Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/110083
Authors: 
Minkler, Lanse
Prakash, Nishith
Year of Publication: 
2015
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers 8877
Abstract: 
In this paper we use novel historical data on economics and social rights from the constitutions of 201 countries and an instrument variable strategy to answer two important questions. First, do economic and social rights provisions in constitutions reduce poverty? Second, does the strength of constitutional language of the economic and social rights matter? Constitutional provisions can be framed either more weakly as directive principles or more strongly as enforceable law. We find three important results. First, we do not find an association between constitutional rights generally framed and poverty. Second, we do not find an association between economic and social rights framed as directive principles and poverty. Third, we do find a strong negative association between economic and social rights framed as enforceable law and poverty. When we use legal origins as our IV, we find evidence that this result is causal. Our results survive a variety of robustness checks. The policy implication is that constitutional provisions framed as enforceable law provide effective meta-rules with incentives for policymakers to initiate, fund, monitor and enforce poverty reduction policies.
Subjects: 
economic and social rights
constitutions
enforceable law
directive principles
poverty
instrumental variables
legal origin
JEL: 
I24
I32
I38
O1
O38
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
340.7 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.