Impact of Public Spending on the Quality of Life in Rural Bangladesh

Main Article Content

Zannatul Fardoush

Abstract

Public spending is one of the most effective instruments in improving the quality of life as an entrenched goal of economic development. However, as the resources are limited, a better distribution would, therefore, require a thorough investigation regarding the impact analysis of public spending on actual development factors. This paper has examined the link between public expenditures in different sectors of economy and improvement in the quality of life through the channel of agricultural growth or rural development in Bangladesh and also throughs the education channel such as the school enrollments. A simultaneous equation model in the form of a 3-Stage Least Square (3SLS) technique has been used to explore the impacts of public spending. By using the data from 1982-2017, this study finds that public spending in education, health, social safety net, and agriculture has positive impacts on the quality of life advancement. A 1 percent increase in public spending in education would result in an increase in quality of life (proxied by life expectancy) by 0.182 percent on average, ceteris paribus. The public expenditure elasticities in health, social safety net, and agriculture on the quality of life are found as 0.05, 0.03, 0.04 respectively. The only concern is the spending in the transportation and communication sector which is probably due to the misallocation and mismanagement of available resources and funds into this sector. Hence, to grasp the agricultural and rural development, the government should continue to institutionalize the policies that support the education of the poor in rural areas.

Article Details

How to Cite
Fardoush, Z. (2020). Impact of Public Spending on the Quality of Life in Rural Bangladesh. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(4), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.74.8067
Section
Articles

References

1. Collier, P. and Reinikka, R., 2001. Reconstruction and liberalization: An overview. Uganda’s recovery: The role of farms, firms, and government, pp.15-48.
2. Mafrolla, E. and D’Amico, E., 2016. Does public spending improve citizens’ quality of life? An analysis of municipalities’ leisure supply. Local Government Studies, 42(2), pp.332-350.
3. Brown, I., 1999. Embracing quality of life in times of spending restraint. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 24(4), pp.299-308.
4. Scully, G.W., 2001. Government expenditure and quality of life. Public Choice, 108(1-2), pp.123-145.
5. Fan, S., Hazell, P. and Thorat, S., 2000. Government spending, growth and poverty in rural India. American journal of agricultural economics, 82(4), pp.1038-1051.
6. Fan, S., Johnson, M., Saurkar, A. and Makombe, T., 2008. Investing in African agriculture to halve poverty by 2015. Intl Food Policy Res Inst.
7. Maparu, T.S. and Mazumder, T.N., 2017. Transport infrastructure, economic development and urbanization in India (1990–2011): Is there any causal relationship?. Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 100, pp.319-336.
8. Quy, N.H., 2017. The Role of Public Expenditures in Economic Growth at Provincial Level: Empirical Study in Vietnam. J. Pol. & L., 10, p.88.
9. Long, H., Tu, S., Ge, D., Li, T. and Liu, Y., 2016. The allocation and management of critical resources in rural China under restructuring: Problems and prospects. Journal of Rural Studies, 47, pp.392-412.
10. Khaqan, S.H., Mukhtiar, A. and ur Rehman, A., 2016. Analysis of infrastructure investment and institutional quality on living standards: a case study of Pakistan (1990-2013). Pakistan Development Review, 55(4), pp.315-329.
11. Diener, E., Oishi, S. and Lucas, R.E., 2015. National accounts of subjective well-being. American Psychologist, 70(3), p.234.
12. Kumari, A. and Sharma, A.K., 2017. Physical & social infrastructure in India & its relationship with economic development. World Development Perspectives, 5, pp.30-33.
13. Majid, N., 2004. Reaching Millennium Goals: How well does agricultural productivity growth reduce poverty? (No. 2004-12). International Labour Office.
14. Wilkinson, R.G., Pickett, K.E. and De Vogli, R., 2010. Equality, sustainability, and quality of life. Bmj, 341, p.c5816.