IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unp/wpaper/201804.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Formulating Regional Competitiveness Fiscal Policy based upon Leverage Factors for Indonesian Data

Author

Listed:
  • Kindy R. Sjahrir

    (Fiscal Policy Office, Ministry of Finance. Republic of Indonesia)

Abstract

Given Indonesia's competitiveness version of the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) released by the World Economic Forum (WEF) has dropped from 38 in 2013-2014 to 41 in 2015-2016, the right strategy is needed so that competitiveness is not continues to decline. Indonesia's geographical condition consisting of 13,000 islands requires increased regional competitiveness to improve national competitiveness. The Regional Economic Governance Index i.e. Tata Kelola Ekonomi Daerah (TKED) as an indicator of economic management in the area of the Regional Autonomy Monitoring Committee (KPPOD) is an example of a proxy option for measures of regional competitiveness. The LEG index compilation methodology is similar to the World Bank's GCI index and Ease of Doing Business (EoDB), so this paper forms the premise that increasing and correcting the LEG index imbalance through the Regional Incentive Fund (DID) will boost regional competitiveness and also lift power Indonesia's global competitiveness. Fiscally, regional competitiveness is also marked by the expansion and deepening of the tax base. The framework of changes in this text is to transform the Macroeconomic Policy - Principal of Fiscal Policy (KEM-PPKF) which originally only targeted high economic growth and equitable distribution of income at the national level with an output orientation to change competitiveness-quality economic growth to the regional level with outcome orientation. To target increasing regional competitiveness, synchronization of central and regional budgeting will be carried out to transform the regional competitiveness criteria in the Regional Incentive Fund and encourage more efficient and accountable regional spending by synchronizing central and regional budgeting data through DID allocations and the synergy of centralized data exchanges. This paper was carried out with the approach of (1) robust study of regional leveraging factors, (2) sharpening of fiscal policy reforms and central-regional budgeting synergies, and (3) the conventions of all stakeholders in the Ministry of Finance's bureaucratic reform. This paper considers Sims (2008) 's argument that strong policy making requires that policy models be treated as "robust models" which include features (1) based on a standard theory or law, (2) can be supported by valid data, and (3) consistently giving the same results. Based on the results of data processing and regression using panel model, some conclusions are obtained. Provincial TKED affects productivity (measured using TPF). In general, the increase in provincial TKED will increase productivity, namely in Management with regard to (1). Land Access (Access); (2). PPUS; and (3) Infrastructure. This proves that good management or local governance will increase productivity. Most of the increase in the TKED index will increase economic productivity. It was confirmed that the outcomes that region with good TKED, yet currently incurring TFP gap have a great potential to boost its GRDP growth should it be assisted thru additional DID (Dana Insentif Daerah) within budgetary allocation processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Kindy R. Sjahrir, 2018. "Formulating Regional Competitiveness Fiscal Policy based upon Leverage Factors for Indonesian Data," Working Papers in Economics and Development Studies (WoPEDS) 201804, Department of Economics, Padjadjaran University, revised Dec 2018.
    • Handle: RePEc:unp:wpaper:201804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ceds.feb.unpad.ac.id/wopeds/201804.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2018
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stan Žaković & Volker Wieland & Berc Rustem, 2007. "Stochastic Optimization and Worst-Case Analysis in Monetary Policy Design," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 329-347, November.
    2. Ricardo J. Caballero & Arvind Krishnamurthy, 2008. "Collective Risk Management in a Flight to Quality Episode," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(5), pages 2195-2230, October.
    3. Brian Gluss, 1961. "An alternative solution to the “lost at sea” problem," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 117-122, March.
    4. Kocherlakota, Narayana & Phelan, Christopher, 2009. "On the robustness of laissez-faire," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(6), pages 2372-2387, November.
    5. Martin Ellison & Thomas J. Sargent, 2012. "A Defense Of The Fomc," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1047-1065, November.
    6. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    7. Lars Peter Hansen & Anastasios G. Karantounias & Thomas J. Sargent, 2009. "Managing expectations and fiscal policy," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2009-29, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    8. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1221-1246, July.
    9. Craine, Roger, 1979. "Optimal monetary policy with uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 59-83, February.
    10. Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2009. "Two Out Of Three Ain'T Bad: A Comment On “The Ambiguity Aversion Literature: A Critical Assessment”," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 335-356, November.
    11. John B. Taylor, 1999. "Monetary Policy Rules," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number tayl99-1.
    12. Onatski, Alexei & Stock, James H., 2002. "Robust Monetary Policy Under Model Uncertainty In A Small Model Of The U.S. Economy," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 85-110, February.
    13. Manski, Charles F., 2000. "Identification problems and decisions under ambiguity: Empirical analysis of treatment response and normative analysis of treatment choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 415-442, April.
    14. Christopher A. Sims, 2001. "Pitfalls of a Minimax Approach to Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 51-54, May.
    15. Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo & Rustichini, Aldo, 2006. "Dynamic variational preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 4-44, May.
    16. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    17. Al-Najjar, Nabil I. & Weinstein, Jonathan, 2009. "The Ambiguity Aversion Literature: A Critical Assessment," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 249-284, November.
    18. J. R. Isbell, 1957. "An optimal search pattern," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 357-359, December.
    19. Al-Najjar, Nabil I. & Weinstein, Jonathan, 2009. "Rejoinder: The “Ambiguity Aversion Literature: A Critical Assessment”," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 357-369, November.
    20. Giannoni, Marc P., 2002. "Does Model Uncertainty Justify Caution? Robust Optimal Monetary Policy In A Forward-Looking Model," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 111-144, February.
    21. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    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. Gadi Barlevy, 2011. "Robustness and Macroeconomic Policy," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Gadi Barlevy, 2009. "Policymaking under uncertainty: Gradualism and robustness," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, vol. 33(Q II), pages 38-55.
    3. Hill, Brian, 2020. "Dynamic consistency and ambiguity: A reappraisal," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 289-310.
    4. Michael Paetz, 2007. "Robust Control and Persistence in the New Keynesian Economy," Quantitative Macroeconomics Working Papers 20711, Hamburg University, Department of Economics.
    5. Andrei Savochkin & Alexander Shklyaev & Alexey Galatenko, 2022. "Dynamic Consistency and Rectangularity for the Smooth Ambiguity Model," Working Papers w0288, New Economic School (NES).
    6. Gumen, Anna & Savochkin, Andrei, 2013. "Dynamically stable preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1487-1508.
    7. Dominiak, Adam & Duersch, Peter & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "A dynamic Ellsberg urn experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 625-638.
    8. Daniel Heyen, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 373-386, May.
    9. Heyen, Daniel, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80342, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2020. "Recursive objective and subjective multiple priors," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-02563318, HAL.
    11. Walsh, Carl E., 2004. "Implications of a Changing Economic Structure for the Strategy of Monetary Policy," Santa Cruz Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt84g1q1g6, Department of Economics, UC Santa Cruz.
    12. Ellis, Andrew, 2018. "On dynamic consistency in ambiguous games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 241-249.
    13. Giordani, Paolo & Soderlind, Paul, 2004. "Solution of macromodels with Hansen-Sargent robust policies: some extensions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 2367-2397, December.
    14. Zhao, Mingjun, 2007. "Monetary policy under misspecified expectations," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 1278-1299, April.
    15. Zampolli, Fabrizio, 2006. "Optimal monetary policy in a regime-switching economy: The response to abrupt shifts in exchange rate dynamics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(9-10), pages 1527-1567.
    16. Keith Kuester & Volker Wieland, 2010. "Insurance Policies for Monetary Policy in the Euro Area," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 872-912, June.
    17. Tommi Ekholm & Erin Baker, 2022. "Multiple Beliefs, Dominance and Dynamic Consistency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 529-540, January.
    18. Georgalos, Konstantinos, 2021. "Dynamic decision making under ambiguity: An experimental investigation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 28-46.
    19. Manuel Ramos-Francia and Santiago García-Verdú, 2017. "On the relationship between macroprudential policy and other policies," BIS Papers chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Macroprudential policy frameworks, implementation and relationships with other policies, volume 94, pages 239-255, Bank for International Settlements.
    20. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf & Kenneth D. West, 2003. "Policy Evaluation in Uncertain Economic Environments," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 34(1), pages 235-322.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fiscal Policy; Indonesian Data;

    JEL classification:

    • G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    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:unp:wpaper:201804. 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: Arief Anshory Yusuf (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lppadid.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.