<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Economics and Mathematical Methods</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Economics and Mathematical Methods</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Экономика и математические методы</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">0424-7388</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">3034-6177</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">The Russian Academy of Sciences</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">684532</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31857/S0424738825020078</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Regional problems</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Региональные проблемы</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Regional effects of fiscal policy: Analysis with spatial vector autoregressive models</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Региональные эффекты бюджетной политики: анализ с помощью пространственных векторных регрессионных моделей</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Demyanenko</surname><given-names>А. V.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Демьяненко</surname><given-names>А. В.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><email>ademyanenko@hse.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">National Research University Higher School of Economics</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">НИУ «Высшая школа экономики»</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2025-07-04" publication-format="electronic"><day>04</day><month>07</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>61</volume><issue>2</issue><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><fpage>90</fpage><lpage>103</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2025-06-16"><day>16</day><month>06</month><year>2025</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2025-06-16"><day>16</day><month>06</month><year>2025</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2025, Russian Academy of Sciences</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2025, Российская академия наук</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2025</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Russian Academy of Sciences</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Российская академия наук</copyright-holder></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.eco-vector.com/0424-7388/article/view/684532">https://journals.eco-vector.com/0424-7388/article/view/684532</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>This paper attempts to assess the impact of fiscal policy measures conducted in Russian Federation units on gross regional product. For this purpose, we use panel data for 80 Russian regions for 2005–2020. As a method for assessing the response of GRP to the shock of government expenditures, we propose to use a spatial vector autoregression model consisting of three equations for the following endogenous variables: GRP, consolidated budget expenditures, tax revenues. The model also includes a set of exogenous factors: oil prices, MIACR interest rate, expenditures of the Russian Pension Fund. Additionally, we account for the structure of the regional economy. The advantage of the model is the ability to simultaneously consider spatial effects using the contiguity-based matrix and evaluate the impulse response function, while the Cholesky decomposition is used for shock identification. Overall, we estimated 3 SpVAR specifications and considered shocks of government expenditures for 7 categories of regional budgets. The main result of the study is the peak and cumulative values of IRF for 2 and 3 years, which reflect the evolution of the GRP response to an exogenous shock of expenditures over time. For all specifications of the model, the greatest positive effect on GRP is observed for the shock of expenditures on the national economy and education. Depending on the specification, over 3 years after the shock of increasing expenditures by 1%, an expected increase in GRP varies from 0.053 to 0.1% and from 0.051 to 0.1%, respectively.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Целью данной работы является оценка влияния мер фискальной политики, проводимой в регионах России, на валовой региональный продукт. В рамках исследования были использованы панельные данные по 80 российским регионам за 2005–2020 гг. В качестве метода оценки реакции ВРП на шок увеличения государственных расходов предлагается использовать модель пространственной векторной авторегрессии, состоящей из трех уравнений относительно следующих эндогенных переменных: ВРП, расходы консолидированного бюджета, налоговые доходы. Также в модель включается набор экзогенных факторов: цена на нефть, ставка MIACR, расходы Пенсионного фонда РФ. Дополнительно учитывается структура экономики региона. Преимуществом модели является возможность одновременно учесть пространственные эффекты при помощи матрицы общих границ и рассчитать функцию импульсного отклика, при этом для идентификации шоков используется разложение Холецкого. В ходе работы было оценено три спецификации SpVAR и были рассмотрены шоки государственных расходов по семи статьям региональных бюджетов. Основным результатом исследования являются пиковые и накопленные значения IRF за два и три года, которые отражают реакцию ВРП на экзогенный шок расходов на временном горизонте в 5 лет. Для всех спецификаций модели наибольший положительный эффект на ВРП наблюдается для шока увеличения расходов на национальную экономику и образование. За три года после шока увеличения расходов на 1% в зависимости от спецификации можно ожидать увеличение ВРП от 0,053 до 0,1% и от 0,051 до 0,1% соответственно.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>Russian regions</kwd><kwd>government expenditures</kwd><kwd>spatial effects</kwd><kwd>fiscal policy</kwd><kwd>spatial vector autoregression</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>российские регионы</kwd><kwd>государственные расходы</kwd><kwd>пространственные эффекты</kwd><kwd>фискальная политика</kwd><kwd>пространственная векторная авторегрессия</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Власов С. А., Дерюгина Е. Б. (2018). Фискальные мультипликаторы в России // Журнал Новой экономической ассоциации. № 2 (38). С. 104–119. [Vlasov S. A., Deryugina E. B. (2018). Fiscal multipliers in Russia. Journal of the New Economic Association, 2 (38), 104–119 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Вотинов А. И., Станкевич И. П. (2017). VAR-подход к оценке эффективности мер фискального стимулирования экономики // Финансовый журнал. Т. 40. № 6. С. 64–74. [Votinov A. I., Stankevich I. P. (2017). VAR approach to efficiency evaluation of fiscal economy encouragement measures. Financial Journal, 6 (40), 64–74 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Демидова О. А. (2021). Методы пространственной эконометрики и оценка эффективности государственных программ // Прикладная эконометрика. № 64. С. 107–134. [Demidova O. A. (2021). Methods of spatial econometrics and evaluation of government programs effectiveness. Applied Econometrics, 64, 107–134 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Демидова О. А., Каяшева Е. В., Демьяненко А. В. (2021). Государственные расходы на здравоохранение и экономический рост в России: региональный аспект // Пространственная экономика. T. 17. № 1. С. 97–122. [Demidova O. A., Kayasheva E. V., Demyanenko A. V. (2021). Government spending on healthcare and economic growth in Russia: A regional aspect. Spatial Economics, 17 (1), 97–122 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Зяблицкий И. Е. (2020). Оценка фискальных мультипликаторов в российской экономике // Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики. Т. 24. № 2. С. 268–294. [Zyablitskiy I. E. (2020). Estimating fiscal multipliers in Russian economy. HSE Economic Journal, 24 (2), 268–294 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Каменских М. В., Иванова Н. Ю. (2011). Эффективность государственных расходов в России // Экономическая политика. № 1. С. 176–192. [Kamenskih M. V., Ivanova N.Yu. (2011). Efficiency of government expenditures in Russia. Economic Policy, 1, 176–192 (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Регионы России. Социально-экономические показатели (2005–2022). М.: Росстат. [Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators (2005–2022). Moscow: Rosstat (in Russian).]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Armingeon K. (2012). The politics of fiscal responses to the crisis of 2008–2009. Governance, 25, 4, 543–565.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Auerbach A. J., Gorodnichenko Y., Murphy D. (2019). Local fiscal multipliers and fiscal spillovers in the United States (No. 25457). National Bureau of Economic Research. DOI: 10.3386/w25457</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Batini N., Eyraud L., Forni L., Weber A. (2014). Fiscal multipliers: Size, determinants, and use in macroeconomic projections. International Monetary Fund.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Blanchard O., Perotti R. (2002). An empirical characterization of the dynamic effects of changes in government spending and taxes on output. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 4, 1329–1368.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Blanchard O. J., Watson M. W. (1986). Are business cycles all alike? In: The American business cycle: Continuity and change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Boone C., Dube A., Kaplan E. (2014). The political economy of discretionary spending: Evidence from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 375–428.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Brandeis C., Lambert D. M. (2014). Projecting county pulpwood production with historical production and macro-economic variables. Journal of Forest Economics, 20, 3, 305–315.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Čapek J., Crespo Cuaresma J. (2020). We just estimated twenty million fiscal multipliers. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 82, 3, 483–502.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Coenen G., Erceg C. J., Freedman C., Furceri D., Kumhof M., Lalonde R. et al. (2012). Effects of fiscal stimulus in structural models. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 4, 1, 22–68.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Corsetti G., Meier A., Müller G. J. (2012). What determines government spending multipliers. Economic Policy, 27, 72, 521–565.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Devarajan S., Swaroop V., Zou H. F. (1996). The composition of public expenditure and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 37, 2, 313–344.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Dupor B., Guerrero R. (2017). Local and aggregate fiscal policy multipliers. Journal of Monetary Economics, 92, 16–30.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Forni M., Gambetti L. (2016). Government spending shocks in open economy VARs. Journal of International Economics, 99, 68–84.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Giannini M., Fiorelli C., Martini B. (2022). Ageing in the labour market: A spatial VAR approach. Spatial Economic Analysis, 17, 2, 538–556.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>Hagedorn M., Manovskii I., Mitman K. (2019). The fiscal multiplier (No. 25571). National Bureau of Economic Research. DOI: 10.3386/w25571</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>Harris R. D.F., Tzavalis E. (1999). Inference for unit roots in dynamic panels where the time dimension is fixed. Journal of Econometrics, 91, 2, 201–226.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>Im K. S., Pesaran M. H., Shin Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115, 1, 53–74.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation>Kuethe T. H., Pede V. O. (2011). Regional housing price cycles: A spatio-temporal analysis using US state-level data. Regional Studies, 45, 5, 563–574.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation>Lee L. F., Yu J. (2010). Estimation of spatial autoregressive panel data models with fixed effects. Journal of Econometrics, 154, 2, 165–185.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><mixed-citation>Nakamura E., Steinsson J. (2014). Fiscal stimulus in a monetary union: Evidence from US regions. American Economic Review, 104, 3, 753–792.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation>Raga S. (2022). Fiscal multipliers: A review of fiscal stimulus options and impact on developing countries. Ottawa: IDRC. Available at: https://set.odi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Fiscal-multipliers-review.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation>Ramey V. A. (2011). Identifying government spending shocks: It’s all in the timing. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126, 1, 1–50.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation>Ramey V. A. (2016). Handbook of macroeconomics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B31"><label>31.</label><mixed-citation>Romer C. D., Romer D. H. (2010). The macroeconomic effects of tax changes: Estimates based on a new measure of fiscal shocks. American Economic Review, 100, 3, 763–801.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B32"><label>32.</label><mixed-citation>Yu J., Jong R. de, Lee L. F. (2008). Quasi-maximum likelihood estimators for spatial dynamic panel data with fixed effects when both n and T are large. Journal of Econometrics, 146, 1, 118–134.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
