attention on the role of the political decentralization process in Spain, which actually began in the early eighties, on regional economic growth, a controversial and yet not enough studied issue. In Spain there are different models of decentralization, and even for each model, the different regions (Comunidades Autónomas) involved could follow different speeds gaining new administrative roles. Our econometric methodology is based on several panel data techniques implemented with Stata. Using a general Mankiw-Romer-Weil (MRW, 1992) approach, which fits well the Spanish data, our empirical work includes the decentralization variable as an additional regressor in the growth equation. For such purpose, we try specifications with different proxies for the decentralization variable, as well as interactions with other variables that we think are linked to it, to capture the whole effect of descentralization. To sum up, our results, reinforced by several robustness exercises, are not conclusive on the relevance and sign of the effect of the decentralization path followed by the Spanish regions on growth and convergence, and points out to the importance of other factors. This result can contribute to the current strong debate in Spain on these topics.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Usabiaga & E. Macarena Hernández-Salmerón, 2016. "Regional Growth and Convergence in Spain: Is the Decentralization Model Important?," EcoMod2016 9358, EcoMod.
  • Handle: RePEc:ekd:009007:9358
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ecomod.net/system/files/Usabiaga%20andHernandez-Salmeron.%20EcoMod.%202016.%20Regional%20Growth%20....pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramiro Gil-Serrate & Julio López-Laborda & Jesús Mur, 2011. "Revenue Autonomy and Regional Growth: An Analysis of the 25-Year Process of Fiscal Decentralisation in Spain," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(11), pages 2626-2648, November.
    2. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    3. Stephen Bond & Anke Hoeffler & Jonathan Temple, 2001. "GMM Estimation of Empirical Growth Models," Economics Papers 2001-W21, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    4. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Agnese Sacchi, 2017. "The Impact Of Fiscal Decentralization: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1095-1129, September.
    5. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    6. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Roberto Ezcurra, 2011. "Is fiscal decentralization harmful for economic growth? Evidence from the OECD countries," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 619-643, July.
    7. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
    8. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Newey, Whitney & Rosen, Harvey S, 1989. "The Revenues-Expenditures Nexus: Evidence from Local Government Data," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 30(2), pages 415-429, May.
    9. Jorge Martínez Vázquez & Robert M. McNab, 2006. "Fiscal decentralization, macrostability and growth," Hacienda Pública Española, IEF, vol. 179(4), pages 25-49, September.
    10. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Anne Krøijer, 2009. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in Central and Eastern Europe," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 387-417.
    11. Durlauf, Steven N. & Johnson, Paul A. & Temple, Jonathan R.W., 2005. "Growth Econometrics," Handbook of Economic Growth,in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 555-677 Elsevier.
    12. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    13. Jonathan Temple, 2005. "Dual Economy Models: A Primer For Growth Economists," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 73(4), pages 435-478, July.
    14. Qiao, Baoyun & Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge & Xu, Yongsheng, 2008. "The tradeoff between growth and equity in decentralization policy: China's experience," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 112-128, April.
    15. Braumoeller, Bear F., 2004. "Hypothesis Testing and Multiplicative Interaction Terms," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(04), pages 807-820, October.
    16. Oates, Wallace E, 1985. "Searching for Leviathan: An Empirical Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 748-757, September.
    17. Ramiro Gil-Serrate & Julio Lopez-Laborda, 2006. "Revenue Decentralisation and Economic Growth in the Spanish Autonomous Communities," ERSA conference papers ersa06p214, European Regional Science Association.
    18. Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre & Marta Espasa & Toni Mora, 2008. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in Spain," Public Finance Review, , vol. 36(2), pages 194-218, March.
    19. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    20. Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge & McNab, Robert M., 2003. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 1597-1616, September.
    21. Robert J. Barro, 1991. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 407-443.
    22. Frank Castles, 1999. "Decentralization and the Post-War Political Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 399, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    23. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1992. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 407-437.
    24. Jin, Hehui & Qian, Yingyi & Weingast, Barry R., 2005. "Regional decentralization and fiscal incentives: Federalism, Chinese style," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(9-10), pages 1719-1742, September.
    25. Xie, Danyang & Zou, Heng-fu & Davoodi, Hamid, 1999. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in the United States," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 228-239, March.
    26. Davoodi, Hamid & Zou, Heng-fu, 1998. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Study," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 244-257, March.
    27. Roberto Ezcurra & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2013. "Political Decentralization, Economic Growth and Regional Disparities in the OECD," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 388-401, March.
    28. David Roodman, 2009. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(1), pages 135-158, February.
    29. Ulrich Thießen, 2003. "Fiscal Decentralisation and Economic Growth in High-Income OECD Countries," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 24(3), pages 237-274, September.
    30. Stephen Bond & Anke Hoeffler, 2001. "GMM Estimation of Empirical Growth Models," Economics Series Working Papers 2001-W21, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    31. Zhang, Tao & Zou, Heng-fu, 1998. "Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 221-240, February.
    32. Thornton, John, 2007. "Fiscal decentralization and economic growth reconsidered," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 64-70, January.
    33. Marcelo Soto, 2009. "System GMM Estimation With A Small Sample," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 780.09, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    34. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Lars P. Feld, 2013. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in OECD Countries," Public Finance Review, , vol. 41(4), pages 421-445, July.
    35. Ravi Kanbur & Xiaobo Zhang, 2005. "Fifty Years of Regional Inequality in China: a Journey Through Central Planning, Reform, and Openness," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 87-106, February.
    36. Stegarescu, Dan & Büttner, Thiess & Behnisch, Alexej, 2002. "Public Sector Centralization and Productivity Growth: Reviewing the German Experience," ZEW Discussion Papers 02-03, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    37. Fritz Breuss & Markus Eller, 2004. "Decentralising the public sector: Fiscal Decentralisation and Economic Growth: Is there Really a Link?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 2(1), pages 3-9, October.
    38. Schakel, Arjan H., 2008. "Validation of the Regional Authority Index," MPRA Paper 8972, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    39. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(01), pages 63-82, December.
    40. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Lars P. Feld & Jan Schnellenbach, 2016. "Fiscal Federalism, Decentralization, And Economic Growth: A Meta-Analysis," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(3), pages 1445-1463, July.
    41. Caselli, Francesco & Esquivel, Gerardo & Lefort, Fernando, 1996. "Reopening the Convergence Debate: A New Look at Cross-Country Growth Empirics," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 363-389, September.
    42. Nickell, Stephen J, 1981. "Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1417-1426, November.
    43. Bowsher, Clive G., 2002. "On testing overidentifying restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 211-220, October.
    44. Jonathan Temple, 1999. "The New Growth Evidence," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 112-156, March.
    45. Angel De la Fuente, 2016. "Series enlazadas de Contabilidad Regional para Espana (1980-2014)," Working Papers 16/06, BBVA Bank, Economic Research Department.
    46. Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1994. "Cross-sectional regressions and the empirics of economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 739-747, April.
    47. Jonathan R. W. Temple, 2005. "Growth and Wage Inequality in a Dual Economy," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 145-169, April.
    48. Hoeffler, Anke E, 2002. " The Augmented Solow Model and the African Growth Debate," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 64(2), pages 135-158, May.
    49. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    50. Nobuo Akai & Yukihiro Nishimura & Masayo Sakata, 2007. "Complementarity, fiscal decentralization and economic growth," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 339-362, September.
    51. Nazrul Islam, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-1170.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Spain; Growth; Regional modeling;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ekd:009007:9358. 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: (Theresa Leary). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ecomoea.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.