Yamamura, Eiji (2011): Groups and information disclosure: Evidence on the Olson and Putnam Hypotheses in Japan.
Preview |
PDF
MPRA_paper_28101.pdf Download (239kB) | Preview |
Abstract
There is controversy between Putnam and Olson concerning the role of group. Putnam argued that small group makes a contribution to economic growth whereas Olson asserted that small group hampers the economic growth through rent-seeking behavior. Since the end of the 1990s in Japan, there has been a remarkable rise in the rate of enactment of public information-disclosure ordinances by local governments. This paper uses the panel data of Japan to compare the effects of Putnam-type horizontally structured groups and Olson-type vertically structured groups on government information disclosures. The Arellano-Bond type dynamic panel model is employed to control for unobserved fixed effects and endogeneity bias. The major findings are as follows: (1) the Putnam-type group has a positive influence on information disclosure; (2) the Olson-type group has a detrimental effect on information disclosure. These support not only Putnam hypothesis but also Olson Hypothesis. The characteristics of groups should be considered carefully when the influence of group is examined.
Item Type: | MPRA Paper |
---|---|
Original Title: | Groups and information disclosure: Evidence on the Olson and Putnam Hypotheses in Japan |
Language: | English |
Keywords: | Putnam, Olson, interest group, social capital, information-disclosure ordinance. |
Subjects: | G - Financial Economics > G3 - Corporate Finance and Governance > G38 - Government Policy and Regulation P - Economic Systems > P4 - Other Economic Systems > P48 - Political Economy ; Legal Institutions ; Property Rights ; Natural Resources ; Energy ; Environment ; Regional Studies Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification |
Item ID: | 28101 |
Depositing User: | eiji yamamura |
Date Deposited: | 18 Jan 2011 15:10 |
Last Modified: | 03 Oct 2019 11:11 |
References: | Alt, J.E., & Lassen, D.D. (2006). Fiscal transparency, political parties, and debt in OECD countries. European Economic Review, 50, 1403-1439. Arellano, M. (2003). Panel data econometrics. New York: Oxford University Press. Asahi Shimbun. (2008). Minryoku: Todofuken-betsu minryoku sokutei shiryoshu (CD-ROM edition), Asahi-Newspaper, Tokyo. Asano, E. (2010). Local government reform promoted by information disclosure (Johokokai de susumeru jichitai kaikaku: Shuzai noto ga akasu katsuyo-jutsu.). Tokyo: Jichitaikenkyu-sha. Baliamoune-Lutz, M. (2009). Human well-being effects of institutions and social capital. Contemporary Economic Policy, 27(1), 54-66. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row. Doi, T., & Ihori, T. (2002). Fiscal reconstruction and local interest groups in Japan. Journal of Japanese and International Economies, 16, 492-511. Doi, T., & Ihori, T. (2009). The public sector in Japan: Past development and future prospects. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. London, Duckworth. Goto, I. (2001). Tracing the origin of the communal fire-fighting team: Communal fire- fighting team in the 21st century (Shobo-dan no genkryu o tadoru: 21seki no shobo-dan no arikata). Tokyo: Kindaishobo-sha. Greene, W.H. (1997). Econometric Analysis (3 eds), Prentice-Hall, London. Heckelman, J. (2000). Consistent estimates of the impact of special interest groups on economic growth. Public Choice, 104, 319-327. Helliwell, J.F. (2003). How’s life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being. Economic Modeling, 20, 331-360. Helliwell, J.F., & Huang, W. (2008). How’s your government? International evidence linking good government and well-being. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 595-619. Index Publishing. (2006). Chiiki Tokei (CD-ROM edition). Tokyo: Index Publishing. Knack, S. (2002). Social capital and government performance: Evidence from states. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 772-785. Knack, S. (2003). Groups, growth and trust: Cross-country evidence on the Olson and Putnam hypotheses. Public Choice, 117, 341-55. Matsui, S. (2000). An introduction to the information disclosure law (Johokokai ho nyumon). Tokyo: Iwanami-shoten. Muroi, C. (1999). Exhortation towards disclosure of local governments’ information. (Jichitai johokoai no susume). Tokyo: Junpo-sha. Niskanen, W. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Olson, M. (1982). The rise and decline of nations. New Haven: Yale University Press. Putnam, R.D. (1993) Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster. Pena Lopez, J.A. & Sanchez Santos, J.M. (2007). The Olson-Putnam controversy: Some empirical evidence. Economics Bulletin, 26(4), 1-10. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Statistics Bureau (various years). Establishment and enterprise census. Tokyo: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Statistics Bureau. Turuoka, K., & Asaoka, M. (1997). Information disclosure in Japan: Resistant bureaucrats. (Nihon-no johokokai: Teikosuru kanryo). Tokyo: Kaden-sha. Uga, K. (2001). Information disclosure law and information disclosure ordinances. (Johokokai ho, johokokai jorei.). Tokyo: Yuhikaku. Yamamura, E. (2010a). Learning effect and social capital: A case study of natural disaster from Japan. Regional Studies,44 (8), 1019-1032. Yamamura, E. (2010 b). Public policy, trust and growth: Disclosure of government information in Japan. MPRA Paper 27703. |
URI: | https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/28101 |