Accountability and yardstick competition in the public provision of education

This paper explores the institutional change introduced by the public disclosure of an education development index (IDEB, Basic Education Development Index) in 2007 to identify the e ect of education accountability on yardstick competition in education spending for Brazilian municipalities. Our results are threefold. First, political incentives are pervasive in setting the education expenditures. The spatial strategic behavior on education spending is estimated lower for lame-ducks and for those incumbents with majority support at the city council. This suggests a strong relation between commitment and accountability which reinforces yardstick competition theory. Second, we nd a minor reduction (20%) in spatial interaction for public education spending after IDEB's disclosure | compared to the spatial correlation before the disclosure of the index. This suggests that public release of information may decrease the importance of the neighbors` counterpart information on voter`s decision. Third, exploring the discontinuity of IDEB`s disclosure rule around the cut-o of 30 students enrolled in the grade under assessment, our estimates suggest that the spatial autocorrelation | and hence yardstick competition | is reduced in 54%. Finally, an unforeseen result suggests that the disclosure of IDEB increases expenditures, more than 100% according to our estimates.

Extreme poverty and development: the role of state in the assurance of minimal existence conditions

This paper follows the idea of Amartya Sen, Nobel Prize of economic, about the role of State in the assurance of minimal existence condition, and aim to answer how countries of Latin America (specifically Brazil) and countries of Europe (specifically United Kingdom) deal with the assurance of this minimal existence conditions. According to Amartya Sen’s view, development must be seen as a process of expanding substantive freedoms, such expansion being the primary purpose of each society and the main mean of development. Substantive freedoms can be considered as basic capabilities allocated to individuals whereby they are entitled to be architects of their own lives, providing them conditions to “live as they wish”. These basic capabilities are divided by Amartya Sen in 5 (five) kinds of substantive freedoms, but for this article’s purpose, we will consider just one of this 5 (five) kinds, specifically the Protective Safety capability. Protective Safety capability may be defined as the assurance of basic means of survival for individuals who are in extreme poverty, at risk of starvation or hypothermia, or even impending famine. Among the means available that could be used to avoid such situations are the possibility of supplemental income to the needy, distributing food and clothing to the needy, supply of energy and water, among others. But how countries deal whit this protective safety? Aiming to answer this question, we selected the problem of “fuel poverty” and how Brazil and United Kingdom solve it (if they solve), in order to assess how the solution found impacts development. The analysis and the comparison between these countries will allow an answer to the question proposed.