Abstract
AbstractDespite extensive econometric testing, the research literature has been unable to draw firm conclusions regarding the effect of economic globalization on government spending. This paper explores various dimensions of the wide variation in existing estimates of the globalization-spending relationship. By applying meta-analysis and meta-regression methods to a unique data set consisting of 1182 observations from 79 peer-reviewed articles, we find that the evidence rejects theoretical views predicting strong unidirectional effects of economic globalization on government spending. Once we account for publication selection bias, no evidence of a non-zero average empirical effect is found. More importantly, however, the type of government spending matters: while the results are consistent with the view that economic globalization exerts small-to-moderate downward pressure on government spending for social protection and welfare, other spending components are affected less significantly. The meta-regression analysis shows further that several factors influence the globalization-spending estimates reported in the literature, including the choice of the economic globalization indicator, details of the econometric specifications, and publication characteristics.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Sociology and Political Science
Reference68 articles.
1. Adam, A., & Kammas, P. (2007). Tax policies in a globalized world: Is it politics after all? Public Choice,133(3–4), 321–341.
2. Adam, A., Kammas, P., & Lagou, A. (2013). The effect of globalization on capital taxation: What have we learned after 20 years of empirical studies? Journal of Macroeconomics,35(1), 199–209.
3. Alesina, A., & Perotti, R. (1997). The welfare state and competitiveness. American Economic Review,87(5), 921–939.
4. Andrews, A., & Kasy, M. (2019). Identification of and correction for publication bias. American Economic Review,109(8), 2766–2794.
5. Belke, A. (2000). Partisan political business cycles in the German labour market? Empirical tests in the light of the Lucas-Critique. Public Choice,104(3–4), 225–283.
Cited by
35 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献