IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/imk/report/168-2021.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Makroökonomische Auswirkungen eines kreditfinanzierten Investitionsprogramms in Deutschland

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian Dullien

    (Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK))

  • Ekaterina Jürgens

    (Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK))

  • Christoph Paetz

    (Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK))

  • Sebastian Watzka

    (Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK))

Abstract

Die Simulationen eines kreditfinanzierten Investitionsprogramms in Höhe von 460 Mrd. Euro im makroökonomischen Modell NiGEM zeigen, dass sich eine solche öffentliche Investitionsoffensive bei konservativen Modellannahmen spätestens nach 30 Jahren selbst finanziert hat. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt ist die Schuldenquote dann auf das Niveau gefallen, welches sich ohne das Programm ergeben hätte. Auch in der konservativsten Simulationsvariante kann von einer Belastung künftiger Generationen durch das Investitionsprogramm keine Rede sein. Im Gegenteil: Schon in der Grundversion des Modells ginge es künftigen Generationen mit dem kreditfinanzierten Investitionsprogramm wirtschaftlich besser als ohne, weil das Bruttoinlandsprodukt (BIP) 2050 höher wäre, die Schuldenquote aber nicht. In alternativen Modellvarianten rückt dieser Zeitpunkt sogar näher in die Gegenwart und die Argumente für ein solches Investitionsprogramm sind noch einmal stärker. Das Investitionsprogramm führt zu erheblichen Wachstumseffekten. Längerfristig liegt das BIP um 3 % bis 4 % über seinem Niveau ohne Investitions­offensive. Außerdem regt das Programm die private Investitionstätigkeit deutlich an, sodass die Unternehmensinvestitionen 4 % bis 5 % über ihrem Niveau ohne Programm liegen. Diese Effekte werden noch verstärkt, wenn das Modell eine Erhöhung der Produktivität des privaten Kapitalstocks durch verbesserte öffentliche Infrastruktur berücksichtigt.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian Dullien & Ekaterina Jürgens & Christoph Paetz & Sebastian Watzka, 2021. "Makroökonomische Auswirkungen eines kreditfinanzierten Investitionsprogramms in Deutschland," IMK Report 168-2021, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:imk:report:168-2021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.boeckler.de/pdf/p_imk_report_168_2021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hubertus Bardt & Sebastian Dullien & Michael Hüther & Katja Rietzler, 2019. "Für eine solide Finanzpolitik: Investitionen ermöglichen!," IMK Report 152-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    2. Aschauer, David Alan, 1989. "Does public capital crowd out private capital?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 171-188, September.
    3. Baxter, Marianne & King, Robert G, 1993. "Fiscal Policy in General Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(3), pages 315-334, June.
    4. Till Baldenius & Sebastian Kohl & Moritz Schularick, 2021. "Die neue Wohnungsfrage: Gewinner und Verlierer des deutschen Immobilienbooms," ECONtribute Policy Brief Series 019, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Beznoska, Martin & Kauder, Björn & Obst, Thomas, 2021. "Investitionen, Humankapital und Wachstumswirkungen öffentlicher Ausgaben," IW policy papers 2/2021, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW) / German Economic Institute.
    2. Sebastian Dullien & Ekaterina Jürgens & Christoph Paetz & Sebastian Watzka, 2021. "Wachstums- und Verschuldungseffekte einer kreditfinanzierten öffentlichen Investitionsoffensive [Growth and Debt Effects of a Credit-Financed Public Investment Offensive]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 101(9), pages 700-705, September.
    3. Otto, Glenn & Voss, Graham, 1996. "Public Capital and Private Production in Australia," MPRA Paper 52110, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Benjamin Faber & Cecile Gaubert, 2019. "Tourism and Economic Development: Evidence from Mexico's Coastline," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(6), pages 2245-2293, June.
    5. Chatterjee, Santanu & Sakoulis, Georgios & Turnovsky, Stephen J., 2003. "Unilateral capital transfers, public investment, and economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1077-1103, December.
    6. Valerie A. Ramey, 2020. "The Macroeconomic Consequences of Infrastructure Investment," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Analysis and Infrastructure Investment, pages 219-268, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Valter Di Giacinto & Giacinto Micucci & Pasqualino Montanaro, 2012. "Network effects of public transport infrastructure: Evidence on Italian regions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(3), pages 515-541, August.
    8. Pina, Alvaro Manuel & St. Aubyn, Miguel, 2005. "Comparing macroeconomic returns on human and public capital: An empirical analysis of the Portuguese case (1960-2001)," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 585-598, July.
    9. Valter Di Giacinto & Giacinto Micucci & Pasqualino Montanaro, 2010. "Dynamic Macroeconomic Effects of Public Capital: Evidence from Regional Italian Data," Giornale degli Economisti, GDE (Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia), Bocconi University, vol. 69(1), pages 29-66, April.
    10. Boehm, Christoph E., 2020. "Government consumption and investment: Does the composition of purchases affect the multiplier?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 80-93.
    11. Wesselbaum, Dennis, 2015. "Sectoral labor market effects of fiscal spending," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 19-35.
    12. Stylianos Asimakopoulos & Marco Lorusso & Luca Pieroni, 2021. "Can public spending boost private consumption?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 1275-1313, November.
    13. Alberto Bucci & Chiara Del Bo, 2012. "On the interaction between public and private capital in economic growth," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 106(2), pages 133-152, June.
    14. Minea, Alexandru, 2008. "The Role of Public Spending in the Growth Theory Evolution," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 5(2), pages 99-120, June.
    15. Moisa Altar & Judita Samuel, 2008. "The Influence of Fiscal Policy on Economic Growth," Advances in Economic and Financial Research - DOFIN Working Paper Series 7, Bucharest University of Economics, Center for Advanced Research in Finance and Banking - CARFIB.
    16. Cevik, Serhan, 2020. "You are suffocating me: Firm-level analysis of state-owned enterprises and private investment," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 292-301.
    17. Stephen J. Turnovsky & Santanu Chatterjee, 2004. "Tied Versus Untied Foreign Aid: Consequences for a Growing Economy," Computing in Economics and Finance 2004 8, Society for Computational Economics.
    18. Chatterjee, Santanu & Turnovsky, Stephen J., 2007. "Foreign aid and economic growth: The role of flexible labor supply," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 507-533, September.
    19. Matthaei, Stephan & Stähler, Nikolai, 2016. "Macroeconomic implications of the German financial equalization system," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145695, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    20. Santanu Chatterjee & Stephen Turnovsky, 2002. "Substitutability of Capital, Investment Costs, and Foreign Aid," Working Papers UWEC-2002-08-P, University of Washington, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2002.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:imk:report:168-2021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sabine Nemitz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/imkhbde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.