2014年-世界发展银行全球_Political_Reforms_and_Public_Policy__Evidence_from_Agricultural_and_Food_Policies_27页_401kb

Summary of "Political Reforms and Public Policy: Evidence from Agricultural and Food Policies"

Core Content

This paper investigates the impact of political regime transitions on agricultural and food policies using a global dataset spanning 74 countries from 1955 to 2005. The study focuses on how democratization influences public policy, particularly in the context of agricultural taxation and subsidization. It employs econometric methods to analyze both cross-country and within-country variations in policy outcomes, aiming to establish a causal relationship between political reforms and agricultural policies.

Main Findings

• Democratization and Agricultural Policies: The study finds that democratization is associated with a reduction in agricultural taxation and an increase in agricultural subsidization, or both. This aligns with the predictions of the median voter model, which suggests that democratic regimes are more likely to redistribute resources toward the poor, including farmers.

• Political Regime Differences: Autocracies are generally associated with negative levels of both the Nominal Rate of Assistance (NRA) and Relative Rate of Assistance (RRA), while democracies show positive values. The average NRA and RRA values are significantly higher in democracies than in autocracies.

• Time Period Analysis: From 1956 to 2005, the average NRA for democracies was +0.45 (or +0.31 for RRA), compared to -0.15 (or -0.26 for RRA) for autocracies. This indicates a substantial shift in policy direction following democratization.

• Country-Specific Transitions: The study examines 23 countries that experienced permanent democratization. It finds that:

  • Agricultural policies (NRA and RRA) were relatively stable in the decade before democratization.
  • Following democratization, these policies increased significantly.
  • There was an immediate effect and an additional increase about five years later.

• Structural Bias of Political Reforms: The majority of transitions from autocracy to democracy occur in countries with a large rural population and significant agricultural employment. This supports the idea that democratization may have a pro-farmer policy effect due to the political weight of farmers in such societies.

Key Variables and Indicators

• Nominal Rate of Assistance (NRA): Measures the total transfers to agriculture as a percentage of the undistorted unit value, including both direct and indirect interventions.

• Relative Rate of Assistance (RRA): Calculated as the ratio of agricultural NRA to nonagricultural NRA. It is used for international comparisons of pro- or anti-agricultural policy regimes.

• Political Regime Classification: Based on the Polity IV database, distinguishing between autocracies and democracies.

Methodology

• Difference-in-Differences (D-in-D) Approach: Used to estimate the causal effect of democratization on agricultural policies by comparing changes in policy outcomes between treated (democratized) and control (non-democratized) countries over time.

• Propensity Score Matching: Combined with D-in-D to address potential confounding factors and ensure that pretreatment characteristics are balanced between the treated and control groups.

• Robustness Checks: The study includes various estimation methods, such as linear and semiparametric models, and dynamic panel models to ensure the reliability of findings.

• Control Variables: The model includes time-varying, country-specific variables and continent-year interaction effects to account for potential heterogeneity and omitted variable bias.

Literature and Conceptual Issues

• Political Economy of Agricultural Policies: The paper builds on existing literature that explores the relationship between political institutions and economic policies. It notes that while some studies have found a positive impact of democracy on agricultural protection, others suggest that this relationship is non-linear and depends on the economic structure and resource endowments.

• Reverse Causality and Omitted Variable Bias: The study acknowledges that many prior studies suffer from reverse causality and omitted variable bias, as they rely primarily on cross-sectional data rather than longitudinal variations.

• Data Limitations: The lack of detailed data on autocratic rulers' preferences and the challenges in measuring political preferences make it difficult to fully understand the mechanisms behind policy changes.

Conclusion

The paper contributes to the understanding of how political reforms, particularly democratization, influence agricultural and food policies. It highlights the importance of using a comprehensive dataset and advanced econometric techniques to capture the causal effects of regime changes on public policy. The findings suggest that democratization is associated with more pro-agricultural policies, especially in countries where farmers constitute a significant portion of the population.