{"title":"Assessing Fiscal Sustainability: A Review of Methods with a View to EMU","authors":"Fabrizio Balassone, D. Franco","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2109377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Balassone and Franco review the literature on fiscal sustainability in order to examine the comparative advantages and disadvantages of different methodologies and indicators and to highlight the areas in which more research effort is still needed. They contrast the intuitive character of the concept of sustainability with the analytical and operational difficulties met with when trying to arrive at a rigorous definition. On the one hand, the literature has not produced a unique definition of sustainability; furthermore, the problem has only been dealt with in a partial equilibrium framework. On the other hand, the statistical definition of the main variables to be used for the assessment of sustainability is not uncontroversial; moreover, as the assessment is based on long-term projections, it is necessarily subject to wide margins of error.Balassone and Franco also point out that, theoretical issues notwithstanding, the Treaty of Maastricht and the Stability and Growth Pact set fiscal rules which, if complied with, ensure sustainability according to any definition adopted. Techniques developed for the analysis of sustainability can therefore be used for the assessment of prospective compliance with such rules, a crucial task for both policy evaluation and timely corrective intervention. In re-examining the pros and cons of available indicators, their paper categorises the studies on the assessment of sustainability into two main strands: those testing for the sustainability of past policies and those assessing prospective fiscal stances. Among the latter a distinction is drawn between works based on standard national accounting concepts and generational accounting exercises. The paper concludes by stressing the need for further efforts to guide budgetary policy more effectively.","PeriodicalId":341123,"journal":{"name":"2000 Fiscal Sustainability Conference (Archive)","volume":"270 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"116","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2000 Fiscal Sustainability Conference (Archive)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2109377","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 116
Abstract
Balassone and Franco review the literature on fiscal sustainability in order to examine the comparative advantages and disadvantages of different methodologies and indicators and to highlight the areas in which more research effort is still needed. They contrast the intuitive character of the concept of sustainability with the analytical and operational difficulties met with when trying to arrive at a rigorous definition. On the one hand, the literature has not produced a unique definition of sustainability; furthermore, the problem has only been dealt with in a partial equilibrium framework. On the other hand, the statistical definition of the main variables to be used for the assessment of sustainability is not uncontroversial; moreover, as the assessment is based on long-term projections, it is necessarily subject to wide margins of error.Balassone and Franco also point out that, theoretical issues notwithstanding, the Treaty of Maastricht and the Stability and Growth Pact set fiscal rules which, if complied with, ensure sustainability according to any definition adopted. Techniques developed for the analysis of sustainability can therefore be used for the assessment of prospective compliance with such rules, a crucial task for both policy evaluation and timely corrective intervention. In re-examining the pros and cons of available indicators, their paper categorises the studies on the assessment of sustainability into two main strands: those testing for the sustainability of past policies and those assessing prospective fiscal stances. Among the latter a distinction is drawn between works based on standard national accounting concepts and generational accounting exercises. The paper concludes by stressing the need for further efforts to guide budgetary policy more effectively.
Balassone和Franco回顾了关于财政可持续性的文献,以检查不同方法和指标的比较优势和劣势,并强调仍然需要更多研究工作的领域。他们将可持续性概念的直观特征与试图得出严格定义时遇到的分析和操作困难进行了对比。一方面,文献没有给出可持续性的独特定义;此外,这个问题只是在部分平衡的框架下处理的。另一方面,用于评价可持续性的主要变量的统计定义并非没有争议;此外,由于评估是基于长期预测,因此必然存在较大的误差幅度。Balassone和Franco还指出,尽管存在理论问题,但《马斯特里赫特条约》(Treaty of Maastricht)和《稳定与增长公约》(Stability and Growth Pact)制定的财政规则如果得到遵守,无论采用何种定义,都能确保可持续性。因此,为分析可持续性而开发的技术可用于评估对这些规则的预期遵守情况,这是政策评价和及时纠正干预的关键任务。在重新审视现有指标的利弊时,他们的论文将可持续性评估的研究分为两大类:对过去政策可持续性的测试和对未来财政状况的评估。在后者中,根据标准国民会计概念和代际会计练习进行的工作有所区别。论文最后强调需要进一步努力,更有效地指导预算政策。