Analysis of the Determinants of Public Education Expenditures in Bangladesh

Rashidul Islam Sheikh

Abstract


This study based on the well-known theories of public policy analysis, economics, as well as public finance through empirically exploring and examining the determinants of public expenditure on education in Bangladesh. It is postulated, for the purpose of the research that education expenditures are determined by multidimensional factors. Economic-demographic, decision-making, political, and new institutionalism theories are therefore been studied, along with the concept of education. This research identified as well as computed education expenditure by types along with levels of education as per the distribution of government budget and the education system of Bangladesh. The results disclosed that education financing policy in Bangladesh is primarily determined by the previous year’s expenditures. Indirect tax also increased the total education expenditure as percentage of GDP. This is what in line of incrementalism theory and fiscal illusion or voting bias model suggests, respectively. Furthermore, total populations and government effectiveness has the positive impact of types as well as levels of education expenditures; implying that government of Bangladesh taken under consideration only certain factors and neglects to incorporate the importance of economic, governance and educational determinants while allocating education expenditures.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Alesina, A., & Roubini, N. (1992). Political Cycles in OECD Economies. The Review of Economic Studies, 59(4), 663–688. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2297992

Balcells, V. L. (2006). Trade Openness and Preferences for Redistribution: A Cross-National Assessment of the Compensation Hypothesis. Business and Politics, 8(2), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.1131

Borcherding, T. E. (Ed.). (1977). Budgets and Bureaucrats: The Sources of Government Growth. North Carolina: Duke University Press Durham.

Buchanan, J. M. (1975). The Limits of Liberty. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1977). The expanding public sector: Wagnor sqaured. Public Choice, 31(Fall), 147–150.

Buchanan, J. M., & Wagner, R. E. (1977). Democracy in Deficit The Political Legacy of Lord Keynes. New York: Academic press.

Buracom, P. (2011). Explaining the growth and distributional and fiscal effects of public education, health, and welfare spending in Thailand. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 38(3), 113–142.

Busemeyer, M. R. (2007). Determinants of public education spending in 21 OECD democracies, 1980-2001. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(4), 582–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701314417

Dye, T. R. (1978). Understanding Public Policy (3rd ed.). Prentice- Hall, Inc.

Dye, T. R. (2005). Understanding Public Policy (11th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Easton, D. (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Etzioni, A. (1967). Mixed-Scanning: A “Third” Aproach to Decision-making. American Society for Public Administration, 27(5), 385-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0869-007-9037-x

Fernandez, R., & Rogerson, R. (1997). The Determinants of Public Education Expenditures: Evidence from the States, 1950-1990 (NBER Working Paper Series No. 5995). Cambridge, MA.

Ferris, J. S., & West, E. G. (1999). Cost disease versus Leviathan explanations of rising government cost: An empirical investigation. Public Choice, 98(3–4), 307–316. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/207157775?accountid=25704

Garrett, G. (2000). The Causes of Globalization. Comparative Political Studies, 33(6/7), 941–991.

Garrett, G., & Mitchell, D. (2001). Globalization, government spending and taxation in the OECD. European Journal of Political Research, 39(2), 145–177. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011043120145

Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (1997). Understanding the Twentieth-Century growth in U.S. School Spending. The Journal of Human Resources, xxx11(1), 35.

Henrekson, M. (1988). Sweedish Government Growth: A Disequilibrium Analysis. In J. . Lybeck & M. Henreckson (Eds.), Explaining The Growth of Government (pp. 93–132). New York: Elsevier Science B.V.

Heyndels, B., & Smolders, C. (1994). Fiscal Illusion at the Local Level : Empirical Evidence for the Flemish Municipalities. Public Choice, 80(3/4), 325–338. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30027088

Hibbs, D. A. (1994). the Partisan Model of Macroeconomic Cycles: More Theory and Evidence for the United States. Economics & Politics, 6(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0343.1994.tb00081.x

Kemnitz, A. (1999). Demographic Structure and the Political Economy of Education Subsidies. Public Choice, 101(3), 235–249.

Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The Science of “Muddling Through.” American Society for Public Administration (Vol. 19). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/973677

Mankiw, N. G. (2010). Intermediate Macroeconomics (7th ed.). Worth Palgrave Macmillan.

Marshall, L. (1991). New Evidence of Fiscal Illusion: The 1986 tax “Windfalls.” American Economic Review, 81(5), 1336–1344.

Meltzer, A. H., & Richard, S. F. (1983). Tests of a Rational Theory of the Size of Government. Springer, 41(3), 403-418. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30023711

Mueller, D. C. (1987). The Growth of Government : A Public Choice Perspectives. Staff Papers (International Monetary Fund, 34(1), 115-149. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3867026

Niskanen Jr, W. A. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine. Atherton.

Oates, W. (1988). On the Nature and Measurement of Fiscal Illusion: A Survey. Taxation and Fiscal Federalism: Essays in Honor of Russell Mathews, 65–82.

Peltzman, S. (1980). The Growth of Government. The Journal of Law and Economics, 1. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845699789.5.663

Quade, E. (1982). Analysis for Public Decisions (2nd ed.). New York: Elsevier Science Publishing.

Ram, R. (1995). Public educational expenditures in the United States: An analytical comparison with other industrialized countries. Economics of Education Review, 14(1), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(94)00029-6

Rodrik, D. (1998). Why do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments ? Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997–1032. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/250038

Romer, T., & Rosenthal, H. (1978). Political Resource Allocation, Controlled Agendas, and the Status Quo. Public Choice, 33(4), 27–43. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30023066

Saeki, M. (2005). Systematic, political, and socioeconomic influences on educational spending in the American States. Review of Policy Research, 22(2), 245-256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00132.x

Sagarik, D. (2013). An Analysis of the Determinants of Education Expenditure in Thailand. Asian Politics & Policy, 5(2), 227–248.

Tandberg, D. (2009). Interest Groups and Governmental Institutions. Educational Policy, 24(5), 735–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904809339163

Tandberg, D. (2010). Interest Groups and Governmental Institutions. Educational Policy, 24(5), 735–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904809339163

Tanzi, V., & Schuknecht, L. (2000). Public Spending in The 20th Centure (1st ed., p. 291). United kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Ubiergo, A. S. (2007). The Political Economy of the Welfare State in Latin America Globalization, Democracy, and Development. New York: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from www.cambridge.org

Wagner, A. (1958). Three Extracts on Public Finance. In R. A. Musgrave & A. T. Peacock (Eds.), Classics in the Theory of Public Finance (p. 244). New York: Macmillan.

Yoon, J. (2009). Globalization and the Welfare State in Developing Countries. Business and Politics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.1205




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v9i3.15419

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Journal of Public Administration and Governance  ISSN 2161-7104

Copyright © Macrothink Institute

'Macrothink Institute' is a trademark of Macrothink Institute, Inc.

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'macrothink.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.