Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Oil bonanza and the composition of government expenditure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Economics of Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Government behavior can be affected by natural resource benefits. Benevolent government and political leaders may use them to improve the welfare of the people, whereas others may use them for their own interests. To examine the effects of oil bonanza on government behavior comprehensively, this study investigates how giant oilfield discoveries affect the size and composition of government expenditure using data from 168 countries between 1972 and 2008. We find weak evidence that giant oilfield discoveries increase total government expenditure significantly in the medium and long term, whereas their effects are more evident in the short term, especially when controlling for other factors affecting total government expenditure. We also obtain evidence that democracy plays a mediating role in these effects; if the democracy level in a country is consolidated, the size of total government spending does not increase even when discovering giant oilfields. Considering each category of government expenditure, giant oilfield discoveries increase expenditure on health and social protection significantly, whereas they decrease educational expenditure. Furthermore, giant oilfield discoveries decrease expenditure on economic affairs and defense and increase general public services and public order and safety. Finally, giant oilfield discoveries increase the net implicit gasoline subsidy in the long term. These findings enhance our understanding of the effects of oil bonanza on government behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See van der Ploeg (2011), Frankel (2012), and Venables (2016) for a detailed survey on the resource curse.

  2. See Ross’ (2015) study that reviews toxic effects of natural resources on politics. He insists that the windfall of revenue from natural resources, specifically petroleum, negatively affects the quality of governance in a country.

  3. See Shelton’s (2007) study that comprehensively investigates the determinants of government expenditure, although he does not consider the role of natural resources.

  4. In Meltzer and Richard’s (1981) model, the consolidation of democracy can induce the government to implement a more distributive policy. On the contrary, democracy does not affect total government consumption, whereas it does increase and decrease specific government expenditure (Mulligan et al. 2004).

  5. Oil reserves improve health outcomes during the 1960s and 1970s, that is, oil abundance lowers infant mortality and increases life expectancy (Cotet and Tsui 2013b). However, these results are not robust and these effects are insignificant over the period of 1960–2000.

  6. Another strand of literature looks at the relationship between resource abundance and civil war. For instance, natural resource abundance significantly increases the duration and probability of civil wars occurring (Collier and Hoeffler 1998). Natural resource concentration plays a significant role in contributing to the incidence of civil wars (Morelli and Rohner 2015). When using geographical data on mining extraction in Africa, mining has a positive effect on conflict at the local level (Berman et al. 2017).

  7. We note the following two points. First, we omit some categories of government expenditure such as “environmental protection,” “housing and community amenities,” and “recreation, culture, and religion,” partly because of data availability. Second, because we use government expenditure as a share of GDP, the level of GDP influences its ratio. When the level of GDP increases drastically, its ratio may decrease even if the level of a specific government expenditure increases.

  8. More detailed explanation on the differences between GFSM 1986 and GFSM 2001 is provided in Wickens (2002).

  9. Accounting bases have been changed gradually from a cash basis to an accrual basis in many countries. Therefore, this effect cannot be controlled for by year dummies, and we need a dummy for accounting with accrual basis following Seiferling (2013).

  10. Note that this result contradicts that in Cockx and Francken’s (2014) study, which insist that natural resource dependence decreases health spending.

References

  • Acosta-Ormaechea S, Morozumi A (2017) Public spending reallocations and economic growth across different income levels. Econ Inq 55(1):98–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albalate D, Bel G, Elias F (2012) Institutional determinants of military spending. J Comp Econ 40(2):279–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Wacziarg R (1998) Openness, country size and government. J Public Econ 69(3):305–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexeev M, Conrad R (2009) The elusive curse of oil. Rev Econ Stat 91(3):586–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali HE, Abdellatif OA (2015) Military expenditures and natural resources: evidence from rentier states in the Middle East and North Africa. Def Peace Econ 26(1):5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amundsen I (2017) Nigeria: defying the resource curse. In: Williams A, Le Billon P (eds) Corruption, natural resources and development: from resource curse to political ecology. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, pp 17–27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Arezki R, Ramey VA, Sheng L (2017) News shocks in open economies: evidence from giant oil discoveries. Q J Econ 132(1):103–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman N, Couttenier M, Rohner D, Thoenig M (2017) This mine is mine! how minerals fuel conflicts in Africa. Am Econ Rev 107(6):1564–1610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya S, Conradie L, Arezki R (2017) Resource discovery and the politics of fiscal decentralization. J Comp Econ 45(2):366–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya S, Hodler R (2010) Natural resources, democracy and corruption. Eur Econ Rev 54(4):608–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulte EH, Damania R, Deacon RT (2005) Resource intensity, institutions, and development. World Dev 33(7):1029–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caselli F, Michaels G (2013) Do oil windfalls improve living standards? evidence from Brazil. Am Econ J Appl Econ 5(1):208–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cockx L, Francken N (2014) Extending the concept of the resource curse: natural resources and public spending on health. Ecol Econ 108:136–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cockx L, Francken N (2016) Natural resources: a curse on education spending? Energy Policy 92:394–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier P, Hoeffler A (1998) On economic causes of civil war. Oxf Econ Pap 50(4):563–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corden WM, Neary JP (1982) Booming sector and de-industrialisation in a small open economy. Econ J 92(368):825–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotet AM, Tsui KK (2013a) Oil and conflict: what does the cross country evidence really show? Am Econ J Macroecon 5(1):49–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotet AM, Tsui KK (2013b) Oil, growth, and health: what does the cross-country evidence really show? Scand J Econ 115(4):1107–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly W, Rebelo S (1993) Fiscal policy and economic growth: an empirical investigation. J Monet Econ 32(3):417–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel JA (2012) The natural resource curse: a survey. In: Shaffer B, Ziyadov T (eds) Beyond the resource curse. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp 17–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Gylfason T (2001) Natural resources, education, and economic development. Eur Econ Rev 45(4–6):847–859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn MK (2003) Giant fields 1868–2003 (CD-ROM). In: Halbouty MT (ed) Giant oil and gas fields of the decade 1990–1999. AAPG Memoir 78.

  • Horn MK (2004) Giant fields 1868–2004 (CD-ROM). AAPG/datapages miscellaneous data series, version 1.2

  • International Monetary Fund (1999) World economic outlook database, September 1999. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • International Monetary Fund (2005) Historical government finance statistics. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • International Monetary Fund (2013) Government finance statistics. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • International Monetary Fund (2016) Economic diversification in oil-exporting Arab countries. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kotera G, Okada K (2017) How does democratization affect the composition of government expenditure? J Econ Behav Organ 137:145–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lei Y-H, Michaels G (2014) Do giant oilfield discoveries fuel internal armed conflicts? J Dev Econ 110:139–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y (2019) Saudi Arabia’s economic diplomacy through foreign aid: dynamics, objectives and mode. Asian J Middle East Islamic Stud 13(1):110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall MG, Gurr TR, Jaggers K (2017) Polity IV project, political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–2016. Center for Systemic Peace, Vienna, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer AH, Richard SF (1981) A rational theory of the size of government. J Polit Econ 89(5):914–927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morelli M, Rohner D (2015) Resource concentration and civil wars. J Dev Econ 117:32–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan CB, Gil R, Sala-i-Martin X (2004) Do democracies have different public policies than nondemocracies? J Econ Perspect 18(1):51–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson JM (2007) Elections, democracy, and social services. Stud Comp Int Dev 41(4):79–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus W, Oneal JR, Russett B (2012) The effects of the international security environment on national military expenditures: a multicountry study. Int Organ 66(3):491–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okada K, Samreth S (2017) Corruption and natural resource rents: evidence from quantile regression. Appl Econ Lett 24(20):1490–1493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Profeta P, Puglisi R, Scabrosetti S (2013) Does democracy affect taxation and government spending? Evidence from developing countries. J Comp Econ 41(3):684–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajkumar AS, Swaroop V (2008) Public spending and outcomes: does governance matter? J Dev Econ 86(1):96–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik D (1998) Why do more open economies have bigger governments? J Polit Econ 106(5):997–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross ML (2001) Does oil hinder democracy? World Polit 53(3):325–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross ML (2015) What have we learned about the resource curse? Annu Rev Polit Sci 18:239–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross ML, Hazlett C, Mahdavi P (2017) Global progress and backsliding on gasoline taxes and subsidies. Nat Energy 2:16201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs JD, Warner AM (1995) Natural resource abundance and economic growth. NBER Working Paper No. 5398. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA

  • Seiferling M (2013) Recent improvements to the government finance statistics yearbook database in response to analytical needs. IMF Working Paper, WP/13/15. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

  • Shelton CA (2007) The size and composition of government expenditure. J Public Econ 91(11–12):2230–2260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith B (2015) The resource curse exorcised: evidence from a panel of countries. J Dev Econ 116:57–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Töngür Ü, Hsu S, Elveren AE (2015) Military expenditures and political regimes: evidence from global data, 1963–2000. Econ Model 44:68–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Ploeg F (2011) Natural resources: curse or blessing? J Econ Lit 49(2):366–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venables AJ (2016) Using natural resources for development: why has it proven so difficult? J Econ Perspect 30(1):161–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil DN (2013) Economic growth, 3rd edn. Pearson Education, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens TM (2002) Government finance statistics manual 2001 companion material: classification of GFSM 1986 Data to the GFSM 2001 framework. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2017) World development indicators. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellner A (1962) An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J Am Stat Assoc 57(298):348–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the co-editor, Amihai Glazer, an anonymous referee, and seminar participants at the University of the Ryukyus for their invaluable comments and suggestions. Any remaining errors are our own responsibility. This work received financial support from the JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP15H03354, JP16H02026, JP17K13740, and JP20K01697.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics, Kansai University, 3-3-35 Yamate-cho, Suita, Osaka, 564-8680, Japan

    Keisuke Okada

  2. Faculty of Liberal Arts, Saitama University, Shimo-Okubo 255, Sakura-ku, Saitama-shi, Saitama, 338-8570, Japan

    Sovannroeun Samreth

Authors
  1. Keisuke Okada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sovannroeun Samreth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keisuke Okada.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 5, 6 and 7.

Table 5 List of countries
Full size table
Table 6 Data definitions and sources
Full size table
Table 7 Descriptive statistics
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Okada, K., Samreth, S. Oil bonanza and the composition of government expenditure. Econ Gov 22, 23–46 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-020-00246-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-020-00246-3

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation