Boondoogles and Expropriation : Rent-seeking and Policy Distortion when Property Rights are Insecure
Keywords
RENTSINSTITUTIONAL VARIABLES
GOVERNMENT ACTION
TAX REVENUE
RENT-SEEKING BEHAVIOR
POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
DISCOUNT RATE
MACROECONOMICS
TAX
GOVERNMENT SPENDING
GOVERNMENT POLICY
BUREAUCRACY
TAXATION
NATIONALIZATION
LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
VETO
POLICY INSTRUMENTS
CLOSED ECONOMY
ROADS
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY
MARGINAL UTILITY
DEMOCRACY
PROPERTY RIGHTS
CITIZENS
DECISION MAKING
FISCAL POLICY
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
FISCAL POLICY
DECISION MAKERS
POLITICIANS
SECURE PROPERTY RIGHTS
EXPROPRIATION
GOVERNMENT POLICY
AUTHORITY
TAX REVENUES
HOUSEHOLDS
UTILITY FUNCTION
FISCAL
GOVERNMENT EXPROPRIATION
PUBLIC GOOD
PRIVATE INVESTMENTS
GROWTH-REDUCING POLICIES AGENTS
RENT-SEEKING
TAX RATE
PRODUCTION FUNCTION
TAX POLICY
ECONOMIC INCENTIVES
PUBLIC INVESTMENTS
LEGISLATURES
PUBLIC PROPERTY
INCENTIVES
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
NATIONAL INCOME
EXPENDITURE
RULE OF LAW
HUMAN CAPITAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS
VOTERS
STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES
EXECUTIVE POWER
ELECTIONS
TAX REVENUES
PUBLIC SPENDING
LEGISLATURE
INVESTMENT CLIMATE
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
GOVERNMENT DECISION
GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES
GROWTH RATE
GDP
ELECTORAL PERFORMANCE
EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
BUREAUCRACY & CORRUPT PRACTICES
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMPETITIVENESS
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
PRODUCTIVITY
ECONOMIC GROWTH
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
CORRUPTION
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
PUBLIC INVESTMENT
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19219Abstract
Most analyses of property rights and economic development point to the negative influence of insecure property rights on private investment. The authors focus instead on the largely unexamined effects of insecure property rights on government policy choices. They identify one significant anomaly-dramatically higher public investment in countries with insecure property rights-and use it to make the following broad claims about insecure property rights; 1) They increase rent-seeking. 2) They may reduce the incentives of governments to use tax revenues for productive purposes, such as public investment. 3) They do so whether one regards the principal problem of insecure property rights as the maintenance of law and order, which government spending can potentially remedy, or as the threat of expropriation by government itself, and therefore not remediable by government spending. The authors present substantial empirical evidence to support these claims.Date
2002-10Identifier
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/19219http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19219
Copyright/License
CC BY 3.0 IGOCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers : Principles and PracticeBoadway, Robin; Shah, Anwar (Washington, DC : World Bank, 2012-06-05)The design of intergovernmental fiscal
 transfers has a strong bearing on efficiency and equity of
 public service provision and accountable local governance.
 This book provides a comprehensive one-stop window/source of
 materials to guide practitioners and scholars on design and
 worldwide practices in intergovernmental fiscal transfers
 and their implications for efficiency, and equity in public
 services provision as well as accountable governance.
-
Transferencias fiscales intergubernamentales : principios y practicaBoadway, Robin; Shah, Anwar (Washington, DC : World Bank, 2012-06-05)The design of intergovernmental fiscal transfers has a strong bearing on efficiency and equity of public service provision and accountable local governance. This book provides a comprehensive one-stop window/source of materials to guide practitioners and scholars on design and worldwide practices in intergovernmental fiscal transfers and their implications for efficiency, and equity in public services provision as well as accountable governance.
-
Unlocking Land Values for Urban Infrastructure Finance : International Experience--Considerations for Indian PolicyPeterson, George E. (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-10)Despite strong economic growth,
 investment in basic urban infrastructure -- water supply,
 wastewater removal and treatment, roads, and other
 capital-intensive systems -- has failed to keep pace with
 urban growth, leaving a critical urban infrastructure
 deficit. At the same time, urban lands in these many
 developing countries are among the most expensive in the
 world. Much of this land is owned by public authorities.
 Significant parts of it lie vacant, unused for public
 service provision or inappropriate for conversion to
 higher-valued economic activity. A composite public-sector
 balance sheet for India's urban areas would show an
 asset mix strong on public-sector landholdings but weak on
 infrastructure. This raises the following questions: Can
 some excess public-sector land be exchanged for
 infrastructure, in a manner that is politically acceptable
 and economically efficient? Can public land sales be a
 realistic source of finance for critically needed urban
 infrastructure investment? This paper considers the policy
 context that has shaped different land-disposal and
 earmarking initiatives, provides details about the actual
 workings of institutions, and examines international
 experience in infrastructure investment. This study
 contributes to the consultative process underway in India to
 consider strategies to unlock public land values to help
 finance urban infrastructure investment.