Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:34:13.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cutting Back Public Investment after 1980: Collateral Damage, Policy Legacies and Political Adjustment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2010

HANS KEMAN
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, VU University, De Boelelaan 1081 – Z340 (Metropolitan), 1081HV Amsterdam,Netherlandse-mail: je.keman@fsw.vu.nl

Abstract

Since the 1980s public investment expenditures have been cut back in many OECD democracies. One explanation is a priority for fiscal stringency in order to curb big government in the context of neo-liberal ideas, which is reinforced by EMU requirements in the 1990s. Another is the potential impact of left and right partisan politics on investment policies. The main finding here is that the overall decrease in public investment expenditure appears to be caused by collateral damage due to the downsizing of total government outlays. This is particularly the case where there is a policy legacy of the Left with high levels of total public spending on the welfare state prior to the 1980s. Where the Right in government has been dominant after 1980, this downward development in public investment is particularly noticeable.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelman, I. and Taft, C. T. (1988) Society, Politics and Economic Development, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Apel, E. (1998) European Monetary Integration 1958–2002, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Armingeon, K. and Beyeler, M. (eds.) (2004) The OECD and European Welfare States, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armingeon, K., Leimgruber, P., Beyeler, M. and Menegale, S. (2006) Comparative Political Data Set 1960–2004, Institute of Political Science, University of Berne.Google Scholar
Aschauer, D. A. (1993) Government Spending and the ‘Falling Rate of Profit’ in Economic Perspectives. 5: 1117.Google Scholar
Banister, D. and Berechman, J. (2000) Transport Investment and Economic Development, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beach, D. (2005) The Dynamics of European Integration. Why and when EU institutions matter, London: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Boix, C. (1998) Political Parties, Growth and Equality. Conservative and Social Democratic Strategies in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, I., Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J. and Tanenbaum, E. (2001) Mapping Policy Preferences. Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, I., Keman, H., McDonald, M. and Pennings, P. (2002) Comparative Government and Democracy, in Keman, H. (ed.) Comparative Democratic Politics: A Guide to Contemporary Theory and Research, London: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
Castles, F. G. (1998) Comparative Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Castles, F. G. (2004) The Future of the Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castles, F. G. (ed.) (2007) The Disappearing State? Retrenchment realities in an Age of Globalisation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarida, R. and Findlay, R. (1994) After Maastricht: Public Investment, Economic Integration and International Capital Mobility, in Economica 61: 319329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flora, P. and Heidenheimer, A. J. (1981) The Development of the Welfare States in Europe and America, New Brunswick: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Fraser, N. and Norris, P. (2007) Data on the Functions of Government: Where are we now? In Castles, (ed.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, J. R. and Alt, J. (1994) The Politics of Public and Private Investment in Britain, in Janoski, T. and Hicks, A.M. (eds.) The Comparative Political economy of the Welfare State, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1967) The New Industrial State. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2004) Multi-Level Governance and European Integration, Lanham etc: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Iversen, T. and Wren, A. (1998) Equality, Employment and Budgetary Restraint: The Trilemma of the Service Economy, in: World Politics 50: 507546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keman, H. (1993) Proliferation of the Welfare State: Comparative Profiles of Public Sector Management 1965–1992, in Eliassen, K.A. and Kooiman, J. (eds.), Managing Public Organizations, London: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
Keman, H. (2002) Policy-making Capacities of European Party Government, in Luther, K.R. and Müller-Rommel, F. (eds.) Political Parties in the New Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Keman, H. and Pennings, P. (2006) Competition and Coalescence: Social Democracy and Christian Democracy moving into the 21th Century, in: Swiss Political Science Review, 12/2: 95126.Google Scholar
Keman, H. (2007) Experts and Manifestos: Different Sources – Same Results for Comparative Research? in Special Issue of Electoral Studies, 26/1: 114.Google Scholar
King, D. and Wood, S. (1999) The Political Economy of Neoliberalism: Britain and the United States in the 1980s, in Kitschelt, H., Lange, P., Marks, G. and Stephens, J.D. (eds.) Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lybeck, J. A. and Henrekson, M. (eds.) (1988) Explaining the growth of government, Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Maddison, A. (1991) Dynamic Forces in Capitalism. A long-run comparative view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mullard, M. (1987) The Politics of Public Expenditure. London etc: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Nove, A. (1983) The Economics of Feasible Socialism, London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
OECD (2003) Privatising State-Owned Enterprises. An Overview of Policies and Practices in OECD Countries. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (2005) Modernising Government: The Way Forward. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (2006) OECD-Economic Outlook Database. Paris.Google Scholar
Oxley, H. and Martin, J. P. (1991) Controlling government spending and deficits: trends in the 1980s and prospects for the 1990s, in: OECD Economic Studies.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (2001) Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare Restructuring in Affluent Societies, in Pierson, P. (ed.) The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, R. and Karran, T. (1987) Taxation by Political Inertia. Financing the Growth of Government in Britain. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Rose, R. and Davies, P. (1994) Inheritance in Public Policy: Change without Choice in Britain. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Richard and Peters, Guy (1978) Can Government Go Bankrupt? New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roubini, N. and Sachs, J. (1989) Government Spending and Budget Deficits in the industrial countries, in: Economic Policy 8: 99132.Google Scholar
Saunders, P. and Klau, F. (1985) The role of the public sector: causes and consequences of the growth of government, Paris: OECD [Economic Studies #4].Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1991) Crisis and Choice in European Social Democracy, Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Self, P. (2000) Rolling back the market. Economic dogma and political choice, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sturm, J. E. (1998) Public Capital Expenditure in OECD countries: causes and impact of the decline in public capital spending, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Tarschys, D. (1983) The Scissors Crisis in Public Finance, in: Policy Sciences, 15/3: 205224.Google Scholar
Zűrn, M. (2000) Democratic Governance beyond the nation-state: The EU and other international institutions, in European Journal of International Relations, 6: 183221.Google Scholar