See All Customer Reviews. Shop Books. Add to Wishlist.
USD Sign in to Purchase Instantly. Overview India is one of the fastest growing countries in the world. Table of Contents Introduction; Yuko Tsujita 1. Average Review. Write a Review. Related Searches. Ancient India. Since both federal and nonfederal capital structures aged at a relatively slow pace.
It is interesting to note that although federal structures are older, on average, than state and local struc- tures, all of these structures are saying at about the same rates, which are only modestly higher now than they were in years past. It is apparent that the nation as a whole is not adding new capital stock as rapidly as it once did. In fact, the rate at which new capital stock is built now exceeds by only a small margin the rate at which existing stock depreciates.
These data alone may not indicate a significant decline in the productivity of our existing capital structures. In fact, it would be inappropriate to assume that there is an optimum rate at which new capital should be added. It would not be possible to postulate such a norm without fully considering specific types of capital, the output equivalents of these types that might be available through nonstructural means, opportunities for of the Census has agreed to reexamine its unpublished data in an attempt to make such a disaggregation but had not done so by the time of this writing. Musgrave, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.
Department of Commerce. Own-source funds encompass all tax and nontax receipts including those from the operation of govern- ment-owned enterprises such as public utilities, liquor stores, and recreation facilities. This percentage increased rapidly in and again in , however, peaking that year at about 50 percent.
This sudden increase was due. Since its drop between , this percentage has generally increased over the s and s.
In that year, they accounted for only 5 percent of state and local capital outlays for transit. In federal capital grants accounted for 81 percent. Federal wastewater treatment grants peaked in , both in dollar terms and as a percentage of nonfederal capital spending. That year, federal grants constituted 76 percent of nonfederal outlays for treatment plants. This percentage dropped steadily, however, reaching a low point of 46 percent in , a level that was still about twice the federal share just prior to the passage of the Clean Water Act in Conventional wisdom generally notes the federal contribution to this public works mode as much smaller than its actual amount.
The local peak in federal grants per capita was due chiefly to highway grants; a similar jump in was due to the combination of wastewater and transit grants. Most of this growth, however, comes from uses that are not defined as public works for the purposes of this paper.
Barriers to development: pushing the boundaries
For example, bonds for public housing, hospitals, and other "social welfare" purposes now account for about one-third of these new issues. Industrial pollution control bonds industrial development bonds issued publicly and used to fund private investments account for another 16 percent. Educational facilities claim another 8 percent. Public works, as defined in this paper, accounted for about 20 percent of all new debt issued in , which was about the same percentage as in but roughly a third tower than the comparable percentage in the s and s.
As a result of the Tax Reform Act of , this percentage is likely to increase as noninfrastructure areas such as industrial development bonds face new restrictions. The data do not allow a detailed analysis of the role of debt within public works modes, but experience has shown that in recent years, debt accounted for about half of all state and local capital financing for public water supply systems, 10 to 20 percent of highway financing, about 20 percent of transit financing excluding New York or perhaps over 50 percent if New York is included, 90 to 95 percent of airport financing percent for the major hub airports , and perhaps 60 to 70 percent of wastewater treatment facilities financing.
Rubirz Trends in the Use of Own-Source Funds to Finance Public Works State and local own-source funds include tax receipts, user fees collected from government-owned or government-run enterprises, and other special charges assessed periodically. These sources generally fund current government operations, but in special cases they di- rectly fund public works construction through "enterprise funds.
Some airports finance capital expansion this way by setting up a so-called "sinking" fund to siphon off the excess of current revenues over current expenditures and hold the balance until needed for a future capital outlay. Similarly, some port authorities allocate a portion of their current revenues to en- terprise funds. The highway trust funds maintained by most states operate much the same way, with the exception that projects are built on a pay-as-you-go basis, with annual outlays equivalent to annual revenues.
Unfortunately, the use of own-source revenues to finance public works is not well documented historically. This is the case with the Census Bureau's and the Bureau of Economic Analysis' BEA series on sources of state and local receipts data; these series tabulate revenues by government and by type of revenue but not by use of those revenues. Some of the other data sets that are not centrally collected attempt to link sources of funds to uses, but most are limited in one way or another: they focus on one public works mode, data represent a small sample of all state and local governments, or data have been collected only over a short period of time.
This section briefly reviews the trends in the composition of over- all state and local government receipts.
- Inclusive Growth and Development in India: Challenges for Underdeveloped Regions and the Underclass?
- Global Analysis, Part 1.
- Inclusive Growth and Development in India;
It may not be appropriate to extend conclusions drawn from this section to the finance of strictly public works investments. This increase is equivalent to about 5 percent a year in real growth. Moreover, the rates of growth in each have been roughly comparable over the midyear period.
- City of Fortune: How Venice Won and Lost a Naval Empire.
- The Blackwell Companion to Major Contemporary Social Theorists (Wiley Blackwell Companions to Sociology).
- Inclusive Growth and Development in India | SpringerLink.
- The Long Boom: A History of the Future, 1980–2020.
Trends by Source Between user fees and other user-based revenue sources accounted for an increasingly larger share of total state and local own-source revenues. That the share of state and local own-source receipts claimed by property taxes fell by about the same amount during the study period suggests a substitution of user-based revenue for property taxes.
California's Proposition 13, passed in , provides the most dramatic example, but this trend appears to have caught on in other states and localities throughout the nation. Income and other taxes have also grown slightly as a proportion of total state own-source receipts; sales taxes, on the other hand, have remained relatively stable.
China’s city challenge | FutureEarth
The opposite is true at the local level, which has seen a small increase in relative sales taxes and steady property taxes. These costs include higher long-term construction and repair costs for facilities that are not properly maintained, higher costs borne by users of inadequate facilities, and potential constraints on economic development. Three alternative but related "models" for analyzing and solving public works infrastructure problems are presented in this section:. Although distinctly different in philosophical approach, all three of these models are closely related.
Thus, the needs-based approach can help define the physical problems of public works that are, in turn, a key input to estimating the economic returns from alterna- tive projects. And correctly setting public and private incentives as called for under the capital management view depends on informa- tion assembled using tools that properly belong in one of the other two models.
After identifying the scope and efficiency of available capacity in light of present and projected demands, needs assessments highlight two types of specific project investments: 1 those that meet cur- rent demand and 2 those that provide additional capacity to meet projected demand. Removing bottlenecks to meet current demand and improving existing levels of efficiency are usually assigned the highest priorities.
Challenges for Underdeveloped Regions and the Underclass
Many presentations of needs estimates amount to a picture of a technically possible optimum, an idealized goal measured without regard to economic feasibility and based principally on age, capacity utilization, or technical standards. Standards tend to be vague in the scope of their definitions and, in some cases, "gold-plated. Finally, the analysis is usually based on average standards instead of being site-specific. If there were no limits on available resources no budgetary constraints , the entire capital investment program identified by a needs assessment could be carried out without financing problems.
In the private investment model, the basis for the choice is rooted in the extent to which the project contributes to the economy in effect, its economic efficiency. In economic terms, the project's contribution to the economy is measured by its return on capital investment.