Browsing Doctoral Degrees (Economics) by browse.metadata.advisor "Calitz, Estian"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
- ItemThe influence of fiscal policymaking frameworks on fiscal outcomes : evidence from the European Union(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2014-12) Siebrits, Franz Krige; Calitz, Estian; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences. Dept. of Economics.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation explores the potential of centralised, top-down procedural rules (also known as budget-process rules) and independent fiscal councils to complement numerical fiscal rules as devices for preventing fiscal profligacy. To this end, it studies the connections between fiscal policymaking frameworks and fiscal outcomes in fourteen European Union countries in the years from 1998 to 2004. The fiscal policymaking frameworks of these countries contained various configurations of numerical rules, procedural rules and fiscal councils, and the study uses differences in the degrees to which the countries complied with the supranational rules of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) as a measure of the efficacy of these configurations at preventing fiscal profligacy. The analysis itself consists of two parts. The first part – a cross-sectional analysis of all fourteen countries – uses a set-theoretic technique known as fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to identify connections between various configurations of the elements of fiscal policymaking frameworks and the degrees to which the countries complied with the SGP rules. These connections are interpreted in terms of sufficiency and necessity and used to identify pathways to consistent compliance with the SGP rules. The second part of the analysis consists of case studies of three of the fourteen countries (Finland, France and Ireland). The case studies are used to verify aspects of the set-theoretic analysis, namely the specification of the set-theoretic model (especially the influence of the preferences of policymakers on compliance with the SGP rules), the accuracy of the quantitative measures of the efficacy of elements of fiscal policymaking frameworks, the explanatory value of the solution pathways and the country-level relevance of two hypotheses derived from the results of the analysis. The set-theoretic analysis finds some evidence of the efficacy of fiscal policymaking frameworks consisting of combinations of numerical rules, procedural rules and fiscal councils, but establishes that such multifaceted frameworks were neither necessary nor sufficient for preventing fiscal profligacy. The study also shows, in tentative fashion in the set-theoretic analysis and more forcefully in the case studies, that the preferences of policymakers were critical determinants of the effectiveness of all types of fiscal policymaking frameworks. Hence, it concludes that the potential of multifaceted fiscal policymaking frameworks should not be exaggerated. In addition, it argues that an unwavering commitment to fiscal prudence complemented by policymaking framework elements chosen to overcome specific incentive distortions is a more promising approach for preventing fiscal profligacy than such multifaceted frameworks per se. More generally, the findings of the study confirm the scope for using fsQCA and other case-oriented methods to complement regression-based analyses of the effectiveness of fiscal policymaking frameworks.