Skip to main content
Log in

Government growth in the twenty-first century

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public choice explanations of government growth fall into three main categories: budget-maximization theories, rational-choice models, and path-dependent models like the “ratchet hypothesis”. The strengths and weaknesses of these theories as explanations for government growth are considered along with some facts about the actual growth of government to conjecture about its trajectory in the twenty-first century. Government size seems to have been constrained in the past primarily by its ability to raise revenue. Growth rates in the new century thus appear to depend on factors constraining government’s ability to continue to expand the tax base.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barlow, R. (1970). Efficiency aspects of local school finance. Journal of Political Economy, 78(5), 1028–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. J. (1967). Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: The anatomy of urban crisis. American Economic Review, 57(3), 415–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1983). A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98(3), 371–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S., & Mulligan, C. B. (2003). Deadweight costs and the size of government. Journal of Law and Economics, 46(2), 293–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, T. C., & Goodman, R. (1973). Private demand for public goods. American Economic Review, 63(3), 280–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borcherding, T. E. (Ed.). (1977). Budgets and Bureaucrats: The Sources of Government Growth. Duke University Press: Durham, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borcherding, T. E., & Deacon, R. T. (1972). The demand for services of non-federal governments. American Economic Review, 62(5), 891–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (1980). The Power to Tax: Analytical Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, G., & Lomasky, L. (1993). Democracy and Decision: The Pure Theory of Electoral Preference. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M., & Lee, D. R. (1982). Politics, time, and the laffer curve. Journal of Political Economy, 90(4), 816–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M., & Wagner, R. E. (1977). Democracy in Deficit: The Political Legacy of Lord Keynes. Academic Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith, A., Siverson, R. M., & Morrow, J. D. (2003). The Logic of Political Survival. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, B. (2001). Rational irrationality and the microfoundations of political failure. Public Choice, 107(3–4), 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, B. (2003). The logic of collective belief. Rationality and Society, 15(2), 218–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P. A., & Mirrlees, J. A. (1971). Optimal taxation and public production: I and II. American Economic Review, 81(March), 8–27, (June), 261–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1960). Why the government budget is too small in a democracy. World Politics, 12(4), 541–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, M. (1964). The Symbolic Uses of Politics. University of Illinois Press: Urbana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D. (1977). A theory of the size and shape of nations. Journal of Political Economy, 85(1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Fredom. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gastil, R. D. (1978). Freedom in the World: Political Rights and Civil Liberties, 1978. Freedom House: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwartney, J., & Lawson, R. (2003). Economic Freedom of the World, 2003 Annual Report. Fraser Institute: Vancouver, B.C.

  • Hayek, F. A. (1944). The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgs, R. (1987). Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government. Oxford University Press: Oxford and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgs, R. (1991). Eighteen problematic propositions in the analysis of the growth of government. Review of Austrian Economics, 5(1), 3–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G. (1989). The median voter model in public choice theory. Public Choice, 61(2), 115–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G. (1993). Are there ratchets in the growth of federal government spending? Public Finance Quarterly, 21(1), 33–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G. (1994). The Economic Foundations of Government. New York University Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G. (1996). The growth of the federal government in the 1920s. Cato Journal, 16(2), 175–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G. (2002). From Liberty to Democracy: The Transformation of American Government. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G., & Lacombe, D. J. (2001). The growth of local government in the united states from 1820 to 1870. Journal of Economic History, 61(1), 184–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G., & Lacombe, D. J. (2004). Factors underlying the growth of local government in the 19th century united states. Public Choice, 120(3–4), 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcombe, R. G., & Mills, J. A. (1995). Politics and deficit finance. Public Finance Quarterly, 23(4), 448–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kau, J. B., & Rubin, P. H. (1981). The size of government. Public Choice, 37(2), 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. Harcourt, Brace & Company: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi, M. (1988). Of Rule and Revenue. University of California Press: Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lott, J. R., Jr., & Kenny, L. W. (1999). Did women’s suffrage change the size and scope of government? Journal of Political Economy, 107(6, part 1), 1163–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1906). Capital. Charles H. Kerr & Company: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • McChesney, F. S. (1987). Rent seeking and rent creation in the economic theory of regulation. Journal of Legal Studies, 16(1), 101–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McChesney, F. S. (1997). Money for Nothing: Politicians, Rent Extraction, and Political Extortion. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer, A. H., & Richard, S. F. (1981). A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy, 89(5), 914–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirrlees, J. A. (1971). An exploration in the theory of optimum income taxation. Review of Economic Studies, 38(2), 175–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D. C. (2002). Interest groups, redistribution and the size of government. In Winer S. L. & Shibata H. (Eds.), Political Economy and Public Finance: The Role of Political Economy in the Theory and Practice of Public Economics (pp. 123–144). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, W. A. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Aldine-Atherton: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, W. A. (1975). Bureaucrats and politicians. Journal of Law and Economics, 18(2), 617–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niskanen, W. A. (2002). On the origin and identification of government failures. In Winer S. L. & Shibata H. (Eds.), Political Economy and Public Finance: The Role of Political Economy in the Theory and Practice of Public Economics (pp. 111–116). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M., Jr. (1982). The Rise and Decline of Nations. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, A. T., & Wiseman, J. (1961). The Growth of Government Expenditures in the United Kingdom. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, S. (1980). The growth of government. Journal of Law and Economics, 23(2), 209–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (1999). The size and scope of government: Comparative politics with rational politicians. European Economic Review, 43(4–6), 699–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2003). Economic Effects of Constitutions. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. A. (1971). Taxation by regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2(1), 22–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rassler, K. A., & Thompson, W. R. (1985). War making and state making: Government expenditures, tax revenues, and global wars. American Political Science Review, 79(2), 491–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, T., & Rosenthal, H. (1978). Political resource allocation, controlled agendas, and the status quo. Public Choice, 33(4), 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1965). Entry barriers in politics. American Economic Review, 55(2), 458–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1982). Why so much stability? Public Choice, 37(2), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, F. J. (1896). The problem of the west. Atlantic Monthly, 78(September), 289–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. (1975). Historical Statistics of the United States from Colonial Times to 1970. Bureau of the Census: Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher, D. (1992). The Welfare Economics of Markets, Voting, and Predation. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, D. A. (1989). Why democracies produce efficient results. Journal of Political Economy, 97(6), 1395–1424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, D. A. (1995). The Myth of Democratic Failure. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, D. A. (2002). Normative public finance without guilt: Why normative public finance is positive public finance. In Winer S. L. & Shibata H. (Eds.), Political Economy and Public Finance: The Role of Political Economy in the Theory and Practice of Public Economics (pp. 101–110). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeager, L. B. (2001). Ethics as a Social Science. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Randall G. Holcombe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holcombe, R.G. Government growth in the twenty-first century. Public Choice 124, 95–114 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-005-4748-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-005-4748-x

Keywords

Navigation