Adirek Vajrapatkul
ABSTRACT
This paper aims to present the determinants of government effectiveness, which has become an important factor in economic and social development. To achieve this purpose, the multinomial logistic model is utilized. The six independent variables, namely internet penetration, control of corruption, political stability, regulatory quality, voice and accountability, and rule of law which are identified from the related literature, are investigated to identify their effect on the level of government effectiveness. Based on the 2021 cross-sectional data of 200 countries obtained from the World Bank database, it revealed logistic regression and marginal analysis that the level of government effectiveness is significantly affected by control of corruption, regulatory quality, rule of law, and internet penetration. To achieve a high level of government effectiveness, government authorities should therefore pay special attention to the practices that promote the enhancement of these determinants.
- M. Ü. Şaşmaz and E. N. Sağdiç, “The Effect of Government Effectiveness and Rule of Law on Economic Growth: The Case of European Union Transition Economies,” Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 203–217, 2020, doi: 10.24889/ifede.729490.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- World Bank, “Government Effectiveness,” World Bank, 2021. https://info.worldbank.org (accessed Feb. 07, 2023).Google Scholar
- P. C. Magalhães, “Government effectiveness and support for democracy,” European Journal of Political Research, vol. 53, pp. 77–97, 2017.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Best and P. Burke, “The Importance of Government Effectiveness for Transitions toward Greater Electrification in Developing Countries,” Energies, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 1–17, 2017, doi: 10.3390/en10091247.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. R. Md Rafayet, E. Kitenge, and B. Bedane, “Government Effectiveness and Economic Growth,” Economics Bulletin, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 222–227, 2017.Google Scholar
- M. Ghulam and J. Muhammad, “Testing the Governance-Productivity Nexus for Emerging Asian Countries,” The Lahore Journal of Economics, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 143–169, 2018.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Akinbode, J. Olabisi, R. Adegbite, T. Aderemi, and A. Alawode, “Corruption, Government Effectiveness and Human Developmentin Sub-Saharan Africa,” JADE, pp. 16–34, 2020, doi: 10.32873/unl.dc.jade912.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Hauner and A. Kyobe, “Determinants of government efficiency,” World Development, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 1527–1542, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Voghouei and M. A. Jamali, “Determinants of government efficiency: does information technology play a role?,” Eurasian Business Review, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 285–298, 2018.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Milán‐García, N. Rueda‐López, and J. De Pablo‐Valenciano, “Local government efficiency: reviewing determinants and setting new trends,” International Transactions in Operational Research, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 2871–2898, 2022.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Metalia, S. W. Zarkasyi, and H. Sugarman, “Factors Affecting the Performance of Indonesian Government´ s Internal Supervisory,” Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, vol. 25, no. Esp. 10, pp. 498–513, 2020.Google Scholar
- K. C. T. Duho, M. O. Amankwa, and J. I. Musah-Surugu, “Determinants and convergence of government effectiveness in Africa and Asia,” PAP, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 199–215, 2020, doi: 10.1108/PAP-12-2019-0039.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. Wang, Z. Sha, X. Tan, H. Lan, X. Liu, and J. Rao, “Modeling urban growth by coupling localized spatio-temporal association analysis and binary logistic regression,” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, vol. 81, p. 101482, 2020.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J.-T. Huang, X. Xu, and T.-F. Chiang, “Household expectations for future economy and risk-taking attitudes,” Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 109–121, 2016.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Yuan, X. Zhang, H. Bao, and Y. Fu, “The self-employment of the industry choices of dispossessed farmers in China,” Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 55, pp. 143–156, 2017.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Zou, A. K. Mishra, and B. Luo, “Aging population, farm succession, and farmland usage: Evidence from rural China,” Land Use Policy, vol. 77, pp. 437–445, 2018.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Abdulhafedh, “Incorporating the multinomial logistic regression in vehicle crash severity modeling: A detailed overview,” Journal of Transportation Technologies, vol. 7, no. 03, pp. 279–303, 2017.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Kaufmann, A. Kraay, and M. Mastruzzi, “The Worldwide Governance Indicators,” Policy Research Working Paper 5430, 2010. [Online]. Available: file:///C:/Users/Pinmanee%20Vajrapatkul/Downloads/SSRN-id1682130.pdfGoogle Scholar
Index Terms
- Government Effectiveness in the Multinomial Logistic Model
Recommendations
The Governance Effects of Korea's Leading E-Government Websites
While abundant research has demonstrated that E-government reduces corruption and improves bureaucratic productivity, few studies have isolated the distinct effects of different types of E-government programs on rates of corruption and different ...
Does a government web presence reduce perceptions of corruption?
Researchers have found that corruption severely affects a country's development because it takes resources away from the economy, leads to uncertainty and impairs investment. The purpose of this study is, thus, to determine if a government's web ...
Understanding Inconsistent Corruption Control through E-government Participation: Updated Evidence from a Cross-Country Investigation
AbstractBased on data from 133 countries, this paper unveils and empirically proves a nonlinear relationship between e-participation and corruption control and further examines the moderating roles of voice and accountability and ICT infrastructure. The ...
Comments