Explaining public investment in Western Europe

Abstract

Budgetary consolidations are considered the obvious explanation for the decline in public investment that most Western European countries experienced over the past three decades.However, regressions based on budgetary variables tend to overpredict public investment during the post 1990-period, i.e., when the budgetary stress eased.We supplement the budgetary consolidation approach to public investment with ideas from behavioural economics to explain why these investments do not increase when additional budgetary resources are available. We use the peak/end evaluation procedure to capture the frustration of voters as cuts in government consumption expenditures accumulate. This 'memory-effect' of budgetary consolidations implies that voters recall the previous peak government consumption expenditures. They remain discontent as long as current expenditures are below the peak value. When the budgetary situation improves, policy makers will choose to increase government consumption because this is electorally more rewarding. Public investment will thus decline when budgetary consolidations are imposed and will remain constant when additional budgetary resources emerge.We test for a memory-effect by introducing expenditure gaps in public investment regressions. These gaps equal the difference between the highest previously observed primary government consumption to GDP ratio and the current ratio. The regression results for most EU-countries support ou r assumption.

The determinants of local public investments in Poland

“…investment spending is more preferred by right-wing governments. Vuchelen and Caekelbergh (2010) point out that there is no offsetting increase in public investments at the time of fiscal expansion. As they indicate, voters assess incumbents on the basis of the relation between a current and the highest historical value of current expenditures.…”

In Search of Fiscal Interactions: A Spatial Analysis ofChinese Provincial Infrastructure Spending

“…Public infrastructure spending can be influenced by a range of factors. These include budget constraints (Vuchelen and Caekelbergh, ), political‐economic factors such as fiscal stringency and frequent changes of government (De Haan et al, ), and some general economic and fiscal variables such as gross domestic product (GDP), output gap, long‐term interest rates, public debt (Bruce et al, ; Mehrotra and Välilä, ; Painter and Bae, ), and fiscal (revenue) decentralization (Kappeler et al, ). We argue that infrastructure investment can also be affected by politically motivated incumbents, as it can be used by local governors (at a provincial or city level) to achieve two goals.…”