Skip to main content

Provincial public expenditure in China: a tale of pro-cyclicality

Economic Change and Restructuring volume 52, pages 19–41 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

This paper examines the cyclicality of provincial expenditure in China during the period 1978–2013. Using panel data for analysis, it assesses whether provincial expenditure has been pro-cyclical. Pro-cyclicality is found to be a regular feature of provincial fiscal policy. This pro-cyclicality occurs both in times of low and high growth rates and has markedly intensified since 1994 with the increased autonomy of provinces. The paper further finds that the pro-cyclicality bias is mitigated when financial constraints are relaxed, the remaining political life of the governor is long, government efficiency is strong, corruption incidence is low, and governments are large.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Source Authors

Notes

  1. Difficulties in accessing capital markets during recessions often force governments in developing countries to refinance or repay debt, obliging them to embark on contractionary policies (Gavin and Perotti 1997; Caballero and Krishnamurthy 2004).

  2. Weak institutions encourage ineffective and often inappropriate spending of revenue windfalls, leaving countries with inadequate buffers to cope with adverse shocks (Tornell and Lane 1999; Talvi and Vegh 2005).

  3. Theoretical work by Christiano et al. (2011) clearly suggests that this shift in the cyclical properties of fiscal policy is welfare improving since the optimal fiscal policy in a stochastic model with sticky prices is countercycical.

  4. Rodden and Wibbels (2010) showed that procyclical fiscal policy among provincial governments offset the modest insurance against regional income shocks provided by central governments.

  5. With the 1994 reforms, the autonomy of provincial governments increased significantly. In 1994, China introduced a major tax and fiscal reform program known as the tax assignment system to replace the discretionary fiscal contract system. This new scheme recentralized much of the tax revenues. The upper-level governments have the decisive power over the fiscal schemes of their directly subordinate governments with little discretion of the central government (Jia et al. 2014). There are five hierarchical levels: Central, provincial, prefectural, county, and township. This fiscal reform was a milestone in China’s intergovernmental relations, and largely reshaped the incentives of local government in economic development. Changing the resource-sharing system was to the advantage of the provincial governments; and the Central government focused more on the coordination and implementation of national economic policies (Naughton and Yang 2010).

  6. Oversight from the central government certainly plays an important role, as emphasized by Xu (2011). Local officials are appointed by higher levels of government officials, and are evaluated by the central government based on a range of criteria. On the one hand, this system of appointment and promotion of provincial leaders serves as a powerful instrument for the national government to induce regional officials to follow the central government policies. On the other hand, the hierarchical administrative organization induces a shared authority, which is beneficial to the local governments.

  7. For instance, from 1992 to 2008, every president, every premier, every newly elected Politic Bureau Standing Committee member of the four CCP congresses during this period was promoted from a provincial position (Xu 2011).

  8. The ideal way to analyze the cyclicality of tax revenue is to focus on the cyclicality of tax rates because they are the true measures of the fiscal actions without the effect of automatic stabilizers (Kaminsky et al. 2005). A procyclical fiscal policy with respect to taxes is defined as increases in tax rates during recessions and reductions in tax rates during expansions (i.e., a negative correlation of tax rates with the business cycle). Unfortunately, there is no readily available data on conventional tax rates for Chinese provinces. Hence, we focus on the expenditure data which are less prone to the effect of automatic stabilizers.

  9. Results with alternative filters (Baxter-King, Christiano-Fitzgerald, and Hodrick-Prescott filters) are provided in the robustness section.

  10. However, controlling the time invariant factors can at most solve part of the omitted variables problem, as some omitted variables may be changing over time.

  11. The smoothing parameter σ is arbitrarily set to 5 because the results are qualitatively robust to slight changes in this parameter.

  12. The ideal control for the initial fiscal position is local public debt which has increased markedly in the recent period (Zhang and Barnett 2014; Ambrose et al. 2015; Ang et al. 2016).

  13. In 2003, provinces with the highest scores are Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Jiangsu, Jilin, Liaoning, Zhejiang and Heilongjiang, provinces that tend to be in eastern coastal regions or on China’s borders. In contrast, inland provinces, such as Shanxi, Jiangxi, Henan, Hunan, Guangxi, Chongqing, Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunan and Gansu, tend to have relatively lower efficiency scores.

  14. Simply by being numerous, instruments over fit the instrumented variables, failing to correct for their endogenous components and biasing the coefficient estimates toward those from non-incremental estimators. Therefore, the over-identification test is biased toward the null hypothesis of the validity of instruments. We found that the probability of the Hansen J-statistic test equals 1 in all cases.

  15. Results with classic filters are broadly unchanged. Estimates are available upon request.

  16. To ensure that endogeneity is not concern in the estimates, we also re-estimate Eq. (4) with one year lagged covariates. Our results remained unchanged. Results are available upon request.

References

  • Aghion P, Marinescu I (2008) Cyclical budgetary policy and economic growth: what do we learn from OECD panel data? In: Acemoglu D, Rogoff K, Woodford M (eds) NBER macroeconomics annual 2007, 22. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Campante FR, Tabellini G (2008) Why is fiscal policy often pro-cyclical? Journal of the European Economic Association 6(5):1006–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose B, Deng Y, Wu J (2015) Understanding the risk of China’s local government debts and its linkage with property markets, mimeo, National University of Singapore. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2557031

  • Ang A, Bai J, Zhou H (2016) The great wall of Debt: real estate, political risk, and Chinese local government credit spreads. Columbia Business School Research Paper No. 15–57. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2603022

  • Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58(2):277

  • Beck N, Katz JN (2011) Modeling dynamics in time-series-cross-section political economy data. Annu Rev Polit Sci 14:331–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birney M (2014) Decentralization and veiled corruption under China’s rule of mandates. World Dev 53:55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caballero RJ, Krishnamurthy A (2004) Fiscal policy and financial depth. NBER working papers No. 10532, National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Calderón C, Duncan R, Schmidt-Hebbel K (2004) Institutions and cyclical properties of macroeconomic policies. Central Bank of Chile Working Paper. 285, Santiago, Chile

  • Calderón C, Duncan R, Schmidt-Hebbel K (2012) Do good institutions promote counter-cyclical macroeconomic policies?. Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute Working Paper 118, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

  • Carmignani F, Laurenceson JS (2013) Provincial business cycles and fiscal policy in China. Econ Transit 21(2):323–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiano L, Eichenbaum M, Rebelo S (2011) When is the government spending multiplier large? J Polit Econ 119(1):78–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole M, Elliott R, Zhang J (2009) Corruption, governance and FDI location in China: a province-level analysis. Journal of Development Studies 45(9):1494–1512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyraud L, Lusinyan L (2013) Vertical fiscal imbalances and fiscal performance in advanced economies. Journal of Monetary Economics 60(5):571–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan G, Wang X, Zhu H (2010) NERI index of marketization of China’s Provinces—the report on the relative process of marketization of each region in China. Economics Science Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltenstein A, Iwata S (2005) Decentralization and macroeconomic performance in China: regional autonomy has its costs. J Dev Econ 76(2):481–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel JA, Végh CA, Vuletin G (2013) On graduation from fiscal pro-cyclicality. J Dev Econ 100(1):32–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavin M, Perotti R (1997) Fiscal policy in Latin America. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, vol 12. MIT Press, pp 11–72

  • Ilzetzki E, Végh CA (2008) Pro-cyclical fiscal policy in developing countries: truth or fiction?. NBER Working Papers No. 14191, National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Jia J, Guo Q, Zhang J (2014) Fiscal decentralization and local expenditure policy in China. China Econ Rev 28:107–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaminsky GL, Reinhart CM, Végh CA (2005) When it rains, it pours: pro-cyclical capital flows and macroeconomic policies. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 19:11–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane PR (2003) The cyclical behavior of fiscal policy: evidence from the OECD. Journal of Public Economics 87(12):2661–2675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Wu F (2012) The transformation of regional governance in China: the rescaling of statehood. Progress in Planning 78:55–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montinola G, Qian Y, Weingast BR (1995) Federalism, Chinese style: the political basis for economic success in China. World Polit 48:50–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naughton B, Yang DL (2010) Holding China together: introduction. In: Naughton BJ, Yang DL (eds) Holding China together: diversity and national integration in the post-Deng Era. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickell S (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica 49(6):1417–1426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodden J, Wibbels E (2010) Fiscal decentralization and the business cycle: an empirical study of seven federations. Econ Politics 22:37–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik D (1998) Why do more open economies have bigger governments? J Polit Econ 106(5):997–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roodman DM (2009) A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 71(1):135–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talvi E, Vegh CA (2005) Tax base variability and pro-cyclical fiscal policy in developing countries. J Dev Econ 78(1):156–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton J (2008) explaining pro-cyclical fiscal policy in African countries. Journal of African Economies 17(3):451–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornell A, Lane PR (1999) The voracity effect. Am Econ Rev 89(1):22–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Noord P (2000) The size and role of automatic fiscal stabilizers in the 1990s and Beyond. OECD Working Paper 230

  • Xu C (2011) The fundamental Institutions of China’s Reform and Development. Journal of Economic Literature 49(4):1076–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang YS, Barnett S (2014) Fiscal vulnerabilities and risks from local government finance in China. IMF Working Paper WP 14/4 (Washington: International Monetary Fund)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IDREC-CERDI, Université d’Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Jean-Louis Combes & Mary-Françoise Renard

  2. Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, USA

    Sampawende J.-A. Tapsoba

  3. Fondation pour les Etudes et Recherches sur le Développement International (Ferdi), Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Sampawende J.-A. Tapsoba

Authors
  1. Jean-Louis Combes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mary-Françoise Renard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sampawende J.-A. Tapsoba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sampawende J.-A. Tapsoba.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table 8.

Table 8 Cyclicality of provincial expenditure 1978–2013, Use of lagged output growth
Full size table

Appendix 2

See Table 9.

Table 9 Cyclicality of provincial expenditure, 1978–2013, alternative filters
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Combes, JL., Renard, MF. & Tapsoba, S.JA. Provincial public expenditure in China: a tale of pro-cyclicality. Econ Change Restruct 52, 19–41 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-017-9215-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-017-9215-4

Keywords

  • China
  • Fiscal cyclicality
  • Regional growth