IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecr/col070/11632.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The political economy of regional grants in Peru

Author

Listed:
  • Letelier S., Leonardo
  • Neyra A., Gonzalo

Abstract

This paper explores the regional allocation pattern of general resources (recursos ordinarios) in Peru, which are distributed to regional governments through a discretionary grant by the national government. We estimate an empirical model based on a panel of annual data between 2004 and 2010. Although national transfers are significantly biased towards regions where the national government received the lowest electoral support, the data suggest that this effect is strongest at the beginning of the administration's period in office. In the long run, however, opposition regions appear to host more volatile constituencies, which is compatible with the swing-voter hypothesis. Interestingly, regions that strongly supported the president receive the fewest benefits. Finally, the role of regional conflicts, the effect of lobbying by organized regionally based civil groups and the size of the regional constituency, among others variables, are statistically significant in the estimations.

Suggested Citation

  • Letelier S., Leonardo & Neyra A., Gonzalo, 2013. "The political economy of regional grants in Peru," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecr:col070:11632
    Note: Includes bibliography
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/11632
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Sorribas-Navarro, Pilar, 2008. "The effects of partisan alignment on the allocation of intergovernmental transfers. Differences-in-differences estimates for Spain," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(12), pages 2302-2319, December.
    2. Wright, Gavin, 1974. "The Political Economy of New Deal Spending: An Econometric Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(1), pages 30-38, February.
    3. Wallis, John Joseph, 1998. "The Political Economy of New Deal Spending Revisited, Again: With and without Nevada," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 140-170, April.
    4. Jorge Vega Castro, 2008. "Análisis del proceso de descentralización fiscal en el Perú," Documentos de Trabajo / Working Papers 2008-266, Departamento de Economía - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
    5. Schady, Norbert R., 2000. "The Political Economy of Expenditures by the Peruvian Social Fund (FONCODES), 1991–95," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 289-304, June.
    6. Segura-Ubiergo,Alex, 2012. "The Political Economy of the Welfare State in Latin America," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107410664, September.
    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. Litschig, Stephan, 2012. "Are rules-based government programs shielded from special-interest politics? Evidence from revenue-sharing transfers in Brazil," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1047-1060.
    2. Jean-Francois Maystadt & Muhammad Kabir Salihu, 2015. "National or political cake?," Working Papers 100756558, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    3. Linda Veiga & Francisco Veiga, 2013. "Intergovernmental fiscal transfers as pork barrel," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 335-353, June.
    4. Elena Jarocinska, 2022. "Discretionary Grants and Distributive Politics: Evidence from Spain," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 64(4), pages 681-709, December.
    5. Gruber, Jonathan & Hungerman, Daniel M., 2007. "Faith-based charity and crowd-out during the great depression," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 1043-1069, June.
    6. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2007. "Do Small States Get More Federal Monies? Myth and Reality about the US Senate Malapportionment," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 07/01, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised May 2007.
    7. Rhode, Paul W. & Snyder, Jr., James M. & Strumpf, Koleman, 2018. "The arsenal of democracy: Production and politics during WWII," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 145-161.
    8. Fishback, Price V. & Haines, Michael R. & Kantor, Shawn, 2001. "The Impact of the New Deal on Black and White Infant Mortality in the South," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 93-122, January.
    9. Fleck, Robert K., 2013. "Why did the electorate swing between parties during the Great Depression?," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 599-619.
    10. Noghanibehambari, Hamid & Engelman, Michal, 2022. "Social insurance programs and later-life mortality: Evidence from new deal relief spending," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Sumner J. La Croix & Denise Eby Konan, 2002. "Intellectual Property Rights in China: The Changing Political Economy of Chinese–American Interests," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 759-788, June.
    12. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2013. "Why Do Small States Receive More Federal Money? U.S. Senate Representation and the Allocation of Federal Budget," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 257-282, November.
    13. Hanes, Niklas, 2007. "Temporary grant programmes in Sweden and central government behaviour," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 1160-1174, December.
    14. Markus Reischmann, 2016. "Empirical Studies on Public Debt and Fiscal Transfers," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 63.
    15. Josip Glaurdić & Vuk Vuković, 2017. "Granting votes: exposing the political bias of intergovernmental grants using the within-between specification for panel data," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 223-241, April.
    16. Rongili Biswas & Sugata Marjit & Velayoudom Marimoutou, 2010. "Fiscal Federalism, State Lobbying And Discretionary Finance: Evidence From India," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 68-91, March.
    17. Fishback, Price V. & Kantor, Shawn & Wallis, John Joseph, 2003. "Can the New Deal's three Rs be rehabilitated? A program-by-program, county-by-county analysis," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 278-307, July.
    18. Emilie Caldeira, 2012. "Does the System of Allocation of Intergovernmental Transfers in Senegal Eliminate Politically Motivated Targeting?," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 21(2), pages 167-191, March.
    19. Carozzi, Felipe & Repetto, Luca, 2019. "Distributive politics inside the city? The political economy of Spain's Plan E," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 85-106.
    20. Paola Azar Dufrechou, 2018. "Electoral politics and the diffusion of primary schooling: evidence from Uruguay, 1914-1954," Working Papers wpdea1801, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.

    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:ecr:col070:11632. 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: Biblioteca CEPAL (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eclaccl.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.