IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Diferencias en el ingreso per cápita regional e infraestructura de transporte en México
[Differences in per capita regional income and transport infrastructure in Mexico]

  • Torres Preciado, Víctor Hugo
  • Polanco Gaytán, Mayrén
  • Manzanares Rivera, José Luis

El objetivo de esta investigación consiste en ofrecer una primera aproximación acerca de la relación entre la disparidad económica regional y la inversión pública en infraestructura de transporte en México. En este sentido, el estudio comparte la perspectiva agregada que predomina en el análisis propuesto por Aschauer (1989). Sin embargo, el marco analítico difiere parcialmente del propuesto por dicho autor. En particular, siguiendo la estrategia de Mankiw, Romer y Weil (1990), se extiende el modelo de Solow para incluir explícitamente la infraestructura de transporte en el análisis. Esto permitirá estimar el efecto de dicha infraestructura en el nivel de ingreso per cápita regional. Con este fin, se estima un modelo en panel de datos y se realizan pruebas para determinar la presencia de efectos fijos, esto permite abandonar el supuesto de niveles de tecnologías idénticas, y por tanto, controlar por diferencias regionales debido a efectos no observados. Los resultados sugieren que la inversión pública en infraestructura carretera y ferroviaria se ha asignado con criterios de equidad, al parecer, con la finalidad de disminuir la inequidad en la dotación de infraestructura de transporte entre estados y mejorar el nivel de vida de los estados económicamente más atrasados. Por su parte, la inversión en aeropuertos y puertos estaría siendo asignada con criterios de eficiencia, aunque debe reconocerse que en el caso de los puertos también intervienen factores geográficos. Sin embargo, el que la magnitud de los coeficientes negativos sobrepasen la magnitud de los coeficientes positivos sugiere que el criterio de equidad predomina sobre el criterio de eficiencia, de hecho, el coeficiente estimado para la inversión agregada en infraestructura de transporte en el modelo 3 parece corroborar esta situación. De manera particular, considerando que aproximadamente el 80% de la inversión en infraestructura de transporte se concentra en la red carretera y que el coeficiente estimado es comparativamente mayor que en el resto de componentes de infraestructura, resulta claro que la inversión en este tipo de infraestructura parece erigirse como uno de los principales instrumentos para aminorar la disparidad económica regional. This investigation aims to offer a first sight on the relationship between regional economic disparities and public investment in transport infrastructure in Mexico. This study shares the aggregate perspective that features the analysis by Aschauer (1989), but differs in that, following the strategy of Mankiw, Romer and Weil (1990), the Solow model is extended to explicitly include transport infrastructure in the analysis and allowing estimating its effects on per capita regional income. To this end, a panel data model with fixed effects is estimated, which permit to abandon the assumption of identical technology levels and therefore controlling by regional differences due to non-observed effects. Results suggest that public investment in road and railroad infrastructures has been assigned under equity criteria, with possibly the aim of reducing the unequal distribution of transport infrastructure among states and improving standard of livings. On the other hand, investment in airports and ports seems to be assigned under efficiency criteria, while it should be recognized that investment in ports is related to geographical factors. Magnitudes of positive signs overpass that of negative signs suggesting that equity criteria may be predominant over efficiency criteria. In particular, given that 80% of transport infrastructure investment is concentrated in road infrastructure and that its related estimated coefficient is higher than the coefficients for the rest of infrastructure components, it is clear that investment in road infrastructure seems to be a key instrument to reduce regional economic disparities.

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:
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 28081.

in new window

Date of creation: 2010/01
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:28081
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany

Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2459
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-992459
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. Aschauer, David Alan, 1989. "Is public expenditure productive?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 177-200, March.
  2. Francesco Caselli & Gerardo Esquivel & Fernando Lefort, 1997. "Reopening the Convergence Debate: A New Look at Cross-Country Growth Empirics," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 03, Central Bank of Chile.
  3. Shantayanan Devarajan & Vinaya Swaroop & Heng-fu Zou, 1993. "What do governments buy?," CEMA Working Papers 513, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
  4. Rodriguez-Oreggia, Eduardo & Rodriguez-Pose, Andres, 2004. "The Regional Returns of Public Investment Policies in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1545-1562, September.
  5. Russell D. Murphy & Andrew Feltenstein, 2001. "Private Costs and Public Infrastructure; The Mexican Case," IMF Working Papers 01/164, International Monetary Fund.
  6. Feltenstein, Andrew & Ha, Jiming, 1995. "The Role of Infrastructure in Mexican Economic Reform," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 9(2), pages 287-304, May.
  7. Miguel Ramirez, 2004. "Is public infrastructure spending productive in the Mexican case? A vector error correction analysis," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 159-178.
  8. Kormendi, Roger C, 1983. "Government Debt, Government Spending, and Private Sector Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(5), pages 994-1010, December.
  9. David Alan Aschauer, 1990. "Highway capacity and economic growth," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue Sep, pages 14-24.
  10. Nazrul Islam, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-1170.
  11. 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.
  12. Devarajan, Shantayanan & Swaroop, Vinaya & Heng-fu Zou, 1993. "What do governments buy? The composition of public spending and economic performance," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1082, The World Bank.
  13. Martin Feldstein, 1980. "Government Deficits and Aggregate Demand," NBER Working Papers 0435, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Alicia H. Munnell, 1992. "Policy Watch: Infrastructure Investment and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 189-198, Fall.
  15. Fan, Shenggen & Chan-Kang, Connie, 2004. "Road development, economic growth, and poverty reduction in China," DSGD discussion papers 12, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  16. Kessides, C., 1993. "The Contributions of Infrastructure to Economic Development, A review of Experience and Policy Implications," World Bank - Discussion Papers 213, World Bank.
  17. Uwe Deichmann & Marianne Fay & Jun Koo & Somik V. Lall, 2004. "Economic structure, productivity, and infrastructure quality in Southern Mexico," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 38(3), pages 361-385, 09.
  18. Aschauer, David Alan, 1985. "Fiscal Policy and Aggregate Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 117-27, March.
  19. Feltenstein, Andrew & Ha, Jiming, 1999. "An analysis of the optimal provision of public infrastructure: a computational model using Mexican data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 219-230, February.
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:pra:mprapa:28081. 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: (Joachim Winter)

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.