Skip to main content

Table 2 Results for the single-equation model

From: How does depreciations management affect subsequent fiscal performance? The case of the Swiss cantons

  Overall sample Subsamples
Model I Model II Model III
  Surpluses only (B > 0) Deficits only
(B < 0)
AD(− 1) 0.259*** 0.190*** 0.169
  (0.076) (0.067) (0.140)
Growth 12.835 4.075 11.615
  (8.715) (6.890) (12.364)
Unemployment − 40.515 − 36.414 − 18.726
  (27.800) (25.272) (31.027)
Elderly − 41.152* − 43.221*** 6.601
  (24.233) (14.872) (25.877)
Leaning − 176.717*** − 77.532* − 147.956**
  (56.748) (40.538) (63.851)
Fragmentation − 15.799 − 29.366 17.861
  (42.744) (29.361) (47.090)
Concordance − 62.071 − 144.951 211.956
  (173.191) (140.321) (258.737)
Departments − 3.934 − 3.181 10.987
  (11.357) (9.977) (13.955)
Election 3.995 39.070 − 42.618
  (37.079) (26.965) (41.752)
Initiative 103.349 175.484*** − 25.178
  (84.209) (61.002) (118.961)
Referendum − 42.176 − 56.754 68.208**
  (35.967) (34.767) (34.664)
Rules − 5.540 − 19.214 − 24.714
  (47.459) (25.928) (58.857)
Misestimation − 0.439*** − 0.426*** 0.270
  (0.129) (0.069) (0.173)
Balance(− 1) 0.262*** 0.220*** − 0.003
  (0.084) (0.033) (0.075)
Constant 1511.481*** 999.567** − 388.93
  (576.440) (429.977) (744.623)
Cantonal FE YES YES YES
Time FE YES YES YES
R-Squared 0.488 0.596 0.513
Joint, p value 0.000 0.000 0.000
N 729 475 254
  1. (1) Dependent variable: cantonal corrected (‘true’) balance in real terms per capita at time t; (2) cantonal fixed and time fixed effects are considered; and (3) parameter values appear without brackets and the standard deviation within. Asterisks denote the level of significance of parameter values: *** indicating significance at 1% level, ** at 5% level and * at 10% level