Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation

This paper looks at the discretionary fi scal and real economy support measures introduced by EMU Member States in response to the crises. The analyses build on a data base assembled by the Commission on individual crises response measures with a view to survey the implementation of the European Eco...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fischer, Jonas, Justo, Isabelle
Formato: Artículo revista
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Instituto de Economía y Finanzas. Facultad de Ciencias Económicas. Universidada Nacional de Córdoba. 2010
Materias:
E6
H2
H3
H6
Acceso en línea:https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/REyE/article/view/3869
Aporte de:
id I10-R10-article-3869
record_format ojs
institution Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
institution_str I-10
repository_str R-10
container_title_str Revistas de la UNC
language Inglés
format Artículo revista
topic automatic stabilisers
European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP)
budget
discretionary policies
E6
H2
H3
H6
estabilizadores automáticos
Plan Europeo de Recuperación Económica (PERE)
presupuesto
políticas discrecionales
E6
H2
H6
H3
spellingShingle automatic stabilisers
European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP)
budget
discretionary policies
E6
H2
H3
H6
estabilizadores automáticos
Plan Europeo de Recuperación Económica (PERE)
presupuesto
políticas discrecionales
E6
H2
H6
H3
Fischer, Jonas
Justo, Isabelle
Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
topic_facet automatic stabilisers
European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP)
budget
discretionary policies
E6
H2
H3
H6
estabilizadores automáticos
Plan Europeo de Recuperación Económica (PERE)
presupuesto
políticas discrecionales
E6
H2
H6
H3
author Fischer, Jonas
Justo, Isabelle
author_facet Fischer, Jonas
Justo, Isabelle
author_sort Fischer, Jonas
title Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
title_short Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
title_full Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
title_fullStr Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
title_full_unstemmed Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation
title_sort government fiscal and real economy responses to the crises: automatic stabilisers versus automatic stabilisation
description This paper looks at the discretionary fi scal and real economy support measures introduced by EMU Member States in response to the crises. The analyses build on a data base assembled by the Commission on individual crises response measures with a view to survey the implementation of the European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP). The paper first provides a broad overview of the types of crises-related measures taken, including broad estimates of their budgetary dimension. On this basis it appears that on an aggregate level, the discretionary support has been in line with agreed principles of being timely, temporary and targeted. Member States with restricted fi scal space has overall taken a more restrictive stance than those with more room of manoeuvre. The paper then looks at how these discretionary measures complement the "automatic" budget  tabilisation. It appears that, in budgetary terms, about half of the discretionary measures add to the areas already covered by automatic stabilisers while the other half address other areas such as investments, industrial sectors and vulnerable groups particularly hit by the crises. The overall experience may suggest that it has been helpful with agreed ex-ante principles for how discretionary stimuli should be provided and that the provision of discretionary stimulus under such conditionality can work to strengthen the budgetary stabilisation capacity in a flexible way.
publisher Instituto de Economía y Finanzas. Facultad de Ciencias Económicas. Universidada Nacional de Córdoba.
publishDate 2010
url https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/REyE/article/view/3869
work_keys_str_mv AT fischerjonas governmentfiscalandrealeconomyresponsestothecrisesautomaticstabilisersversusautomaticstabilisation
AT justoisabelle governmentfiscalandrealeconomyresponsestothecrisesautomaticstabilisersversusautomaticstabilisation
AT fischerjonas respuestasfiscalesdelgobiernoydelaeconomiarealalascrisisestabilizadoresautomaticosversusestabilizacionautomatica
AT justoisabelle respuestasfiscalesdelgobiernoydelaeconomiarealalascrisisestabilizadoresautomaticosversusestabilizacionautomatica
first_indexed 2022-08-20T00:57:09Z
last_indexed 2022-08-20T00:57:09Z
_version_ 1770716707983196160
spelling I10-R10-article-38692022-04-06T20:52:18Z Government Fiscal and Real Economy Responses to the Crises: Automatic Stabilisers versus Automatic Stabilisation Respuestas fiscales del gobierno y de la economía real a las crisis: Estabilizadores automáticos versus estabilización automática Fischer, Jonas Justo, Isabelle automatic stabilisers European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP) budget discretionary policies E6 H2 H3 H6 estabilizadores automáticos Plan Europeo de Recuperación Económica (PERE) presupuesto políticas discrecionales E6 H2 H6 H3 This paper looks at the discretionary fi scal and real economy support measures introduced by EMU Member States in response to the crises. The analyses build on a data base assembled by the Commission on individual crises response measures with a view to survey the implementation of the European Economic Recovery Programme (EERP). The paper first provides a broad overview of the types of crises-related measures taken, including broad estimates of their budgetary dimension. On this basis it appears that on an aggregate level, the discretionary support has been in line with agreed principles of being timely, temporary and targeted. Member States with restricted fi scal space has overall taken a more restrictive stance than those with more room of manoeuvre. The paper then looks at how these discretionary measures complement the "automatic" budget  tabilisation. It appears that, in budgetary terms, about half of the discretionary measures add to the areas already covered by automatic stabilisers while the other half address other areas such as investments, industrial sectors and vulnerable groups particularly hit by the crises. The overall experience may suggest that it has been helpful with agreed ex-ante principles for how discretionary stimuli should be provided and that the provision of discretionary stimulus under such conditionality can work to strengthen the budgetary stabilisation capacity in a flexible way. Este artículo analiza las medidas discrecionales fi scales y de apoyo a la economía real introducidas por los países miembros de Unión Monetaria Europea en respuesta a la crisis. El análisis se realiza en base a datos recolectados por la Comisión Europea sobre medidas tomadas por cada país en respuesta a la crisis para evaluar la implementación del Programa de Recuperación Económica Europea. El artículo provee una extensa revisión de los tipos de medidas tomadas relacionadas con la crisis, incluyendo estimaciones de su dimensión presupuestaria. Con respecto a esto se encuentra que, a nivel agregado, el apoyo discrecional ha estado en línea con los principios aceptados de ser oportuno, transitorio y selectivo. Los Estados Miembros con capacidad fi scal más limitada en general han adoptado una postura más restrictiva que los que tienen más margen de maniobra. En el documento se analiza cómo estas medidas discrecionales complementan la estabilización presupuestaria "automática". Se encuentra que, en términos  presupuestarios, cerca de la mitad de las medidas discrecionales apoyan a áreas ya cubiertas por los estabilizadores automáticos, mientras que la otra mitad apoya otras áreas como inversiones, sectores industriales y grupos vulnerables particularmente afectados por la crisis. La experiencia en general puede sugerir que los estímulos discrecionales han sido de gran ayuda y han estado de acuerdo con los principios preestablecidos de cómo deben ser provistos y que la implementación de este tipo políticas discrecionales pueden fortalecer la capacidad de estabilización presupuestaria de una manera flexible. Instituto de Economía y Finanzas. Facultad de Ciencias Económicas. Universidada Nacional de Córdoba. 2010-06-01 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion application/pdf https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/REyE/article/view/3869 Revista de Economía y Estadística; Vol. 48 No. 1 (2010); 11-40 Revista de Economía y Estadística; Vol. 48 Núm. 1 (2010); 11-40 2451-7321 0034-8066 10.55444/2451.7321.2010.v48.n1 eng https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/REyE/article/view/3869/5091 Derechos de autor 2010 Jonas Fischer, Isabelle Justo http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0