Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
CHAPTER1.PRACTICALDIMENSIONOFRESEARCHONPUBLICFINANCES
Intheanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenthedeficitofthepublicfinancesector
andmacroeconomicvariables,thevectorautoregression(VAR)model,impulsere-
sponsefunctionandGrangercausalitytestwereused0TheVARmodelbreakswith
theclassicaldistinctionbetweenendogenousandexogenousvariables,andischarac-
terizedbythelackoflimitsastothevalueofparameters0Theuseofmodelsofmulti-
dimensionalstochasticprocessesshouldallowfindingoftencomplexdependenciesof
feedbackbetweenmacroeconomicvariables0Theimpulseresponsefunctionallows
topresentashortandlong-termresponseofvariouseconomicvariablestoashock
changeinthebudgetdeficit0Inturn,theGrangercausalitytestshouldallowoneand
two-waycausalityinrelationsbetweenbudgetdeficitandothervariables0
Theanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenthestateofpublicfinances,ormorepre-
ciselythebudgetbalance,andthementionedmacroeconomicvariableswillbecarried
outinthefollowingcountries:Germany,theUnitedKingdom,Hungary,Poland,i0e0the
countriesstudiedwiththeuseofthecasestudymethodrelyingonaqualitativeanaly-
sisoffiscalconsolidationprocesses0Intheanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenbudget
deficitandthesemacroeconomicvariables,twoothercountrieswerealsoincluded,
namelyFranceandSweden0Theirchoicewasnotaccidental,becausefromthe
pointofviewofthefiscalsituation,bothbeforethefinancialcrisisandinthesubsequent
years,thesecountriesarecharacterizedbyaradicallydifferentapproachtopublicfi-
nances0Aftertheeconomicandfiscalcrisisinthelate1980sandearly1990s,Sweden
appliedarestrictivefiscalpolicy,whichconsistedinreducingandstabilizingthelevelof
fiscalismtoaround50%ofGDPandachievingarelativelysustainablebudgetbalance,
whichwasreflectedbybudgetsurplusesinsomeyearsbeforethefinancialcrisis,and
duringthecrisisandinthefollowingyears,publicfinancesofthiscountrywereandstill
havebeenundersuccessfulcontrol(seeAnnex)0Asaconsequence,Sweden’spublic
debtshowedadecliningtrendfromaround70%ofGDPinthemid-1990stoaround
40%ofGDPnowadays(seeAnnex)0Swedenbelongedtooneofthethreecountriesfor
whichtheExcessivedeficitprocedurewasnotimposed0Acompletelydifferentsituation
occurredinFrance0Whilethecountrynotedbudgetdeficitsbeforethefinancialcrisis,
oscillatingaround3%ofGDP
,in2009–2010thebudgetdeficitreachedaround7%of
GDP
0Inthefollowingyears,Francebegantoreducethedeficit,buttherearestillsome
difficultiesinmaintainingthereferencevalueforEUcountries,namely3%ofGDP
0It
isobviousthen,thatinsuchasituation,quiteoppositetoSwedish,tendencyinthefor-
mationofpublicdebthadtooccur0Whileinthe1990sandinthefirstyearsofthenew
decade,France’spublicdebtfluctuatedaroundthereferencevalue(60%ofGDP),in
subsequentyears,especiallyduringthefinancialcrisisandinfollowingyears,France’s
publicdebtshowedaclearupwardtrendandcurrentlyfluctuatesaround95%ofGDP
0
Forthesereasons,thesetwocountries,apartfromGermany,theUnitedKingdom,
HungaryandPoland,havebeenanalysedfortherelationshipbetweenthebudget
deficitandthebasicmacroeconomicvariables(Chapter9)0
34