Dasar fiskal dan asakan keluar mengikut sub-sektor perbelanjaan kerajaan di Malaysia
Abstract
ABTRACT
The main purpose of this study is to examine the effect of government expenditure on private consumption based on experience in Malaysia for the period of 1970-2008 using GMM estimation method. For this purpose, separate regressions are performed on operating expenditure and development expenditure. Empirical results show that each sub sector of operating expenditure and development expenditure gives a different effect on private consumption. Operating expenditure for defence, agriculture and rural development and transport and comminucations expenditure have negative relationship with private consumption. However, operating expenditure for security, health and trade and industry expenditure have positive relationship with private consumption. Meanwhile, development expenditure for internal security, health and general administration expenditure have a positif effect on private consumption. Development expenditure for defence, education, agriculture and rural development and trade and industry expenditure have a positive effect on private consumption. The implication is that fiscal policy shocks in total without making any choice of priorities is not possible to stimulate economic growth or to offset the effects of trade cycle.
ABSTRAK
Tujuan utama kajian ini ialah untuk menguji kesan asakan perbelanjaan kerajaan terhadap penggunaan swasta berasaskan pengalaman di Malaysia untuk tempoh 1970-2008 dengan menggunakan kaedah penganggaran GMM. Untuk tujuan ini, regresi yang berasingan dilakukan ke atas perbelanjaan mengurus dan perbelanjaan pembangunan. Hasil kajian mendapati bahawa setiap sub sektor perbelanjaan mengurus dan perbelanjaan pembangunan memberi kesan yang berbeza ke atas penggunaan swasta. Perbelanjaan mengurus bagi pertahanan, pertanian dan pembangunan luar bandar dan pengangkutan dan perhubungan mempunyai hubungan negatif dengan penggunaan swasta. Sebaliknya, perbelanjaan mengurus bagi keselamatan dalam negeri, kesihatan dan perdagangan dan perindustrian pula mempunyai hubungan positif dengan penggunaan swasta. Sementara itu, perbelanjaan pembangunan bagi keselamatan dalam negeri, kesihatan dan perkhidmatan am mempunyai kesan negatif ke atas penggunaan swasta. Perbelanjaan pembangunan bagi pertahanan, pendidikan, pertanian dan pembangunan luar bandar dan perdagangan dan perindustrian pula memberi kesan positif ke atas penggunaan swasta. Implikasinya, kejutan dasar fiskal secara total tanpa membuat sebarang pilihan keutamaan tidak mungkin dapat meransang pertumbuhan ekonomi atau menjadi penimbal bagi mengimbangi kesan putaran dagangan.
Â
References
Ahmed, S. 1986. Temporary and permanent government spending in an open economy: some evidence for the United Kingdom. Journal of Monetary Economics. 17: 197-224.
Aiyagari, S. R., Christiano, L.J., and Eichbaum, M. 1992. The Output, Employment, and Interest Rate Effects of Government Consumption. Journal of Monetary Economics. 30: 73-86.
Aschauer, D. A. 1985. Fiscal Policy and Aggregate Demand. American Economic Review. 75(1): 117-127.
Bailey, M. J. 1971. National Income and the Price Level. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Baxter, M., and King, R. G. 1993. Fiscal policy in general equilibrium. American Economic Review. 83(3): 315-334.
Blanchard, Olivier and R. Perotti. 2002. An Empirical Characterization of the Dynamic Effects of Changes in Government Spending and Taxes on Output. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1329-1368.
Burnside, Craig, Martin Eichenbaum and Jonas D.M. Fisher 2003. Fiscal Shocks and Their Consequences. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 9772. Cambridge: NBER.
Giorgioni, G., and Holden, K. 2003. Does the Ricardian Equivalence Proposition Hold in Less Developed Countries? International Review of Applied Economics. 17(2): 209-221.
Green, W. H. 2003. Econometric analysis. Ed. Ke 5. Edisi Antarabangsa. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Hall, R.E. 1978. Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis: theory and evidence. Journal of Political Economy. 86(6): 971-987.
Hogan, V. 2004. Expansionary Fiscal Contractions? Evidence from Panel Data. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 106(4):647-659.
Hsiao, C. 2005. Analysis of Panel Data. Ed. Ke 2. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jönsson, K. 2004. Effective Consumption and Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy. http://swopec.hhs.se/lunewp/abs/lunewp2004_026.htm.
Karras, G. 1994. Government spending and private consumption, some international evidence. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. 26: 9-22.
Keynes, J.M. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. New York: MacMillan.
Kormendi, R. C. 1983. Government debt, government spending, and private sector behavior. The American Economic Review. 73(5): 994-1010.
Lopez, H. J., Schmidt-Hebbel, K., and Serven, L. 2000. How effective is fiscal policy in raising national saving?. The Review of Economics and Statistics 82(2): 226-238.
McCulloch, J. H. 1977. The Austrian Theory of the Marginal Use and of Ordinal Marginal Utility. Zeitschrift fuer Nationaloekonomie. 37: 249-280.
Mountford, Andrew and Harald Uhlig. 2008. What are The Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks? National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 14551. Cambridge: NBER.
Pozzi, L. 2003. Tax discounting in a high-debt economy. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 65(3): 261-282.
Hur, Seok-Kyun; Sushanta Mallick and Donghyun Park. 2010. Fiscal Policy and Crowding Out in Developing Asia. ADB Economics Working Paper Series No 222. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank.
Wooldridge, J. M. 2002. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. Edisi ke-2. USA: South-Western.
