IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwvjh/73-30-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Warum verstoßen vorwiegend die großen EWU-Länder gegen den Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt?: Eine theoretische Beweisaufnahme

Author

Listed:
  • Bodo Herzog

Abstract

The Stability and Growth Pact - who does not know it? The need for reforming the Stability and Growth Pact became more and more obvious in the year 2002. The big countries as Germany and France are in systematic breach of the rules within the Stability and Growth Pact. They are likely to do so again in 2004. Moreover, when the President of the European Commission calls the fiscal rules of the Stability and Growth Pact "stupid" and "rigid" it is clear that changes to the Pact are in the air. So we can conclude that everybody in Europe knows something goes wrong with the current fiscal framework and especially with the Stability and Growth Pact because Ecofin is unlikely to vote in favour of imposing sanctions. Since these events, there is a huge reform discussion about reforming the Stability and Growth Pact. But the theoretical fundament of the main arguments in the reform discussion is pretty vague. In this article I will identify the key issues and relevant trade-offs that are essential for designing appropriate fiscal policy rules at the EMU and national level. Now it is time to overcome the clearly pre-embryonic state and to look for an appropriate fiscal framework, which cures the main problems and drawbacks, particularly the current rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. Spätestens seit dem Scheitern der Frühwarnung im Februar 2002 und dem Aussetzen des Defizitverfahrens gegenüber Deutschland auf der Sitzung des Ecofin-Rates im November 2003 erlangte der Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt öffentliches Aufsehen. Die Frage, warum gerade die großen Länder wie Deutschland und Frankreich gegen die 3 %-Defizithürde verstoßen, wirft so manches Rätsel auf, auch wenn Deutschland nicht alleine in der Riege der Defizitsünder ist. Hinzu kamen in jüngster Zeitauch Äußerungen, die in der politischen Arena für Wirbel und Furore sorgten. So sagte der Kommissionspräsident der Europäischen Union, Romano Prodi, in der Zeitung Le Monde: "Der Pakt ist dumm - wie alle Regeln, die rigide sind". Seitdem ist klar: Eine Reform des Stabilitätspaktes liegt in der Luft. Die Reformdiskussion, die heftig und kontrovers geführt wird, ist mittlerweile selbst für Insider kaum noch zu überschauen. Darüber hinaus gibt es bis heute keine vernünftige ökonomische Theorie, die die Defizit- und Schuldengrenzwerte erklären könnte. Diese Tatsache führt unweigerlich zu dem Problem, dass vielen Argumenten in der Reformdiskussion ein theoretisches Fundament fehlt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden deshalb ein Überblick über die theoretischen Erklärungsansätze für den Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt gegeben sowie deren Reformansätze diskutiert. Im Zentrum stehen dabei folgende Fragen: 1. Was ist eine optimale Regel für einen heterogenen Währungsraum? 2. Warum verstoßen bislang vorwiegend große Länder gegen den Stabilitätspakt?

Suggested Citation

  • Bodo Herzog, 2004. "Warum verstoßen vorwiegend die großen EWU-Länder gegen den Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt?: Eine theoretische Beweisaufnahme," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 73(3), pages 405-417.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:73-30-7
    DOI: 10.3790/vjh.73.3.405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.73.3.405
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3790/vjh.73.3.405?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avinash Dixit & Luisa Lambertini, 2003. "Interactions of Commitment and Discretion in Monetary and Fiscal Policies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1522-1542, December.
    2. Beetsma, Roel & Uhlig, Harald, 1999. "An Analysis of the Stability and Growth Pact," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(458), pages 546-571, October.
    3. Jakob de Haan & Helge Berger & David-Jan Jansen & Jakob de Haan, 2003. "The End of the Stability and Growth Pact?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1093, CESifo.
    4. Beetsma, Roel M. W. J. & Bovenberg, A. Lans, 1999. "Does monetary unification lead to excessive debt accumulation?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 299-325, December.
    5. Barro, Robert J. & Gordon, David B., 1983. "Rules, discretion and reputation in a model of monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 101-121.
    6. Antonio Fatás & Ilian Mihov, 2003. "The Case for Restricting Fiscal Policy Discretion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1419-1447.
    7. Juergen Stark, 2001. "Genesis of a Pact," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Anne Brunila & Marco Buti & Daniele Franco (ed.), The Stability and Growth Pact, chapter 4, pages 77-105, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Bodo HERZOG, 2010. "European Monetary Union and Fiscal Policy Sustainability," EcoMod2004 330600067, EcoMod.
    9. Marco Buti & Gabriele Giudice, 2002. "Maastricht’s Fiscal Rules at Ten: An Assessment," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 823-848, December.
    10. Xavier Debrun, 2000. "Fiscal Rules in a Monetary Union: A Short-Run Analysis," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 323-358, October.
    11. Roel Beetsma, 2001. "Does EMU Need a Stability Pact?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Anne Brunila & Marco Buti & Daniele Franco (ed.), The Stability and Growth Pact, chapter 2, pages 23-52, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Ohr, Renate & Schmidt, André, 2003. "Der Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt im Zielkonflikt zwischen fiskalischer Flexibilität und Glaubwürdigkeit: Ein Reformansatz unter Berücksichtigung konstitutionen- und institutionenökonomischer Aspekte," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 19, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    13. V. V. Chari & Patrick J. Kehoe, 2003. "On the desirability of fiscal constraints in a monetary union," Staff Report 330, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    14. Dixit, Avinash & Lambertini, Luisa, 2001. "Monetary-fiscal policy interactions and commitment versus discretion in a monetary union," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 977-987, May.
    15. Beetsma, Roel M. W. J. & Bovenberg, A. Lans, 2003. "Strategic debt accumulation in a heterogeneous monetary union," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, March.
    16. Dixit, Avinash, 2001. "Games of monetary and fiscal interactions in the EMU," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 589-613, May.
    17. Uhlig, H.F.H.V.S., 2002. "One Money, But Many Fiscal Policies in Europe : What are the Consequences?," Discussion Paper 2002-32, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Beetsma, Roel & Jensen, Henrik, 2003. "Contingent deficit sanctions and moral hazard with a stability pact," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 187-208, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bodo Herzog, 2011. "EMU at Crossroads," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 12(04), pages 23-29, December.
    2. Bodo Herzog, 2011. "EMU at Crossroads," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 12(4), pages 23-29, December.

    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. Herzog, Bodo, 2005. "Why do bigger countries have more problems with the Stability and Growth Pact?," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 40, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    2. repec:got:cegedp:40 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Campoy Juan Cristóbal & Negrete Juan C., 2010. "Structural Reforms and Budget Deficits in a Monetary Union: A Strategic Approach," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, July.
    4. Renate Ohr & André Schmidt, 2006. "Handelbare Verschuldungsrechte zur Sicherung fiskalischer Stabilität in der Währungsunion?," Departmental Discussion Papers 128, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    5. Pasquale Foresti, 2018. "Monetary And Fiscal Policies Interaction In Monetary Unions," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 226-248, February.
    6. Hubert Kempf & Leopold von Thadden, 2007. "On policy interactions among nations: when do cooperation and commitment matter ?," 2007 Meeting Papers 801, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    7. Ignacy Święcicki & Jan J. Michałek, 2014. "Sources of difficulties in coordination of monetary and fiscal policies in the European Economic and Monetary Union," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 39.
    8. Lindbeck, Assar & Niepelt, Dirk, 2004. "Improving the SGP: Taxes and Delegation Rather than Fines," Seminar Papers 733, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
    9. Bodo HERZOG, 2010. "European Monetary Union and Fiscal Policy Sustainability," EcoMod2004 330600067, EcoMod.
    10. Acocella, Nicola & Di Bartolomeo, Giovanni & Tirelli, Patrizio, 2009. "The macroeconomics of social pacts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 202-213, October.
    11. Roel Beetsma & Koen Vermeylen, 2007. "The effect of monetary unification on public debt and its real return," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 393-415, December.
    12. Beetsma, Roel M.W.J. & Lans Bovenberg, A., 2006. "Political shocks and public debt: The case for a conservative central bank revisited," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1857-1883, November.
    13. Beetsma, Roel M. W. J. & Bovenberg, A. Lans, 2003. "Strategic debt accumulation in a heterogeneous monetary union," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, March.
    14. Oliver Grimm & Stefan Ried, 2007. "Macroeconomic Policy in a Heterogeneous Monetary Union," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 07/67, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    15. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2007-028 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Bonatti, Luigi & Cristini, Annalisa, 2008. "Breaking the Stability Pact: Was it predictable?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 793-810.
    17. Ms. Francesca Castellani & Mr. Xavier Debrun, 2001. "Central Bank Independence and the Design of Fiscal Institutions," IMF Working Papers 2001/205, International Monetary Fund.
    18. Jean‐Louis Combes & Xavier Debrun & Alexandru Minea & René Tapsoba, 2018. "Inflation Targeting, Fiscal Rules and the Policy Mix: Cross‐effects and Interactions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(615), pages 2755-2784, November.
    19. L. Lambertini & R. Rovelli, 2003. "Monetary and fiscal policy coordination and macroeconomic stabilization. A theoretical analysis," Working Papers 464, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    20. Herzog, Bodo, 2006. "Coordination of fiscal and monetary policy in CIS-countries: A theory of optimum fiscal area?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 256-274, June.
    21. Oros, Cornel & Zimmer, Blandine, 2015. "Uncertainty and fiscal policy in a monetary union: Why does monetary policy transmission matter?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 85-93.
    22. Pappa, Evi & Vassilatos, Vanghelis, 2007. "The unbearable tightness of being in a monetary union: Fiscal restrictions and regional stability," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 1492-1513, August.

    More about this item

    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:diw:diwvjh:73-30-7. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.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.