The relationship between public debt and privatisationthe moderating roles of political ideology and electoral cycles: La relación entre deuda pública y privatización: el papel moderador de la ideología política y los ciclos electorales

  1. Cuadrado-Ballesteros, Beatriz 1
  2. Peña-Miguel, Noemí 2
  1. 1 University of Salamanca, Salamanca-SPAIN
  2. 2 University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Bilbao-SPAIN
Revista de contabilidad = Spanish accounting review: [RC-SAR]

ISSN: 1138-4891

Year of publication: 2024

Volume: 27

Issue: 1

Pages: 18-29

Type: Article

DOI: 10.6018/RCSAR.439271 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDIGITUM editor

More publications in: Revista de contabilidad = Spanish accounting review: [RC-SAR]


Using a sample of 25 European countries between 1995 and 2013, this study shows a bidirectional relationship between privatisations and public debt. Firstly, our findings suggest that governments with higher levels of debt tend to privatise state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to a greater extent than less-indebted governments. Subsequently, the results show that privatisations effectively reduce indebtedness. This means that causality between privatisation and public debt should be considered in future studies. In addition, we have found that such a strategy is used more by right-wing governments, which implies the existence of partisan effects. However, our findings do not support any effect caused by electoral cycles.

Bibliographic References

  • Akitoby, B., Binder, A., & Komatsuzaki, T. (2017). Inflation and public debt reversals in the G7 countries. Journal of Banking and Financial Economics, 1 (7), 28-50.
  • Alesina, A., & Rosenthal, H. (1995). Partisan politics, divided government, and the economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Anaya, P., & Pienkowski, A. (2015). What really drives public debt: A holistic approach. IMF Working Paper WP/15/137. International Monetary Fund,
  • Annet, A. (2006). Enforcement and the Stability and Growth Pact: How fiscal policy did and did not change under Europe’s fiscal framework. IMF working paper No. WP/06/116. International Monetary Fund.
  • Arellano, M., & Bond, B. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data, Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277–297.
  • Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variables estimation of error components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29–51.
  • Armingeon, K., Wenger, V., Wiedemeier, F., Isler, C., Knöpfel, L., Weisstanner, D., & Engler, S. (2018). Comparative Political Data Set 1960−2016. Bern, Institute of Political Science, University of Bern.
  • Ashworth, J., Geys, B., & Heyndels, B. (2005). Government weakness and local public debt development in Flemish municipalities. International Tax and Public Finance, 12, 395-422.
  • Baber, W., & Sen, P. (1986). The Political Process and the Use of Debt Financing by State Governments. Public Choice, 48(3), 201–215.
  • Barquero Romero, J. P., & Loaiza Marín, K. (2017). Inflation and Public Debt. Monetaria, 1, 39-94.
  • Belke, A., Baumgärtner, F., Schneider, F., & Setzer, R. (2007). The different extent of privatisation proceeds in OECD countries, A preliminary explanation using a public-choice approach. FinanzArchiv, Public Finance Analysis, 63 (2), 211–243.
  • Benito, B., Guillamón, Mª. D., & Bastida, F. (2015). Budget Forecast Deviations in Municipal Governments: Determinants and Implications. Australian Accounting Review, 25(1), 45-70.
  • Benito López, B., & Martínez Conesa, I. (2002). Análisis de las Administraciones Públicas a Través de Indicadores Financieros: Analysis of Public Administrations Using Financial Indicators. Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, 5(9), 21–55.
  • Benito, B., Martínez-Córdoba, P. J., & Guillamón, Mª. D. (2021). Measurement and determinants of efficiency in the municipal police service, Evaluation and Program Planning, 85, 101904,
  • Bernardini, S., Cottarelli, C., Galli, G., & Valdes, C. (2019). Reducing public debt: the experience of advanced economies over the last 70 years. Available at:
  • Biais, B., & Perotti, E. (2002). Machiavellian privatisation. The American Economic Review, 92 (1), 240–258.
  • Binet, M. E., & Pentecote, J.S. (2004). Tax digression and the political budget cycle in French municipalities. Applied Economics Letters, 11(14), 905-908. 10.1080/1350485042000268642.
  • Bofinger, P. (2003). The Stability and Growth Pact neglects the policy mix between fiscal and monetary policy. Intereconomics, 38(1), 4-7.
  • Bortolotti, B., & Pinotti, P. (2008). Delayed privatisation. Public Choice, 136(3), 331–351.
  • Bortolotti, B., & Pinotti, P. (2003). The Political Economy of Privatisation. Working paper 45.2003, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. Disponible en:
  • Bortolotti, B., & Siniscalco, D. (2004). The Challenges of Privatisation: An International Analysis. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
  • Bortolotti, B., Fantini, M., & Siniscalco, D. (2003). Privatisation around the world: Evidence from panel data. Journal of Public Economics, 88(1-2), 305–332.
  • Bortolotti, B., Fantini, M., & Siniscalco, D. (2001). Privatisation: Politics, institutions, and financial markets. Emerging Markets Review, 2(2), 109–137.
  • Boubakri, N., Smaoui, H., & Zmmiti, M. (2009). Privatisation Dynamics and Economic Growth. Journal of Business and Policy Research, 4(2), 16-44.
  • Breen, M., & Doyle, D. (2013). The determinants of privatisation: A comparative analysis of developing countries. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 15(1), 1-20.
  • Buti, M., Eijffinger, S., & Franco, D. (2003). Revisiting EMU's Stability Pact: a pragmatic way forward. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(1), 100-111.
  • Butler, S. (1991). Privatisation for Public Purposes. In W. T. Gormley (Ed.), Privatisation and its Alternatives (pp.17–24). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
  • Cioffi, J.W., & Höpner, M. (2006). The political paradox of finance capitalism, Interests, preferences, and center-left party politics in corporate governance reform. Politics and Society, 34 (4), 463–502.
  • Clifton, J., Comín, F., & Díaz Fuentes, D. (2003). Privatisation in the European Union. Public Enterprises and Integration. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science and Business Media.
  • Clifton, J., Comín, F., & Díaz, D. (2006). La privatización de empresas públicas en la UE: ¿la vía británica o la senda europea? Revista de Economía Mundial, 15, 121-153.
  • Clifton, J., Díaz-Fuentes, D., & Gómez, A. L. (2018). The crisis as opportunity? On the role of the Troika in constructing the European consolidation state. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(3), 587-608.
  • Clingermayer, J C., & Wood, B. D. (1995). Disentangling patterns of state debt financing. American Political Science Review, 89(1), 108-20.
  • Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Peña-Miguel, N. (2019). Does privatisation reduce public deficits? Policy and Politics, 47(2), 287.
  • Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Peña-Miguel, N. (2020). Corruption Perception following Privatisation Reforms: The Moderating Role of Governance. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review, 23(1), 127-137.
  • Dalkalachev, C. (2003). Privatisation in Bulgary. En V.V. Ramanadham (Ed.), Privatisation: A global perspective (Chapter 9). London, UK: Routledge.
  • Dasí-González, R.M. (2011). El Pacto de Estabilidad y Crecimiento ante la crisis. Determinación y seguimiento del déficit público de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea. Revista Española de Control Externo, XIII (39), 65-104.
  • Diefenbach, T. (2009). New public management in public sector organizations: The dark sides of managerialistic “enlightenment”. Public Administration, 87(4), 892–909.
  • Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65(2), 135–150.
  • Frey, B. S., & Schneider, F. (1978a). A politico-economic model of the United Kingdom. The Economic Journal, 88(350), 243–253.
  • Frey, B. S., & Schneider, F. (1978b). An Empirical Study of Politico-Economic Interaction in the United States. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 60(2), 174–183.
  • Frey, B. S., & Schneider, F. (1979). An econometric model with an endogenous government sector. Public Choice, 34(1), 29–43.
  • García-Sánchez, I. M., Prado-Lorenzo, J. M., & Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B. (2011). Do progressive goverments undertake different debt burdens? Partisan vs. Electoral Cycles. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review, 14(1), 29-57.
  • Hibbs, D. A. (1977). Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review, 71(4), 1467–1487.
  • Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2-3), 93–109.
  • Jeronimo, V., Pagán, J.A., & Soydemir, G. (2000). Privatisation and European Economic and Monetary Union. Eastern Economic Journal, 26(3), 321-333.
  • Katsoulakos, Y., & Likoyanni, E. (2002). Fiscal and other macroeconomic effects of privatization. Nota di Lavoro, No. 113.2002, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milano.
  • Kikeri, S., & J. Nellis. (2004). An assessment of privatisation. The World Bank Research Observer, 19 (1), 87-118.
  • Knott, J. H., & G. J. Miller. (2006). Social welfare, corruption and credibility: Public management's role in economic development. Public Management Review, 8 (2), 227-252.
  • Nordhaus, W. D. (1975). The political business cycle. The review of economic studies, 42(2), 169-190.
  • Obinger, H., Schmitt, C., & Traub, S. (2016). The Political Economy of Privatisation in Rich Democracies. Oxford, UK; Oxford University Press.
  • Obinger, H., Schmitt, C., & Zohlnhöfer, R. (2014). Partisan politics and privatisation in OECD countries. Comparative Political Studies, 47 (9), 1294–1323.
  • OECD (2009). Privatisation in the 21st Century: Recent experiences of OECD countries. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: [Accessed 10 July 2017]
  • Orban, G., & Szapáry, G. (2004). The stability and growth pact from the perspective of the new member states. Journal of Policy Modeling, 26(7), 839-864.
  • Overman, S. (2016). Great expectations of public service delegation: A systematic review. Public Management Review, 18 (8), 1238-1262.
  • Panizza, U., & Presbitero, A. F. (2014). Public debt and economic growth: is there a causal effect? Journal of Macroeconomics, 41, 21-41.
  • Parker, D. (1999). Privatisation in the European Union: a critical assessment of its development, rationale and consequences. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 20(1), 9-38.
  • Parker, D., & Saal, D. (2003). International Handbook on Privatisation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Peña-Miguel, N., & Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B. (2019). Is privatisation related to corruption? An empirical analysis of European countries. Public Management Review, 21(1), 69-95.
  • Pindado, J., & Requejo, I. (2015). Panel data: A methodology for model specification and testing. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management 4, 1–8.
  • Ramamurti, R. (1992). The impact of privatisation on the Latin American debt problem. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 34(2), 93-126.
  • Reid, B. G. (1998). Endogenous elections, electoral budget cycles and Canadian provincial government, Public Choice, 97, 35-48.
  • Reinhart, C. M., Reinhart, V., & Rogoff, K. (2015). Dealing with debt. Journal of International Economics, 96 (Supplement 1), S43-S55.
  • Roberts, B. M., & Saeed, M. A. (2012). Privatisations around the world: economic or political determinants? Economics and Politics, 24(1), 47-71.
  • Robinson, C. (2003). Privatisation: analysing the benefits. In D. Parker & D. Seal (Eds.), International Handbook on Privatisation (pp. 41–59). Cheltenham, UK: International Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
  • Roodman, D. (2009). A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 71(1), 135-158.
  • Rudolph, T. J., & Evans, J. (2005). Political trust, ideology, and public support for government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 660-671.
  • Schmitt, C. (2011). What Drives the Diffusion of Privatization Policy? Evidence from the Telecommunications Sector. Journal of Public Policy, 31(1), 95-117. doi:10.1017/S0143814X11000018
  • Schmitt, C. (2013). The Janus face of Europeanisation, Explaining cross-sectoral differences in public utilities. West European Politics, 36 (3), 547–563.
  • Schmitt, C. (2014). The diffusion of privatisation in Europe, Political affinity or economic competition? Public Administration, 92 (3), 615–635.
  • Schneider, V., & Häge, F. M. (2008). Europeanization and the Retreat of the State. Journal of European Public Policy, 15 (1), 1–19.
  • Sheshinski, E., & López-Calva, L.F. (2003). Privatisation and its benefits: Theory and Evidence. CESifo Economic Studies, 49(3), 429-459.
  • Sinha, P., Arora, V., & Bansal, V. (2011). Determinants of Public Debt for middle income and high income group countries using Panel Data regression. MPRA Paper No. 32079. Available at:
  • Stark, A. (2002). What is the new public management? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12 (1), 137-151.
  • Tellier, G. (2006). Public expenditures in Canadian provinces: An empirical study of politico-economic interactions. Public Choice, 126(3-4), 367-385.
  • Török, L. (2019). Do Changes in the Economic Role of States through Privatisation matter? The Brazilian Case. International Journal of Engineering and Management Sciences, 4(4), 125-136.
  • Vickers, J., & Yarrow, G. (1988). Privatisation: An economic analysis. Cambridge, USA: MIT Press.
  • Windmeijer, F. (2005). A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 126(1), 25-51.
  • Zohlnhöfer, R, Obinger, H., & Wolf, F. (2008). Partisan politics, globalization, and the determinants of privatisation proceeds in advanced democracies (1990–2000). Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 21 (1), 95–112.