Dynamic Effects of Fiscal Policy on Output in Rwanda
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t2401Abstract
This paper aimed to analyze the dynamic effect of various components of fiscal policy on output in Rwandan economy from 1990 to 2022. Differently several researchers argue that fiscal policy affect positively and negatively the output, in long run and in short run, the growth in the economy. These theories have used in this study Keynesian Theory, suggests that fiscal policy can have a significant effect on output, especially during economic downturns, Ricardian Equivalence theory argues that individuals have rational expectations about future taxes and government spending and New Keynesian theory emphasizes the importance of price and wage rigidities in shaping the effects of fiscal policy on output. The estimation technique employed is the ARDL together with ECM. This study used secondary data collected from world bank database, these data were time series data as the study used annual data. Using Eviews 13, the econometrics technique of ADF Test was used to test the stationarity. The stationarity test was done so as to ensure whether to conduct the co integration test or not. Having purely results of unit root test at first different allowed the researcher to adopt ARDL bound test of co integration. The results of ARDL bound test indicated the existence of a long run relationship among the series of the study. The findings from ARDL ECM indicated that there is a significant short run relationship among the variables of the study. With R-square of 0.84, it is evident that all variables together Couse variation of 84% to the dependent variable GDP in short run, other factors remaining constant and the negative coefficient of -0.036 implies that as long as the time will go the error will be correct. This study reveals that the activities in the fiscal policy can affect positively on output. The results of post estimation tests show that there is no multi collinearity, no heteroscedasticity, the model are specified by using Ramsey resort test, data are stable and errors are normally distributed which mean that we don’t have spurious regression and we have good forecast in this work. This study reveals that the activities in the fiscal policy can impact positively on the economic growth. Some recommendation has been given to the regulatory Authority and government of Rwanda that should initiate the policies that would encourage more investors to come to invest in the country in order to access the more tax and also be more proactive in their surveillance of collecting tax which will facilitate in long run the entry of new business in Rwandan market in order to increase GDP of country.
References
Idris, M., & Bakar, R. (2019). Public sector spending and economic growth in Nigeria: In search of a stable relationship. Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 3(2), 1-19.
Ihugba O.A., Njoku A.C. (2018). Social and community services government expenditure and Nigeria’s economic growth. In: Tsounis N., Vlachvei A. (eds) Advances in Applied Economic Research. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer.
Barlas, A. W. (2020). The impact of government expenditure on economic growth in Afghanistan, Journal of Economics and Business, 3(2), 729-733.
Dudzeviciˇ ut¯ e, G., ˙ Simelyt ˇ e, A., & Liu ˙ cvaitien ˇ e, A. (2018). Government expenditure and ˙ economic growth in the European Union countries. International Journal of Social Economics, 45(2), 372-386.
Davide Furceri, and Petia Topalova. (2019). “The Macroeconomic Effects of Public Investment: Evidence from Advanced Economies.” Journal of Macroeconomics 50: 224–40.
Arewa A. & Nwakahma C. (2013). Macroeconomic Variables and the Dynamic Effect of Public Expenditure: Long-term Trend Analysis in Nigeria Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology.
Phiri, A. (2019). Does military spending nonlinearly affect economic growth in South Africa? Defence and Peace Economics, 30(4), 474-487.
Colander. (2006). Government and Economic Growth in Less Developed Countries. An empirical study,Economic Development and Culture Change, 546.
Austin, A.M. & Ogbole, F. O. (2014). Public Sector Spending and Macroeconomic Variables in Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Management Vol.6, No.18, 2014
Danjuma, A., & Bala, A.K. (2012). Role of Governance in Employment Generation in Nigeria. Journal of Business and Management, 3(3), 27-31.
Gupta, R. (2018). The impact of government expenditure on economic growth in Nepal.
Elizabeth, W. (2013) Fiscal Deficits and Macroeconomic Aggregates in Nigeria Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review vol. 2, No. 9; May, 2013
Holden, S., & Sparrman, V. (2013). Do Government Purchases Affect Unemployment? http://folk.uio.no/sholden/wp/fiscal-U.pdf (Accessed August 28, 2013).
Mc Connel, B. (2002). Macroeconomics, Principles, Problems and policies (8 ed.). New York.
Corbo, & Hernandez. (1994). Taxation, Human capital Accumulation and Economic growth. Texas: Cambrige University Press.
Grossman. (1990). Development of USA economic (Vol. 2). New York: Working paper.
King, R., & Rebero, S. (1990). Public policy and Economic Growth: Developing Neoclassical Implications. Journal of political Economy.
Mankiw, N., & Romer, D. (2006). The quarterly Journal of Economics. A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth, 128.
Mithani. (2010). Contribution to the the Theory Growth (3 ed.). London: University of Berlin.
Michel, k. (1978). introduction to research design of dissertation (2 ed.). New York: oxford dictionary.
Abdullah. (2000). Fiscal Policy institutions and Economic Growth in Asian Economies: Evidence from the Pedroni's Cointegration Approach. International Journal of business and Management, 2, 173-176.
Grossman. (1990). Development of USA economic (Vol. 2). New York: Working paper.
King, R., & Rebero, S. (1990). Public policy and Economic Growth: Developing Neoclassical Implications. Journal of political Economy.
Mankiw, N., & Romer, D. (2006). The quarterly Journal of Economics. A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth, 128.