Government growth in the twenty-first century

Abstract

Public choice explanations of government growth fall into three main categories: budget-maximization theories, rational-choice models, and path-dependent models like the “ratchet hypothesis”. The strengths and weaknesses of these theories as explanations for government growth are considered along with some facts about the actual growth of government to conjecture about its trajectory in the twenty-first century. Government size seems to have been constrained in the past primarily by its ability to raise revenue. Growth rates in the new century thus appear to depend on factors constraining government’s ability to continue to expand the tax base. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

toward a science of politics?

“…Or is it simply that government is what economists call a 'normal good,' and more of it is sought as incomes rise? (For further discussion, see Holcombe, 2005). 10 Understanding the mechanisms which drive observed empirical relationships allows us to refine and extend our theories.…”

A theory of predatory welfare state and citizen welfare: the French case

“…The question of government size should not be conflated with government growth. The latter relates to the evolution of the state size in a dynamic setting (Holcombe 2005). Path dependency models (Olson 1982;Holcombe 2005) capture government growth.…”

“…The latter relates to the evolution of the state size in a dynamic setting (Holcombe 2005). Path dependency models (Olson 1982;Holcombe 2005) capture government growth. These models build upon the ratchet hypothesis to explain government growth from a supply side perspective.…”

“…A second contribution of this paper is to explore the reappropriating effect or the way self-managed citizen welfare was transformed into a welfare state through a three stage process of reforms in 1946, 1967, and 1996. JEL Codes: D6, D74, H1, H53, N4, O1Our general theory builds upon path dependency models of welfare spending (Olson 1982;Holcombe 2005) and the vast literature on the symbiotic relationship between total war and the welfare state within a predatory approach to the state (Vahabi 2016a, b). Welfare spending increases the state capacity to engage in a total war.…”

“…Our general theory builds upon path dependency models of welfare spending (Olson 1982;Holcombe 2005) and the vast literature on the symbiotic relationship between total war and the welfare state within a predatory approach to the state (Vahabi 2016a, b). Welfare spending increases the state capacity to engage in a total war.…”