Search results

This paper aims to investigate spillover effects of public capital stock in a production function model that accounts for spatial dependencies. In many settings, ignoring spatial dependency yields inefficient, biased and inconsistent estimates in cross country panels. Although there are a number of studies aiming to estimate the output elasticity of public capital stock, many of those fail to reach a consensus on refining the elasticity estimates. We argue that accounting for spillover effects of the public capital stock on the production efficiency and incorporating spatial dependences are crucial. For this purpose, we employ a spatial autoregressive stochastic frontier model based on a number of specifications of the spatial dependency structure. Using the data of 21 OECD countries from 1960 to 2001, we estimate a spatial autoregressive stochastic frontier model and derive the mean indirect marginal effects of public capital stock, which are interpreted as spillover effects. We found that spillover effects can be an important factor explaining variations in technical inefficiency across countries as well as in explaining the discrepancies among various levels of output elasticity of public capital stock in traditional production function approaches.

To analyse productivity of public expenditures; especially to find out the effect of human capital investment on private sector productivity.

Several measures of public sector capital stock are constructed. These measures are used in testing the effects on private sector productivity. Empirical analysis makes use of cross‐country panel data and utilizes various panel econometric methods.

The main finding is that public sector capital has a positive impact on private sector productivity. Some evidence is provided to the hypotheses that also human capital that is generated within the public sector increases private sector productivity.

There are a lot of measurement problems with the cross‐country data. Also the non‐stationarity of data creates some estimation problems. These may have some impact on the quantitative, but perhaps not on qualitative, nature of results.

Relatively few analysis have made in this area; this is true in particular with comparative (cross‐country) analysis.

This paper is a response to the doctrine that capital is incompatible with public ownership. The fundamental characteristics of modern productivity determine the co-existence of the market economy and capital relations.

Socialism can neither bypass the market economy nor “go beyond capital”; capital appears in two historical forms, including the private capital and the public capital. Public capital is the inevitable outcome of the inherent contradictions of public ownership in a socialist market economy.

It represents an economic relationship that compels individual labourers to provide surplus labour for the society. The combination of the strong accumulation function of public capital and the improvement of people's welfare is the main cause of China's development miracle.

The innovation impetus of the public capital and its “immunity” to the capitalist crisis highlight the tremendous power of socialism with Chinese characteristics in breaking free of the shackles of capitalism and continuously developing productive forces. Public capital demonstrates and will continue to demonstrate the historical legitimacy of socialism.

This paper aims to study the effects of public human capital spending on growth under the presence of financial frictions and productivity heterogeneity. In addition, this paper derives and discusses growth-maximizing policy.

This paper constructs a tractable human capital–based growth model. There a continuum of heterogeneous entrepreneurs who own private firms, accumulate personal wealth and face collateral borrowing constraints. The representative worker accumulates human capital by using his own efforts, the existing human capital stock and human capital–related public services. The government finances public spending by taxing capital income. This paper then focuses its analysis on the balanced growth path equilibrium of the economy model.

This paper finds that public human capital spending financed by capital income taxation yields strictly higher growth than when the spending is absent. In addition, it shows that the growth-maximizing capital income tax rate is higher when the idiosyncratic firm productivity distribution is more heavy tailed.

This paper embraces and then explores the effects of productivity heterogeneity and financial frictions into an otherwise conventional human capital–based endogenous growth model. This paper also differs from the conventional endogenous growth framework by incorporating the productive role of public services in the process of accumulating human capital. Therefore, it can address the effects of public spending on growth.

This article highlights key aspects of capital management, including capital planning, capital budgeting, capital financing, decision making and capital spending outcomes. We provide a background discussion of public sector capital management, followed by a summary of the articles that comprise this symposium. Combined, these articles illustrate the complexity of and challenges to capital management at the state and local government levels. We discuss common themes that emerge from reading these articles as a collective symposium, including: (1) modest progress in applying and empirically testing theoretical frameworks; (2) the variety of actors and institutions; and (3) the deteriorating condition and poor performance of public infrastructure. We use the articles to illustrate gaps in the research and offer suggestions for future research on capital management theory and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize a meso-level (organizational) social capital theoretical approach to public relations. A theory and conceptualization of social capital as a resource- and exchange-based function of public relations is proposed. Here it is argued that public relations professionals serve as the managers of intangible resources on behalf of organizations. These intangibles serve as social capital for organizations and are managed through strategic, goal-directed communication behaviors. Social capital is conceptualized alongside other forms of capital that contribute to organizational advantage. The author proposes a conceptual social capital model of public relations and argues that the strategic management of intangible resources as social capital offers an ontology for public relations.

The author employed a process of open-system theory building. Extensive research from multi-disciplinary areas of scholarship – namely, sociology, business, and public relations – formed the basis for the conceptualized model and propositions.

Public relations theory is narrowly defined and does not offer an adequate ontology. This paper extends and refines existing public relations scholarship surrounding social capital to focus on competitive advantages for the organization. This paper uses input from the larger fields of sociology and business, while contextualizing social capital within the public relations scholarship. The result is a resource- and exchange-based social capital model of public relations and propositions for further theory building and empirical analyses.

The public relations discipline often struggles to demonstrate return-on-investment for organizations. The social capital model of public relations offers support for the capital generation and maintenance role of public relations for organizational advantage.

This paper represents one of the first comprehensive attempts at developing a meso-level social capital theory of public relations focused on intangible resource management for the organization.

The purpose of this paper is to provide assistance to public organizations in the process of developing their ability to identify, measure and manage their intangible assets.

A review of the most important intellectual capital management initiatives at Spanish public organizations is realized.

The paper shows the importance of intellectual capital approaches as instruments to face the new challenges in public sector. The experience gained from the case studies provides a practical help to public organizations to develop means to identify, measure and manage their intangible assets.

The study provides a basis to understand how Spanish public organizations are measuring and managing their intellectual capital. In this sense, the first step would be the definition and diffusion of the organization's strategic objectives. Then, critical intangibles related to these objectives should be identified. Afterwards, a set of indicators is defined and developed for each intangible.

Public managers work with intangible concepts, although there is not always a methodology available that systematizes their identification, measurement and presentation. To deal with this problem, it is considered fundamental to know which initiatives have been carried out in Spain in relation to models of intellectual capital management for public organizations.

Academic research in the USA and more recently in the UK and Sweden, has highlighted public capital as a significant growth determinant. Public capital, it is argued, has a positive effect on private sector output, productivity and capital formation. However, controversy surrounds the empirical results emerging from this literature. Much of the controversy rests on research methods employed. Adds to this body of literature in two ways. First, estimates aggregate production functions for private sector output using Irish data. The stock of public capital is included as an input to investigate the effects of government investment on private sector productivity. Second, uses modern time‐series techniques to test the hypothesis. Employs the Johansen (1988) cointegration testing procedure and error correction modelling on annual data for the period 1958‐1990. These modern techniques produce empirical results which do not support the public capital hypothesis. Suggests several reasons to explain this outcome, and outlines possible policy implications.

The aim of this paper is to analyse the relationship between public debt, corporate debt service costs and private capital formation in South Africa.

To capture the long-run characteristic of investment, the study adopts the Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares approach and tests for cointegration using Hansen (1992)'s Parameter Instability test.

We find that private capital formation increases in domestic debt and decreases in external debt during the pre-crisis period. However, during the period post the Global Financial Crisis, we find evidence of domestic public debt crowding out private capital formation, whereas external debt crowds-in capital formation. Debt service costs are found to reduce investment due to the effect of the debt overhang throughout the period under analysis.

The paper has important implications for macroeconomic policy. In particular, there is need for deleveraging and allocation of a higher proportion of debt to public infrastructure expenditure which has complementary effects on private investment.

Debt overhang signal that South African firms could be over-leveraged, which hinders future growth prospects. Firms that face high levels of debt should consider debt restructuring.

Empirical studies undertaken to explore this relationship have yielded contradicting results suggesting that the relationship between public debt and private investment is heterogeneous depending on a given economy or prevailing macroeconomic environment. In particular, existing research does not provide evidence on whether recent increases in public debt in South Africa have led to crowding-in or crowding-out of private investment. This paper therefore contributes to empirical literature on the impact of public debt on private investment within a small open economy.