Advertisement

Elite interests and public spending: Evidence from Prussian cities

  • Florian M. HollenbachEmail author
Article

Abstract

When do economic and political elites demand investment in public goods and services? The prevailing view is that non-democratic governments engage in low levels of government spending and taxation, because elites have interests in low taxation. Non-democracies exhibit significant variation in levels of government spending; the causes of these discrepancies have thus far not been thoroughly examined. I argue that where elites own capital that is conducive to government spending, regimes make higher investments. I test this argument using newly collected data on government spending as well as political and economic characteristics of 110 cities in 19th century Prussia. Using both standard regression models and instrumental variable analysis, I show that the economic needs of the local elites drove local government decisions on public spending.

Keywords

Public spending Revenue Non-democracies Industrial demand Fiscal policy 

JEL Classification

H1 H41 H72 H75 I24 I25 I28 N13 O14 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I thank Joshua Alley for excellent research assistance. The paper has been presented at the Meeting of the European Political Science Association, Milan, Italy, June 2017. I thank Franziska Keller, the editor, three excellent reviewers, and participants at the Texas A&M Conference on Taxation, Revenue, and Fiscal Capacity for helpful comments on this project. All remaining errors are my own.

Supplementary material

11558_2019_9347_MOESM1_ESM.zip (1.2 mb)
(ZIP 1.21 MB)
11558_2019_9347_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (256 kb)
(PDF 255 KB)

References

  1. Acemoglu, D., Cantoni, D., Johnson, S., Robinson, J.A. (2011). The consequences of radical reform: the French revolution. American Economic Review, 101(7), 3286–3307.Google Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., Robinson, J.A. (2013). Democracy, redistribution and inequality. Working paper. Prepared for the handbook of income distribution. http://economics.mit.edu/files/9396, (Accessed November 27 2013).
  3. Angrist, J.D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ansell, B.W. (2008). Traders, teachers, and tyrants: democracy, globalization, and public investment in education. International Organization, 62(2), 289–322.Google Scholar
  5. Asch, K. (2005). IGME 5000: 1:5 million international geological map of Europe and adjacent areas. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe. https://www.bgr.de/karten/IGME5000/downloads.htm.
  6. Baum, M.A., & Lake, D.A. (2003). The political economy of growth: democracy and human capital. American Journal of Political Science, 47(2), 333–347.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, S., Cinnirella, F., Hornung, E., Wössmann, L. (2014). iPEHD - the ifo Prussian economic history database. Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 47(2), 57–66.Google Scholar
  8. Becker, S.O., Hornung, E., Wössmann, L. (2011a). Education and catch-up in the industrial revolution. American Economic Journal, 3(1), 92–126.Google Scholar
  9. Becker, S.O., Hornung, E., Wössmann, L. (2011b). Web Appendix to Becker/Hornung/Woessmann, Education and Catch-up in the Industrial Revolution. http://www.aeaweb.org/aej/mac/app/2010-0021_app.pdf, (Accessed March 23, 2014).
  10. Benabou, R. (2002). Tax and education policy in a heterogeneous-agent economy: what levels of redistribution maximize growth and efficiency? Econometrica, 70(2), 481–517.Google Scholar
  11. Betz, T., Cook, S.J., Hollenbach, F.M. (2018). Spatial interdependence and instrumental variable models. Political Science Research and Methods Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  12. Boix, C. (1998). Political parties, growth and equality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Boix, C., Miller, M., Rosato, S. (2013). A complete dataset of political regimes, 1800-2007. Comparative Political Studies, 46(12), 1523–1554.Google Scholar
  14. Boix, C., & Svolik, M. (2013). Institutions, commitment, and power-sharing in dictatorships. Journal of Politics 75(2):Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  15. Boix, C. (2003). Democracy and redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bourguignon, F., & Verdier, T. (2000). Oligarchy, democracy, inequality and growth. Journal of Development Economics, 62(2), 285–313.Google Scholar
  17. Brown, J.C. (1988). Coping with crisis? The diffusion of waterworks in late Nineteenth-Century German towns. The Journal of Economic History, 48(2), 307–318.Google Scholar
  18. Brown, J.C. (1989). Public reform for private gain? The case of investments in sanitary infrastructure: Germany 1880-1887. Urban Studies, 26(1), 2–12.Google Scholar
  19. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith, A., Siverson, R.M., Morrow, J.D. (2005). The logic of political survival. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Busemeyer, M.R. (2007). Determinants of public education spending in 21 OECD democracies, 1980-2001. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(4), 582–610.Google Scholar
  21. Cinnirella, F., & Hornung, E. (2016). Landownership concentration and the expansion of education. Journal of Development Economics, 121(Supplement C), 135–152.Google Scholar
  22. Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C.H., Lindberg, S.I., Skaaning, S.-E., Teorell, J., Altman, D., Bernhard, M., Steven Fish, M., Cornell, A., Dahlum, S., Gjerløw, H., Glynn, A., Hicken, A., Krusell, J., Lührmann, A., Marquardt, K.L., McMann, K., Mechkova, V., Medzihorsky, J., Olin, M., Paxton, P., Pemstein, D., Pernes, J., von Römer, J., Seim, B., Sigman, R., Staton, J., Stepanova, N., Sundström, A., Tzelgov, E., Wang, Y., Wig, T., Wilson, S., Ziblatt, D. (2018). V-dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v8 – Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. https://www.v-dem.net/en/data/data-version-8/ (Accessed October, 2018).
  23. Drukker, D.M., Prucha, I.R., Raciborski, R. (2013). Maximum likelihood and generalized spatial two-stage least-squares estimators for a spatial-autoregressive model with spatial-autoregressive disturbances. The Stata Journal, 13(2), 221–241.Google Scholar
  24. Drukker, D.M., Egger, P., Prucha, I.R. (2013). On two-step estimation of a spatial autoregressive model with autoregressive disturbances and endogenous regressors. Econometric Reviews, 32(5-6), 686– 733.Google Scholar
  25. Engerman, S., & Sokoloff, K.L. (2002). Factor endowments, inequality, and paths of development among new world economies. Economia, 3(1), 41–109.Google Scholar
  26. Escribà-Folch, A. (2009). Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation. Constitutional Political Economy, 20(1), 71–93.Google Scholar
  27. Fernihough, A., & O’Rourke, K.H. (2014). Coal and the European industrial revolution. University of Oxford: Discussion Papers in Economic and Social History. http://www.economics.ox.ac.uk/materials/papers/13183/Coal%20-%20ORouke%20124.pdf (Accessed February 2014).
  28. Galloway, P.R. (2007). Galloway Prussia database 1861 To 1914 www.patrickgalloway.com (Accessed May, 2014).
  29. Galor, O., & Moav, O. (2004). From physical to human capital accumulation: inequality and the process of development. Review of Economic Studies, 71(4), 1001–1026.Google Scholar
  30. Galor, O., & Moav, O. (2006). Das Human-Kapital: a theory of the demise of the class structure. Review of Economic Studies, 73(1), 85–117.Google Scholar
  31. Galor, O., Moav, O., Vollrath, D. (2009). Inequality in landownership, the emergence of human-capital promoting institutions, and the great divergence. The Review of Economic Studies, 76(1), 143–179.Google Scholar
  32. Gehlbach, S., & Keefer, P. (2011). Investment without democracy: ruling-party institutionalization and credible commitment in autocracies. Journal of Comparative Economics, 39(1), 123–139.Google Scholar
  33. Gift, T., & Wibbels, E. (2014). Reading, writing, and the regrettable status of education research in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 17, 291–312.Google Scholar
  34. Go, S., & Lindert, P.H. (2010). The uneven rise of american public schools to 1850. The Journal of Economic Historyi, 70(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  35. Gutberlet, T. (2013). Cheap coal versus market access: the role of natural resources and demand in Germany’s industrialization. Working paper. http://gutbet.wp.rpi.edu/files/2014/02/LocationChoice_PaperDec2013.pdf, (Accessed June 2014).
  36. Hallerberg, M. (2002). The political economy of taxation in Prussia, 1871-1914. Jahrbuch fü,r Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 2002(2), 11–33.Google Scholar
  37. Hollenbach, F.M. (2018). Autocracy, inequality and tax capacity: evidence from 19th century Prussia. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  38. Hühner, M. (1998). Kommunalfinanzen, Kommunalunternehmen und Kommunalpolitik im Deutschen Kaiserreich Muenster. Germany: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  39. Iversen, T., & Stephens, J.D. (2008). Partisan politics, the welfare state, and three worlds of human capital formation. Comparative Political Studies, 41(4/5), 600–637.Google Scholar
  40. Jaeger, H. (1967). Unternehmer in der Deutschen Politik (1890–1918). Germany: Ludwig Röhrscheid Verlag.Google Scholar
  41. Jensen, N., Malesky, E.J., Weymouth, S. (2013). Unbundling the relationship between authoritarian legislatures and political risk. British Journal of Political Science, 44(3), 655–684.Google Scholar
  42. Kourtellos, A., Stylianou, I., Tan, C.M. (2013). Failure to launch? The role of land inequality in transition delays. European Economic Review, 62, 98–113.Google Scholar
  43. Krabbe, W.R. (1985). Kommunalpolitik Und Industrialisierung Industrialisierung: Die Entfaltung Der Städtischen Leistungsverwaltung Im 19. Und Frühen 20 Jahrhundert. Fallstudien Zu Dortmund Und Münster. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer/Deutscher Gemeindeverlag.Google Scholar
  44. Lizzeri, A., & Persico, N. (2004). Why did the elites extend the suffrage? Democracy and the scope of government, with an application to britain’s age of reform. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(2), 707–765.Google Scholar
  45. Mares, I., & Queralt, D. (2015). The Non-Democratic origins of income taxation. Comparative Political Studies In Print:1–36.Google Scholar
  46. Mares, I., & Queralt, D. (2018). Fiscal innovation in nondemocratic regimes. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  47. Marshall, M.G., Gurr, T.R., Jaggers, K. (2016). Polity IV project: political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2015, Dataset Users’ Manual. Center for Systemic Peace.Google Scholar
  48. Mauro, P., Romeu, R., Binder, A., Zaman, A. (2015). A modern history of fiscal prudence and profligacy. Journal of Monetary Economics, 76, 55–70. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304393215000938.Google Scholar
  49. MPIDR. (1975). Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research CGG – Chair for Geodesy and Geoinformatics, University of Rostock. 2011. MPIDR Population History GIS Collection. Rostock, Germany. Partly based on Hubatsch and Klein. http://censusmosaic.org/web/data/historical-gis-files (Accessed February 2014).
  50. Mulligan, C.B., Gil, R., Sala-i Martin, X. (2004). Do democracies have different public policies than nondemocracies? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(1), 51–74.Google Scholar
  51. Oster, E. (2017). Unobservable selection and coefficient stability: theory and evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Statistics Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  52. Paglayan, A.S. (2017). Civil war, state consolidation, and the spread of mass education. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  53. Paglayan, A.S. (2018). Democracy and educational expansion: evidence from 200 years. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  54. Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2003). Economic effects of constitutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Pierenkemper, T., & Tilly, R.H. (2004). The German economy during the nineteenth century. New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  56. Pomeranz, K. (2002). Political economy and ecology on the eve of industrialization: Europe, China, and the global conjuncture. American Historical Review, 107(2), 425–446.Google Scholar
  57. Sala-i Martin, X., Doppelhofer, G., Miller, R.I. (2004). Determinants of long-term growth: a baysian averagin of classical estimates (BACE). The American Economic Review, 94(4), 813–835.Google Scholar
  58. Silbergleit, H. (1908). Preussens Städte: Denkschrift zum 100jährigen Jubiläum der Städteordnung vom 19. November 1808. Berlin: Carl Haymanns Verlag.Google Scholar
  59. Spoerer, M. (2004). Steuerlast, Steuerinzidenz und Steuerwettbewerb: Verteilungswirkung der Besteuerung in Preußen Württemberg (1815–1913). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
  60. Stasavage, D. (2005). Democracy and education spending in Africa. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 343–358.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00127.x.Google Scholar
  61. Thier, A. (1999). Steuergesetzgebung und verfassung in der konstitutionellen monarchie: staatssteuerreformen in Preussen, 1871-1893. vol 1 Frankfurt am Main. Germany: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
  62. Tilly, R. (1966). The political economy of public finance and the industrialization of Prussia, 1815-1866. The Journal of Economic History, 26(4), 484–497.Google Scholar
  63. Tilly, R.H. (1980). Kapital, staat und sozialer protest in der Deutschen industrialisierung: Gesammelte Aufsätze Goettingen. Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  64. Tilly, R.H. (1990). Sozialer protest in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert. GESIS Datenarchiv, Köln. ZA8040 Datenfile Version 1.0.0.  https://doi.org/10.4232/1.8040.
  65. Tilly, R.H. (1991). Germany. In: Patterns Of European Industrialization: The Nineteenth Century, ed. RIchard Sylla and Gianni Toniolo. London, UK: Routledge chapter 9, pp. 175–196.Google Scholar
  66. Tipton, F.B. (1996). Technology and industrial growth. In R. Chickering (Ed.) Imperial Germany: A Historiographical Companion (pp. 62–97). Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  67. Wittmütz, V. (2007). Die Preußische Elementarschule Im 19. Jahrhundert.Google Scholar
  68. World Bank Group. (2018). World Bank Data Bank 2018. https://data.worldbank.org/, (Accessed October 2, 2018).
  69. Wrigley, E.A. (2010). Energy and the english industrial revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Ziblatt, D. (2009). Shaping democratic practice and the causes of electoral fraud: the case of Nineteenth-Century Germany. American Political Science Review, 103(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  71. Ziblatt, D., & Blossom, J.C. (2011). Electoral district boundaries, Germany, 1890-1912. http://pelham.lib.harvard.edu:8080/opengeoportal/, (Accessed October 2018).

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations