Randolph, Bogetic, and He ...

October 1996 Governments that are not committed to alleviating poverty - or that are extremely committed to it - spend less from the central budget on infrastructure. Governments with only limited commitment to alleviating poverty adopt strategies to increase the productivity of the poor by investing in infrastructure. But as their commitment intensifies, their strategy shifts to improving human capital or strengthening the social safety net, and funding for social programs competes with funding for infrastructure. Randolph, Bogetic, and Heffley empirically study factors that influence public investment in transportation and communication infrastructure. Using pooled cross-national and time-series data for 1980-86 for 27 low- and middle-income economies, they assess the influence on public infrastructure spending of a government's objectives (especially its commitment to poverty alleviation), the nature of the domestic economy, and the flow (and composition) of external assistance. Their findings: * Per capita spending on infrastructure responds most strongly to changes in the level of development, the urbanization rate, and the labor force participation rate. * Spending is greater in countries with large foreign sectors and is positively influenced by sectoral imbalances between rural and urban areas (reflected in migration rates). Moreover, as the stock of infrastructure increases, so does per capita spending on it. * If total flows of foreign savings increase, there is a small positive response in per capita spending. The composition of foreign savings matters: when commercial bank flows represent proportionately more of such flows, infrastructure spending is greater. * With higher population densities, consolidated government spending declines. Central government spending increases initially, but decreases as population densities rise. * Central budget spending is positively associated with improved institutional development, whereas consolidated budget spending falls as institutional development improves (when levels of institutional development are low). * The size of the budget deficit appears not to influence central budget spending but is positively associated with consolidated budget spending. * Greater outward orientation is positively associated with increased consolidated budget spending but seems to bear no relationship to central budget spending on infrastructure. * Governments that are not committed to alleviating poverty, or that are extremely committed to it, spend less from the central budget on infrastructure. Governments with only limited commitment to alleviating poverty adopt strategies to increase the productivity of the poor by investing in infrastructure. But as their commitment intensifies, their strategy shifts to improving human capital or strengthening the social safety net, and funding for those social programs competes with funding for developing infrastructure. This paper - a product of the Country Operations Division, Europe and Central Asia, Country Department I - is part of a larger effort in the department to analyze public expenditure issues. The study was funded by the Bank's Research Support Budget under the research project Enhancing Urban Productivity: Determinants of Optimal Expenditure on Infrastructure, Human Resources, and Public Consumption Goods (RPO 677-66).

World Development Report 1994 examines the link between infrastructure and development and explores ways in which developing countries can improve both the provision and the quality of infrastructure services. In recent decades, developing countries have made substantial investments in infrastructure, achieving dramatic gains for households and producers by expanding their access to services such as safe water, sanitation, electric power, telecommunications, and transport. Even more infrastructure investment and expansion are needed in order to extend the reach of services - especially to people living in rural areas and to the poor. But as this report shows, the quantity of investment cannot be the exclusive focus of policy. Improving the quality of infrastructure service also is vital. Both quantity and quality improvements are essential to modernize and diversify production, help countries compete internationally, and accommodate rapid urbanization. The report identifies the basic cause of poor past performance as inadequate institutional incentives for improving the provision of infrastructure. To promote more efficient and responsive service delivery, incentives need to be changed through commercial management, competition, and user involvement. Several trends are helping to improve the performance of infrastructure. First, innovation in technology and in the regulatory management of markets makes more diversity possible in the supply of services. Second, an evaluation of the role of government is leading to a shift from direct government provision of services to increasing private sector provision and recent experience in many countries with public-private partnerships is highlighting new ways to increase efficiency and expand services. Third, increased concern about social and environmental sustainability has heightened public interest in infrastructure design and performance.

This Study Addresses Itself Essentially To Examining The Growth And Pattern Of Public Expanditure, Explaining Its Growth In Terms Of Both Demand And Supply Factors, Studying, Its Impact On The Economy, And Determining Policy Implications Of Short-Term Economic Stabilization And Long-Term Development. Stamped On The Title Page, Ex-Libris, Condition Good.

World Bank Discussion Paper No. 318. Analyzes the condition needed for achieving sustainable private sector growth in the Visegrad countries--the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and the Slovak Republic. The analysis focuses on the legal and regulatory framework and institutional capacity, the privatization of state enterprises, and private sector development.

Annual data on Kenya from 1950 to 2014 are used to analyze the determinants of the level and composition of government expenditures and estimate the agricultural-output returns to the different types of government expenditures. The paper analyzes expenditures for six functions (general administration, defense, education, health, agriculture, and other economic functions—transport, communications, etc.) as well as the capital-to-recurrent expenditure ratios within each of the six functions. Simultaneous equations modeling methods are employed, and different diagnostic tests are used to check for and address issues with stationarity, causality, and autocorrelation. Different model specifications are used to assess the sensitivity of the results to using different measures and combinations of the conceptual variables that are hypothesized to affect the composition of government expenditures and agricultural production.