Regional Heterogeneity of Government Expenditure Multipliers in Poland

• Autorzy: Piotr Krajewski , Katarzyna Piłat

Warianty tytułu

Regionalne zróżnicowanie mnożników wydatków rządowych w Polsce

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The study analyzes the regional heterogeneity of the impact of government expenditure on Polish voi-vodships. The aim of the paper is to estimate regional fi scal multipliers in Poland. The empirical re-search is based on the structural vector autoregression model with the identifi cation scheme proposed by Blanchard and Perotti. The estimations were carried out on the basis of quarterly data covering the period 2000Q1-2022Q4. The empirical results show that the regional eff ects of government expenditure are characterized by a high level of heterogeneity. The static fi scal multipliers range from 0.17 to 0.55, and the strongest impact of government expenditure on the level of employment occurs in the eastern voivodships of Poland. Thus, the results have important policy implications - the eastern Polish voivodships are among those with below-average economic development, so an expansive fi scal policy may contribute to reducing diff erences in economic development and enhance regional convergence in Poland. However, the empirical results also indicate that expansionary fi scal policy has the most permanent impact on the labor market in the Mazowieckie Voivodship, which is the richest Polish voivodship. It means that although expansionary fi scal policy in Poland, in the short term, is an eff ective tool of reducing inequalities in its regional economic development, in the long term, it may lead to an increase in disproportions between the economic development of the richest region and other Polish voivodships. (original abstract)

W badaniu poddano analizie regionalne zróżnicowanie wpływu wydatków rządowych na sytuację gospodarczą polskich województw. Celem artykułu jest oszacowanie regionalnych mnożników fiskalnych w Polsce. Badanie empiryczne opiera się na strukturalnym modelu autoregresji wektorowej ze schematem identyfikacji zaproponowanym przez Blancharda i Perottiego. Estymacje zostały przeprowadzone na podstawie danych kwartalnych obejmujących lata 2000-2022. Otrzymane wyniki ukazują, że regionalne efekty wydatków rządowych charakteryzują się wysokim poziomem heterogeniczności. Statyczne mnożniki fiskalne wahają się od 0,17 do 0,55, przy czym najsilniejszy wpływ wydatków rządowych na poziom zatrudnienia występuje we wschodnich województwach. Wyniki badania mają zatem istotne implikacje aplikacyjne - wschodnie województwa Polski należą do regionów o relatywnie niższym poziomie rozwoju gospodarczego, więc ekspansywna polityka fiskalna może przyczynić się do zwiększenia konwergencji regionalnej w Polsce. Wyniki empiryczne wskazują jednak również, że ekspansywna polityka fiskalna ma najtrwalszy wpływ na rynek pracy w województwie mazowieckim, czyli najbogatszym województwie. Oznacza to, że chociaż ekspansywna polityka fiskalna w Polsce w krótkim okresie jest skutecznym narzędziem zmniejszania nierówności regionalnych, to w długim okresie może prowadzić do wzrostu dysproporcji między rozwojem gospodarczym najbogatszego regionu a pozostałymi województwami. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Heterogeneous expectations; Government spending; Fiscal multiplier

PL

Oczekiwania heterogeniczne; Wydatki państwa; Mnożnik fiskalny

• Czasopismo: Barometr Regionalny
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: 20
• Numer: nr 1
• Strony: 7--16

Twórcy

autor

Piotr Krajewski

• University of Lodz, Poland

autor

Katarzyna Piłat

• University of Lodz, Poland

Bibliografia

• Afonso, A., J. Baxa, and M. Slavík. 2018. "Fiscal Developments and Financial Stress: a Thresh-old VA R Analysis." Empirical Economics 54 (2):395-423. doi: 10.1007/s00181-016-1210-5.
• Afonso, A., and F.S. Leal. 2019. "Fiscal Multipliers in the Eurozone: an S VA R Analysis." Applied Economics 51 (51):5577-5593. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2019.1616068.
• Andrés, J., J.E. Boscá, J. Ferri, and C. Fuentes-Albero. 2022. "Households' Balance Sheets and the Effect of Fiscal Policy." Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 54 (4):737-778. doi: 10.1111/jmcb.12902.
• Angelini, G., G. Caggiano, E. Castelnuovo, and L. Fanelli. 2023. "Are Fiscal Multipliers Estimated with Proxy-S VA Rs Robust?" Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 85 (1):95-122. doi: 10.1111/obes.12521.
• Auclert, A., B. Bardóczy, and M. Rognlie. 2023. "MPCs, MPEs, and Multipliers: a Trilemma for New Keynesian Models." The Review of Economics and Statistics 105 (3):700-712. doi: 10.1162/rest_a_01072.
• Auerbach, A.J., and Y. Gorodnichenko. 2012. "Measuring the Output Responses to Fiscal Policy." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 4 (2):1-27. doi: 10.1257/pol.4.2.1.
• Barnichon, R., D. Debortoli, and C. Matthes. 2021. "Understanding the Size of the Government Spending Multiplier: It's in the Sign." The Review of Economic Studies 89 (1):87-117. doi: 10.1093/restud/rdab029.
• Baum, A., and G.B. Koester. 2011. "The Impact of Fiscal Policy on Economic Activity over the Business Cycle - Evidence from a Threshold VA R Analysis." Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies (03):1-51.
• Blanchard, O., and R. Perotti. 2002. "An Empirical Characterization of the Dynamic Effects of Changes in Government Spending and Taxes on Output." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 (4):1329-1368.
• Boiciuc, I. 2015. "The Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks in Romania. A S VA R Approach." Procedia Economics and Finance 32:1131-1139. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01578-6.
• Brunila, A., M. Buti, and J.I. 'T Veld. 2003. "Fiscal Policy in Europe: How Effective Are Automatic Stabilisers?" Empirica 30 (1):1-24. doi: 10.1023/A:1022646912573.
• Caggiano, G., E. Castelnuovo, V. Colombo, and G. Nodari. 2015. "Estimating Fiscal Multipliers: News From a Non-Linear World." The Economic Journal 125 (584):746-776. doi: 10.1111/ecoj.12263.
• Cantore, C., and L.B. Freund. 2021. "Workers, Capitalists, and the Government: Fiscal Policy and Income (re)Distribution." Journal of Monetary Economics 119:58-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2021.01.004.
• Cerqua, A., and G. Pellegrini. 2020. "Local Multipliers at Work." Industrial and Corporate Change 29 (4):959-977. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtaa004.
• Christiano, L., M. Eichenbaum, and S. Rebelo. 2011. "When Is the Government Spending Multiplier Large?" Journal of Political Economy 119 (1):78-121. doi: 10.1086/659312.
• Coenen, G., and R. Straub. 2005. "Does Government Spending Crowd in Private Consumption? Theory and Empirical Evidence for the Euro Area." International Finance 8 (3):435 -470. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2362.2005.00166.x.
• Davis, S.J., P. Loungani, and R. Mahidhara. 1997. "Regional Labor Fluctuations: Oil Shocks, Military Spending, and Other Driving Forces." International Finance Discussion Papers (578):1- 61.de
• Castro, F., and P. Hernández de Cos. 2008. "The Economic Effects of Fiscal Policy: the Case of Spain." Journal of Macroeconomics 30 (3):1005-1028. doi: 10.1016/j.jmacro.2007.08.009.
• Deleidi, M., D. Romaniello, and F. Tosi. 2021. "Quantifying Fiscal Multipliers in Italy: a Panel S VA R Analysis Using Regional Data." Papers in Regional Science 100 (5):1158-1177. doi: 10.1111/pirs.12620.
• Eggertsson, G.B. 2008. Can Tax Cuts Deepen Recessions? [draft]. Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
• Eggertsson, G.B., and P. Krugman. 2012. "Debt, Deleveraging, and the Liquidity Trap: a Fisher-Minsky-Koo Approach." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (3):1469-1513. doi: 10.10 93/q je/q js023.
• Erceg, C., and J. Lindé. 2014. "Is There a Fiscal Free Lunch in a Liquidity Trap?" Journal of the European Economic Association 12 (1):73-107. doi: 10.1111/jeea.12059.
• Fatas, A., and I. Mihov. 2001. "The Effects of Fiscal Policy on Consumption and Employment: Theory and Evidence." CEPR Discussion Paper (2760).
• Favero, C., and F. Giavazzi. 2012. "Measuring Tax Multipliers: the Narrative Method in Fiscal VA Rs." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 4 (2):69-94. doi: 10.1257/pol.4.2.69.
• Fishback, P.V., and V. Kachanovskaya. 2010. "In Search of the Multiplier for Federal Spending in the States During the Great Depression." NBER Working Paper (16561). doi: 10.3386/w16561.
• Grdović Gnip, A. 2014. "The Power of Fiscal Multipliers in Croatia." Financial Theory and Practice 38 (2):173-219. doi: 10.3326/fintp.38.2.3.
• Hansen, G.D. 1985. "Indivisible Labor and the Business Cycle." Journal of Monetary Economics 16 (3):309-327. doi: 10.1016/0304-3932(85)90039-X.
• Heppke-Falk, K.H., J. Tenhofen, and G.B. Wolff. 2006. "The Macroeconomic Effects of Exogenous Fiscal Policy Shocks in Germany: a Disaggregated S VA R Analysis." Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies (41):1- 46.
• Hooker, M.A., and M.M. Knetter. 1997. "The Effects of Military Spending on Economic Activity: Evidence from State Procurement Spending." Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 29 (3):400-421.
• Ilzetzki, E., E.G. Mendoza, and C.A. Végh. 2013. "How Big (Small?) Are Fiscal Multipliers?" Journal of Monetary Economics 60 (2):239-254. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2012.10.011.
• Jones, C., V. Midrigan, and T. Philippon. 2022. "Household Leverage and the Recession." Econometrica 90 (5):2471-2505. doi: 10.3982/ECTA16455.
• Klein, M., H. Polattimur, and R. Winkler. 2022. "Fiscal Spending Multipliers over the Household Leverage Cycle." European Economic Review 141:103989. doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103989.
• Klein, M., and R. Winkler. 2021. "The Government Spending Multiplier at the Zero Lower Bound: International Evidence from Historical Data." Journal of Applied Econometrics 36 (6):744-759. doi: 10.1002/jae.2835.
• Kydland, F.E., and E.C. Prescott. 1982. "Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations." Econometrica 50 (6):1345-1370. doi: 10.2307/1913386.
• Leeper, E.M., T.B. Walker, and S.-C.S. Yang. 2008. "Fiscal Foresight: Analytics and Econometrics." NBER Working Paper (14028).
• Martínez-López, D. 2005. "Fiscal Policy and Growth: the Case of Spanish Regions." Economic Issues 10, Part 1:9-24.
• Matarrese, M.M., and F. Frangiamore. 2023. "Italian Local Fiscal Multipliers: Evidence from Proxy-S VA R." Economics Letters 228:111185. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111185.
• Mountford, A., and H. Uhlig. 2009. "What Are the Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks?" Journal of Applied Econometrics 24 (6):960-992. doi: 10.1002/jae.1079.
• Nakamura, E., and J. Steinsson. 2014. "Fiscal Stimulus in a Monetary Union: Evidence from US Regions." American Economic Review 104 (3):753-792. doi: 10.1257/aer.104.3.753.
• Olivier, C., and M. Takongmo. 2017. "Government-Spending Multipliers and the Zero Lower Bound in an Open Economy." Review of International Economics 25 (5):1046-1077.
• Owyang, M.T., and S. Zubairy. 2013. "Who Benefits from Increased Government Spending? A State-Level Analysis." Regional Science and Urban Economics 43 (3):445-464. doi: 10.1016/ j.regsciurbeco.2013.02.005.
• Pappa, E. 2009. "The Effects of Fiscal Shocks on Employment and the Real Wage." International Economic Review 50 (1):217-24 4.
• Perotti, R. 2008. "In Search of the Transmission Mechanism of Fiscal Policy." In NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2007, edited by D. Acemoglu, K. Rogoff, and M. Woodford, 169-226 (249). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Ramey, V.A. 2011. "Identifying Government Spending Shocks: It's all in the Timing." The Quar-terly Journal of Economics 126 (1):1-50. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjq008.
• Ramey, V.A., and M.D. Shapiro. 1998. "Costly Capital Reallocation and the Effects of Gov-ernment Spending." Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 48:145-194. doi: 10.1016/S0167-2231(98)00020-7.
• Sims, C.A., J.H. Stock, and M.W. Watson. 1990. "Inference in Linear Time Series Models with Some Unit Roots." Econometrica 58 (1):113 - 4 4.
• Suárez Serrato, J.C., and P. Wingender. 2016. "Estimating Local Fiscal Multipliers." NBERWorking Paper (22425).

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.56583/br.2229