무역개방도와 국가채무에 대응한 정부규모 = Government Size in Response to Trade Openness and General Government Debt

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper empirically examines the impact of trade openness and national debt on government size using unbalanced panel data on 72 countries over the period 1990∼2020. Specifically, this paper is an extension of the existing literature that verified Rodrik’s (1998) hypothesis, that is, the existence of positive relationship between trade openness and government spending, by adjusting national debt and government size, which were limitedly mentioned in the existing literature.
National debt and government size are measured by the ratio of general government debt (central government debt + local government net debt) to GDP and the ratio of general government expenditure to GDP, respectively. The empirical results suggest that the Rodrik’s (1998) hypothesis is not supported. This suggests that Rodrik’s (1998) hypothesis may depend on the selection of variables and/or estimation models. In addition, national debt is estimated to have a statistically significant positive impact on government size. This reflects that countries with large government size have a relatively large portion of their financial resources through debt. Therefore, the results of this study suggest that Wagner’s law and Rodrik’s (1998) hypothesis can only be established in countries under specific periods an/or conditions.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 황진영, "정부와 재정지출" 글누리 2024

2 김의섭 ; 황진영, "인구구조와 재분배적 재정지출" 54 (54): 33-61, 2006

3 최종수 ; 조성일, "바그너 법칙의 실증적 검증–한국의 경우–" 18 (18): 21-44, 2016

4 Hartwig, J., "‘Baumol’s Diseases’ : The Case of Switzerland" 146 : 533-552, 2010

5 IMF, "World Economic Outlook Database"

6 World Bank, "World Development Indicators"

7 Rodrik, D., "Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments?" 106 : 997-1032, 1998

8 Hartwig, J., "What Drives Health Care Expenditure? : Baumol’s Model of ‘Unbalanced Growth’ Revisited" 27 : 603-623, 2008

9 Liberati, P., "Trade Openness, Capital Openness and Government Size" 27 : 215-247, 2007

10 Benarroch, M., "Trade Openness and Government Size" 101 : 157-159, 2008

11 Shelton, C. A., "The Size and Composition of Government Expenditure" 91 : 2230-2260, 2007

12 Alesina, A. F., "The Political Economy of Budget Deficits" 42 : 1-31, 1995

13 Buchanan, J. M., "The Limits of Liberty : Between Anarchy and Leviathan" University of Chicago Press 1975

14 Jin, C., "The Impact of Import and Export on Unemployment : A Cross-National Analysis" 11 : 347-363, 2019

15 Peacock, A. T., "The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom" Allen and Unwin 1967

16 Legrenzi, G., "The Displacement Effect in the Growth of Governments" 120 : 191-204, 2004

17 Ferris, J. S., "Testing Theories of Real Government Size : U. S. Experience, 1959~89" 62 : 537-566, 1996

18 Oates, W. E., "Taxation and Fiscal Federalism: Essays in Honour of Russel Mathews" Australian National University Press 65-82, 1988

19 Tanzi, V., "Public Spending in the 20th Century : A Global Perspective" Cambridge University Press 2000

20 Brown, C., "Public Sector Economics" Blackwell 1990

21 Grossman, G. M., "Protection for Sale" 84 : 832-850, 1994

22 Ram, R., "Openness, Country Size, and Government Size : Additional Evidence from a Large Cross-Country Panel" 93 : 213-218, 2009

23 Alesina, A. F., "Openness, Country Size and Government" 69 : 305-321, 1998

24 Bharati, T., "On the Relationship between Trade Openness and Government Size" 46 : 2102-2133, 2023

25 Baumol, W., "Macroeconomics of Unbalanced Growth : The Anatomy of Urban Crisis" 57 : 415-426, 1967

26 Millsap, A. A., "Local Governments and Economic Freedom : A Test of the Leviathan Hypothesis" 47 : 493-529, 2019

27 Helpman, E., "Labor Market Rigidities, Trade and Unemployment" 77 : 1100-1137, 2010

28 Karceski, S. M., "Is There a Limit to the Size of the State? The Scope Conditions of Wagner’s Law" 16 : 217-232, 2020

29 Sylwester, K., "Income Inequality, Education Expenditure, and Growth" 63 : 379-398, 2000

30 Sari, E., "Government Size and Openness : Insights Based on Country Classifications" 7 : 1-16, 2021

31 IMF, "Government Finance Statistics"

32 "Freedom House"

33 Anderson, J. E., "Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size : An International Test for Leviathan Accounting for Unmeasured Economic Activity" 5 : 171-186, 1998

34 Nose, M, "Estimation of Drivers of Public Education Expenditure: Baumol’s Effect Revisited" 24 : 512-535, 2016

35 Wooldridge, J. M., "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data" MIT Press 2010

36 Garen, J., "Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments? Another Look" 77 : 533-551, 2005

37 Nordhaus, W. D., "Baumol’s Diseases : A Macroeconomic Perspective" 8 : 2008

38 Hwang, J., "Asset Distribution and Tertiary Education Expenditure in Developing Countries" 24 : 171-178, 2005

39 Florio, M., "A Logistic Growth Theory of Public Expenditures : A Study of Five Countries over 100 Years" 122 : 355-393, 2005

40 White, H., "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity" 48 : 817-838, 1980