IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Business Subsidies and Bureaucratic Behaviour


  • Venetoklis, Takis


The study attempts to apply William Niskanen's (1971) theory of budget maximising bureaucrats to the business subsidies policy implemented in Finland, by one of the major distributor of subsidies to firms, the ministry of Trade and Industry (KTM). The empirical analysis is based on records of 15 300 firms applying for aid through the KTM regional offices during 1995-1999 and on the budgeted appropriations given to the KTM between 1989 and 2000. In testing Niskanen's theory we examine whether its four assumptions are relevant and applicable within the context of the KTM?s business subsidies policy. First, information asymmetry is found to exist between the KTM and its sponsor (the ministry of Finance VM). Second, bilateral monopoly is also evident between the two parties. Third, the VM does not seem to play a passive role during the budget negotiations with the KTM, as Niskanen assumed. The fourth assumption - the budget maximising bureaucrat - is tested by examining (a) the strategies of the KTM bureaucrats in attempting to maximise their bureau's budget and (b) the success in their budget maximisation efforts. Looking at the budget maximisation strategies, our analysis shows that the bureaucrats? request for funds is not based on the previous year's appropriations, as initially hypothesised. However, we find strong evidence suggesting that bureaucrats attempt to get rid of unallocated funds before year's end in order to avoid receiving less the following years. Finally, our logistic regression analysis indicates that bureaucrats pursue a "creaming" policy where only firms that have better chances of success, receive more subsidies. That way, they can reduce the chances of the policy not achieving its goals, thus avoid the risk of having later deductions in the program's budget. In testing the success of the bureaucrats? budget maximisation efforts, we note that, despite that subsidy appropriations have fluctuated during the examined period, administrative expenses (including salaries) have stayed flat or grown to some degree. Although this is not a causal finding, it suggests that bureaucrats have succeeded in - at least - safeguarding the appropriations which are of major importance to them. Among others, the study recommends that direct subsidies to firms should be reduced further, and be substituted by advanced advisory services, subsidised loans and forgivable loans.

Suggested Citation

  • Venetoklis, Takis, 2001. "Business Subsidies and Bureaucratic Behaviour," Research Reports 79, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:fer:resrep:79

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Thomas McGuire, 1981. "Budget-maximizing governmental agencies: An empirical test," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 313-322, January.
    2. repec:cup:apsrev:v:77:y:1983:i:02:p:297-322_24 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bhagwati, Jagdish N, 1982. "Directly Unproductive, Profit-seeking (DUP) Activities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 988-1002, October.
    4. William G. Gale, 1990. "Collateral, Rationing, and Government Intervention in Credit Markets," NBER Chapters,in: Asymmetric Information, Corporate Finance, and Investment, pages 43-62 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Tollison, Robert D, 1982. "Rent Seeking: A Survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 575-602.
    6. Venetoklis, Takis, 1999. "Process Evaluation of Business Subsidies in Finland. A Quantitative Approach," Research Reports 58, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola, 2001. "Grant Assistance and Small Firm Development in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(1), pages 99-117, February.
    8. Benedict J. Clements & Hugo Rodríguez & Gerd Schwartz, 1998. "Economic Determinants of Government Subsidies," IMF Working Papers 98/166, International Monetary Fund.
    9. Otto Davis & M. Dempster & Aaron Wildavsky, 1966. "On the process of budgeting: An empirical study of congressional appropriation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 63-132, December.
    10. P. J. A. Robson & R. J. Bennett, 2000. "The use and impact of business advice by SMEs in Britain: an empirical assessment using logit and ordered logit models," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1675-1688.
    11. Niskanen, William A, 1975. "Bureaucrats and Politicians," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 617-643, December.
    12. Gerd Schwartz & Réjane Hugounenq & Benedict J. Clements, 1995. "Government Subsidies; Concepts, International Trends, and Reform Options," IMF Working Papers 95/91, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Järviö, Maija-Liisa & Luoma, Kalevi & Räty, Tarmo & Aaltonen, Juho, 2005. "Productivity and its Drivers in Finnish Primary Care 1988-2003," Research Reports 118, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Aki Kangasharju, 2007. "Do Wage Subsidies Increase Employment in Subsidized Firms?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(293), pages 51-67, February.
    3. Ruotoistenmäki, Riikka & Babykina, Evgenia, 2002. "The Actors and the Financial Affairs of the Northern Dimension," Research Reports 86, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Luoma, Kalevi & Räty, Tarmo & Mäkinen, Erkki & Vaarama, Marja, 2003. "The Factors Affecting the Use of Elderly Care and the Need for Resources by 2030 in Finland," Research Reports 99, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Venetoklis, Takis, 2002. "Public Policy Evaluation: Introduction to Quantitative Methodologies," Research Reports 90, VATT Institute for Economic Research.


    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:fer:resrep:79. 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: (Anita Niskanen). General contact details of provider: .

    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.