Impact of Election Expenditure on Agricultural Service Delivery Expenditure in Zambia, 2000-2021
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47672/ajppa.1260Keywords:
Democracy & Functionality, Elections, Expenditure, AgricultureAbstract
Purpose: This paper examined the public expenditure changes between elections and agriculture service delivery. The aim was to determine how the relationship trend related to agriculture growth. Early analyses assumed that elections act as a signal for preferential public expenditure. Thus, in Zambia, agriculture would be a priority as the government claims over 70% of citizens, directly or indirectly earn from the sector.
Methodology: Times series secondary data was analyzed for descriptive statistics from 2000 to 2021.
Findings: The evidence is that agriculture public expenditure was lower than CAADP targets in this period. Agriculture research as a service received the lowest funding. The trend also revealed that there were very sharp increases in election expenditure in both the preceding year and in the year of elections. In most election years this was close to 2% of total national public spending over the study period. These election spending spikes may have induced cyclical fiscal shocks, difficult to recover from, resulting in limited fiscal space and a reduction in agriculture spending. The electoral cycle induced fiscal shocks, over time, may have also led to a downward trend in agriculture growth. The authors identify this phenomenon as the ‘functionality burden of democracy’.
Recommendation: Based on the findings the study recommends that agreed policy objectives in agriculture and CAADP commitments must become a national mission. This would mean that the agriculture goals are shared at all levels including family, schools, private sector, civil society and the media.
Downloads
References
African Development Bank, 6-July-2005, Online: Zambia Reaches Completion Point in HPIC Initiative: Obtains major debt relief from the AfDB.
Agriculture Policy, Ministry of Agriculture, 2006. Government of the republic of Zambia.
Akroyd S. & Smith L., 2007: Review of Public Spending to Agriculture. A joint DFID/World Bank Study. Oxford, UK: Oxford Policy Management.
Balaguer-Coll, M. T., Brun-Martos, M. I., Forte, A. & Tortosa-Ausina, E., 2014. Determinants of local governments' reelections: New evidence based on a bayesian approachch, s.l.: s.n.
Benin, S. 2014. Identifying Agriculture Expenditures within the Public Financial Accounts and Coding Systems in Ghana. Is the Ten percent Government Agriculture Expenditure Over estimated? IFPRI Discussion paper, 1365. Washington, DC: International Food Policy research Institute.
Block, S., 2002. Elections, Electoral Competitiveness, and Political Budget Cycles in Developing countries, s.l.: Harvard University.
Brender, A. & Drazen, A., 2005. How do budget deficits and economic growth affect re-election prospects. American Economic Review, pp. 2203-20.
Chapota, A. & Sitko, N., 2015. Agriculture in Zambia: Past, Present and Future. Lusaka: s.n.
Chang, Ha-Joon, 2010: 23 THINGS THEY DON’T TELL YOU ABOUR CAPITALISM, Bloomsbury Publishing
Clark, 2017. The cost of democracy: The determinants of spending on the public administration of elections.. s.l.:Newcastle University.
Clark, A. & James, T., 2020. Governments must properly fund covid-era elections. [Online]
Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program, CAADP, 2002/2003
CSO, 2010. Census of Population National Analytical Report, Lusaka: CSO.
Daidone, S., Davis, B., Handa, S. & Winters, P. 2019. The household and individual-level productive impacts of cash trasnfer programs in sun-Sahara Africa. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 101 (5): 1401-1431
Dalton, H., 1970. Dalton Principle of Maximum Social Advantage
Das, P., Kar, S., 2016: Public Expenditure, Demography and Growth: Theory and Evidence from India, online version. Corpus ID 55422754
de Haan, J. & Klomp, J., 2013. Conditional political budget cycles: a review of recent evidence. Public Choie, 157(3/4), pp. 387-430.
Ebeke, C. & Olcer, D., 2013. Fiscal Policy over the Election Cycle in low income countries, s.l.: IMF working paper.
Economic Commission of Latin America and Caribbean/FAO, 2021-2022: The outlook for Agriculture and Rural Development in the Americas; Perspective on Latin America and the Caribbean. online version
ECZ, 2011,2012, 2014. Annual Report, Lusaka: Electoral commission of Zambia.
Fan, S. & Omilola, L. M., 2009. “Public Spending for Agriculture in Africa:Trends and Composition” .Regional Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support System,, s.l.: s.n.
FAO, 2020. Government expenditure in agriculter 2001-20201, s.l.: FAO.
FAO, 2021. Public expenditure on food and agriculture in sub-saharan africa: Trends, challenges and priorities, s.l.: FAO.
Fiszbein, A., 2005. Citizens, Politicians and Providers: The latin american experience with service delivery reform, Washington DC: The international bank for reconstruction and developments / The World Bank.
Folz, D, 2014. "Vote Centres as a Strategy to Control Election Administration Costs: Findings from a Pilot project." SAGE Open January-March: 1-10
Friis-Hansen, E., 2014. Social accountability and public service Delivery in Rural Africa. Danish Institute for International Studies, p. 4.
Garry, S. & Valdivia, J. 2017: An analysis of the contribution of public expedniture to economic growth and fiscal multipliers in Mexico, Central America and the Dominican republic, 1990-2015, ECLAC/UN.
Goveral, J. et al., 2009. Trends and spartial distribution of public agriculture spending in zambia: implication for agriculturak productivity growth. Michigan: Michigan State University.
Hadley, S., Hart, T., Miller, M., 2021: PFM and service Delivery-What's New, What's Missing, What's Next, IMF Papers.
Hansard, National Assembly of Zambia, 2013-2015. Questions asked to the Vice President's Question Time on election expedniture, Lusaka: s.n.
Human Development Report, 2004: Cultural Liberty in Today's Diverse World, UNDP.
World Development Report, 2000/20001: Attacking Poverty. openknowledge.worldbank.or
Indaba for Agriculture Policy Research Institute, 2015. Agriculture in Zambia: Past present and Future, Lusaka: IAPRI.
IDEA, 2017. Election Costs: informing the narrative. [Online]
Available at: https://www.idea.int/news-media/news/election-costs-informing-narrative [Accessed 2 9 2022].
James, T. S., 2020. Austerity and financial investment in Electoral management, s.l.: University of Easy Anglia.
Kosec, K. & Wantchekon, L., 2018. Can information improve rural governance and service delivery. Elsevier.
Ligon, E. & Sadoulet, E., 2018. Estimating the relative benefits of agricultural growth on the distribution of expenditures. Elsevier, Volume 109, pp. 417-428.
Lopez-Pintor, R. & Fischer, J., 2005. Cost of Registration and Elections (CORE). Center for transition and post-conflict governance, internation foundation for electrocal systesms (IFES).
Lucas, G. M., 2015. Out of sight, out of mind, How opportunity cost neglect undermines democracy. NYU Journal of Law and Liberty.
Mandle, U., 2008. The effectiveness and efficiency of public spending: European Economy, s.l.: European Commission.
Mazzucato, M., 2021. Mission Economy: a moon-shot guide to changing capitalism. London: Allen Lane.
Mason, N., Jayne, T. & Mofya-Mukuka, R. 2013. Zambia's input subsidy programmes. Agricultural Economics, 44(6): 613-628.
Ministry of Agriculture: Budget Speeches, 2010, 2011, 2016, 2017, 2020, and 2021.
Ministry of Finance and National Development Planning: Budget speeches 2020 and 2021.
Mink, S., 2016. Finding Across Agricultural Public Expenditure Reviews in African Countries, International Food Policy Research Institute Paper.
Mogues, T. & Rosario, D., 2016. The political economy of public expenditure in Agriculture: Application of concepts to mozambique. South African Journal of Economics, 84(1), pp. 20-39.
Moreno-Monroy, A. & Jacobs-crisioni, C., 2022. Understanding present and future service delivery cost, s.l.: OECD.
Morh, Z. et al., 2018. Election Administration Spending in Local Election Jurisdictions: Results from a Nationwide Data Collection Project, s.l.: s.n.
Moyo, D., 2009. Dead Aid: Why Aid is now working and how there is a better way for Africa.
Moyo, D., 2018. Edges of Chaos: Why Democracy is failing to deliver economic growth and how to fix it. s.l.:Basic Books.
National Constitutional Conference Report, 2013-2015, Ministry of Justice, Zambia.
National Agriculture Policy, 2004. The Government Republic of Zambia
Quaicoe, S. & Nsiah, C., 2022. Estimating the modulating role of economic development on the effect of elections on government expenditure in africa. Open Access.
Second Agriculture Policy, Ministry of Agriculture: 2016
Shi, M. & Svensson, J., 2003. Political budget cycles in developed and developing countries, Stockholm: Institute for international economic studies, Stockholm university.
Stads, G.J. & Beintema, N. 2015. Agricultural R&D expedniture in Africa: analyssis of growth and volatility. European Journal of Development Research, 27: 391-406
Stiglitz, J., 2002: Capital-market liberalisation and the IMF.
Van der Straaten, 2019. Of Democracy and Election- in Reverse. On the exorbitant (increase in the cost of election in africa). SSRN Electronic Journal.
Vergne, C., 2011. Democracy, Elections and Allocation of Public Expenditure in Developing Countries. s.l.:s.n.
World Development Report, 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty, World Bank.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Dora Siliya, Felix Kanungwe Kalaba, Max Chibelushi Musongole
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
