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