Productive Public Expenditure in a New Economic Geography Model

Commendatore, Pasquale and Kubin, Ingrid and Petraglia, Carmelo (2007): Productive Public Expenditure in a New Economic Geography Model.

Abstract

We assess whether and how differences in productive public expenditure impacts on industrial location. Since productive public expenditure and taxation affect in opposite direction industrial location, it is not straightforward that following an increase in productive public expenditure in a region, that region will necessarily enjoy stronger agglomeration. As a major contribution to the literature, we consider jointly two effects arising from public policy: the demand effect and the productivity effect. The interplay of these two effects determines the final impact on the spatial distribution of firms. The result is influenced by the proportion in which tax payers of the two regions contribute to the financing of public expenditure.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: economic geography; public expenditure, footloose capital
• Subjects: F - International Economics > F2 - International Factor Movements and International Business > F20 - General; H - Public Economics > H5 - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R1 - General Regional Economics > R12 - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity

References

Baldwin R. (1999), “Agglomeration and endogenous capital”, European Economic Review 43: 253-280

Baldwin R., R. Forslid, P. Martin, G.I.P. Ottaviano and F. Robert-Nicoud (2003), “Economic geography and public policy”, Princeton University Press

Borck R. and M. Pflüger (2006), “Agglomeration and tax competition”, European Economic Review, 50(3): 647-68

Baldwin S. and P.R. Krugman (2004), “Agglomeration, integration and tax harmonisation”, European Economic Review, 48(1): 1-23

Brakman S., Garretsen H. and C. van Marrewijk (2002), “Local competition and Agglomeration: the role of Government Spending”, CESifo Working Paper Series No. 775

Brülhart M. and F. Trionfetti (2004), “Public expenditure, specialisation and agglomeration”, European Economic Review, 48: 851-71

Commendatore P. and I. Kubin (2006), “Taxation and Agglomeration”, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance (CeNDEF) Working paper 06-08, University of Amsterdam

Commendatore P., M. Currie and I. Kubin (2005), “Footloose Entrepreneurs, taxes and subsidies”, The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 0521, University of Manchester

Dupont V. and P. Martin (2006), “Subsidies to poor regions and inequalities: some unpleasant arithmetic”, Journal of Economic Geography, 6(2): 223-240

Forslid R., (1999), “Agglomeration with human and physical capital: an analytically solvable case”, Discussion Paper No. 2102, Centre for Economic Policy Research

Forslid R. and G.I.P. Ottaviano (2003), “An analytically solvable core-periphery model”, Journal of Economic Geography, 3: 229 - 240

Krugman P.R. (1991), “Increasing returns and economic geography”, Journal of Political Economy, 99: 483-499

Martin P. (1999), “Public policies, regional inequalities and growth”, Journal of Public Economics 73: 85–105

Martin, P. and G.I.P. Ottaviano (1999), “Growing locations: industry location in a model of endogenous growth”, European Economic Review 43, 281–302

Martin P. and C.A. Rogers (1995), “Industrial location and public infrastructure”, Journal of International Economics, 39: 335-351

Martin P., and G. I. P. Ottaviano (2001), “Growth and agglomeration”, International Economic Review, 42(4): 947-968

Ottaviano G.I.P. (2001), “Monopolistic competition, trade, and endogenous spatial fluctuations”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 31: 55-77

Samuelson P. (1954), “The transfer problem and transport costs, II: analysis of effects of trade impediments”, Economic Journal 64, 264–289

Trionfetti F. (1997), “Public Expenditure and Economic Geography”, Annales d’Économie et de Statistique, 47: 101-120