Main Article Content

Abstract

In this paper, we tested the Wagner’s Law against the Keynesian Hypothesis for Indonesia using granger causality test. After conducting theoretical and empirical theory, this paper is analysing the relationship between government expenditure and GDP percapita. The long run parameters and causality test found valid Wagners’ Law in Indonesia not Keynesian Hypothesis. The results reveal a positive and statistically significant long run effect running from economic growth toward the government expenditure refer to Wagner’s Law in Indonesia. Further more, the growth of population is giving a positive effect for government expenditure also.


 

Keywords

Economic Growth Government Expenditure Granger Causality

Article Details

How to Cite
Pasaribu, E., & Septriani, S. (2021). Pengujian Wagner’s Law Versus Keynesian Hypothesis: Pendekatan Regional Indonesia. Convergence: The Journal of Economic Development, 2(2), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.33369/convergence-jep.v2i2.14174

References

  1. Adisasmita, Rahardjo. (2011). Pengelolaan Pendapatan dan Anggaran Daerah. graha ilmu, Yogyakarta, edisi pertama, hal. 35 dan 46.
  2. Adkisson, Richard V., &Mohammed, Mikidadu. (2014). Tax Structure and StateEconomic Growth during the Great Recession.The Social Science Journal, 51,79-89.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2013.10.009.
  3. Baumol, William J. (1967). Macroeconomic of Unbalanced Growth: The Anatomy of Urban Crisis. The American Economic Review, 57: 415-426.
  4. Beck, Morris. (1976). The Expanding Public Sector: Some Contrary Evidence. National Tax Journal, 29(1): 15-21.
  5. Breunig, R. & Rocaboy, Y. (2008) Per-capita Public Expenditures and Population Size: A Non-Parametric Analysis Using French Data, public choice, vol. 136, hal. 429-445.
  6. Eldemerdash, H., & Ahmed, K.I.S. (2019). Wagner’s Law vs Keynesian Hypothesis: New Evidence from Egypt, International Journal of Arts and Commerce, vol. 8(3) hal. 1-18.
  7. Ganti, Subrahmanyam & Bharat R. Kolluri. (1979). Wagner’s Law of Public Expenditures: Some Efficient Results for the United States. Public Finance, 34(2): 223-233.
  8. Hindriks, J., & Myles, Gareth D. (2006). Intermediate Public Economics. London: The Mit Press.
  9. Ighodaro, Clement A. U., & Oriakhi, Dickson E. (2010) Expenditure and Economic Growth Follow Wagner’s Law in Nigeria?.annals of the university of petrosani, economics, vol. 10, no.2, pp. 185-198.
  10. Islam A. (2001). Wagner's Law Revisited: Cointegration and Exogeneity Tests for the USA. applied economics letters, vol. 8 no. 8, hal. 509-515. DOI 10.1080/13504850010018743.
  11. Keho Y. (2016). Testing Wagner’s Law in the Presence of Structural Changes: New Evidence from Six African Countries (1960-2013). International journal of economics and financial issues, vol. 6 no.1, hal. 1-6.
  12. Kimakova A. (2009) Government Size and Openness Revisited: The Case of Financial Globalization. kyklos, vol. 62 no. 3, hal. 394–406.
  13. Lamartina S & Zaghini A. (2011). Increasing Public Expenditures: Wagner’s Law In OECD Countries. german economic review, vol.12 no. 2, hal. 149-164. DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0475.2010.00517.x.
  14. Loizides, John & George Vamvoukas. (2005). Government Expenditure and Economic Growth: Evidence from Trivariate Causality Testing. Journal of Applied Economics, 8(1): 125-152.
  15. Mahmudi. (2010). Manajemen Kinerja Sektor Publik. UPPYKPN,Yogyakarta, edisi kedua, hal. 85 dan 86
  16. Mann, Arthur J. (1980). Wagner’s Law: An Econometric Test for Mexico 1925-1976. National Tax Journal, 33(2): 189-201.
  17. Musgrave, Richard A. (1969). Fiscal Systems. New Heaven: Yale University Press.
  18. Narayan, Paresh Kumar. (2005). The Government Revenue and Government Expenditure Nexus: Empirical Evidence From Nine Asian Countries. journal of asian economics, vol. 15, hal. 1203-1216.
  19. Oxley, Les. (1994). Cointegration, Causality and Wagner’s Law: A Test for Britain 1870- 1913. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 41(3): 286-298.
  20. Peacock A, Scott A. (2000). The Curious Attraction Of Wagner's Law. public choice, vol. 102, No. 1/2, hal. 1-17.
  21. Ram, Rati. (1987). Wagner’s Hypothesis in Time-Series and Cross-Section Perspectives: Evidence for ‘Real’ Data for 115 Countries. Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(2): 194-204.
  22. Rostow, Walt W. (1960). The Stages of Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  23. Sukartini N & Saleh S. (2012) Pengujian Hukum Wagner Dalam Perekonomian Indonesia Kajian Pengeluaran Pemerintah Pusat Dan Pemerintah Provinsi. jurnal bisnis dan ekonomi (JBE), vol. 19 no. 1, hal. 1-24.
  24. Suparmoko. (2013). Keuangan Negara: Dalam teori dan Praktik. BPFE, Yogyakarta, Edisi Keenam, hal. 27-28.
  25. Taha, R & Loganathan, N. (2008) Causality Between Tax Revenue and Government Spending in Malaysia. the international journal of business and finance research, vol. 2 no. 2, hal. 62-73. ISSN: 19310269.
  26. Tulumce, S. Y., & Yayla, N. (2017). Components of government expenditures and economic growth relationship in Turkey: Wagner or Keynes? Social Sciences, 12(4), 163-184.
  27. Turan T & Karakas M. (2016). The Effect Of Trade Openness And Income On The Size Of A Government. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 47 E, hal. 164-178.
  28. Uysal, D., & Mucuk, M. (2009). The relationship between public spending and economic growth in Turkish economy. Finans Politik & Ekonomik Yorumlar, 46(527), 39-48.
  29. Wijeweera A, Garis T. (2009). Wagner’s Law And Social Welfare: The Case Of The Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia. applied econometrics and international development, vol. 9-2, hal 199-209. ISSN: 15784487.