IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Revisiting the Stability and Growth Pact: grand design or internal adjustment?

  • Marco Buti
  • Sylvester Eijffinger
  • Daniele Franco

The Stability and Growth Pact is under fire. Problems have appeared in sticking to the rules. Proposals to reform the Pact or ditch it altogether abound. But is the Pact a flawed fiscal rule? Against established criteria for an ideal fiscal rule, its design and compliance mechanisms fare reasonably well. Where weaknesses are found, they tend to reflect trade-offs typical of supra-national arrangements. In the end, only a higher degree of fiscal integration would remove the inflexibility inherent in the recourse to predefined budgetary rules. This does not mean that the EU fiscal rules cannot be improved. However, given the existing degree of political integration in EMU, internal adjustment rather than attempting to re-design the rules from scratch appears a more suitable way to bring about progress. Redefining the medium term budgetary target, improving transparency, tackling the pro-cyclical fiscal bias in good times, moving towards non-partisan application of the rules and improving transparency in the data can achieve both stronger discipline and higher flexibility.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission in its series European Economy - Economic Papers with number 180.

in new window

Length: 34 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:euf:ecopap:0180
Contact details of provider: Postal: Coomunivcations Unit, B-1049 Bruxelles / Brussels
Fax: +32 2 298.08.23
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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. Easterly, William & Rebelo, Sergio, 1993. "Fiscal policy and economic growth: An empirical investigation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 417-458, December.
  2. Beetsma, R.M.W.J. & Bovenberg, A.L., 1995. "Monetary union without fiscal coordination may discipline policymakers," Discussion Paper 1995-59, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  3. Michael Kell, 2001. "An Assessment of Fiscal Rules in the United Kingdom," IMF Working Papers 01/91, International Monetary Fund.
  4. de la Fuente, Angel, 1997. "Fiscal Policy and Growth in the OECD," CEPR Discussion Papers 1755, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Eijffinger, S.C.W. & de Haan, J., 2000. "European Monetary and Fiscal Policy," Other publications TiSEM a056022b-c6b1-4c89-bcd5-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  6. Balassone, Fabrizio & Giordano, Raffaela, 2001. " Budget Deficits and Coalition Governments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 106(3-4), pages 327-49, March.
  7. Roubini, Nouriel & Sachs, Jeffrey D., 1989. "Political and economic determinants of budget deficits in the industrial democracies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 903-933, May.
  8. Poterba, James M., 1995. "Capital budgets, borrowing rules, and state capital spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 165-187, February.
  9. George Kopits & Steven A. Symansky, 1998. "Fiscal Policy Rules," IMF Occasional Papers 162, International Monetary Fund.
  10. repec:sae:niesru:v:174:y::i:1:p:92-104 is not listed on IDEAS
  11. Arnold, Ivo & Lemmen, Jan, 2001. "The Vulnerability of Banks to Government Default Risk in the EMU," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 101-25, Spring.
  12. Balassone, F. & Manacelli, D., 2000. "Emu Fiscal Rules: is There a Gap?," Papers 375, Banca Italia - Servizio di Studi.
  13. Buti, Marco & Sapir, André, 2001. "EMU in the Early Years: Differences and Credibility," CEPR Discussion Papers 2832, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  14. Knight, Brian & Levinson, Arik, 1999. "Rainy Day Funds and State Government Savings," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 52(n. 3), pages 459-72, September.
  15. de Haan, Jakob & Sturm, Jan-Egbert, 1997. "Political and economic determinants of OECD budget deficits and government expenditures: A reinvestigation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 739-750, December.
  16. Alberto Alesina & Ignazio Angeloni & Federico Etro, 2001. "The Political Economy of International Unions," NBER Working Papers 8645, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Buchanan, James M, 1997. " The Balanced Budget Amendment: Clarifying the Arguments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 90(1-4), pages 117-38, March.
  18. Alberto Alesina & Allan Drazen, 1989. "Why are Stabilizations Delayed?," NBER Working Papers 3053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Jakob Haan & Jan Sturm & Bernd Sikken, 1996. "Government capital formation: Explaining the decline," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 55-74, March.
  20. M. Buti & D. Franco & H. Ongena, 1997. "Budgetary Policies during Recessions - Retrospective Application of the "Stability and Growth Pact" to the Post-War Period," European Economy - Economic Papers 121, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
  21. George Kopits, 2001. "Fiscal Rules: Useful Policy Framework or Unnecessary Ornament?," IMF Working Papers 01/145, International Monetary Fund.
  22. Daniele Franco & Maria Rosaria Marino, 2002. "The Role of Forecasts in Social Security Policy," Giornale degli Economisti, GDE (Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia), Bocconi University, vol. 61(2), pages 215-265, December.
  23. Marco Buti & Gabriele Giudice, 2002. "Maastricht's Fiscal Rules at Ten: An Assessment," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 823-848, December.
  24. Volkerink, Bjorn & De Haan, Jakob, 2001. " Fragmented Government Effects on Fiscal Policy: New Evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 109(3-4), pages 221-42, December.
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:euf:ecopap:0180. 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: (ECFIN INFO)

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.