Skip to Main Content
Table 4.
Tau vs Other Measures of Regulations: All States and Union Territories
(1) Tau(2) Tau(3) Tau(4) Tau(5) Tau(6) Tau
Dougherty measure −0.360 −0.394     
(all reforms) (0.169) (0.199)     
Dougherty measure   −0.480 −0.623   
(inspector reforms)   (0.162) (0.148)   
Besley-Burgess     0.223 0.235 
measure (regulations)     (0.178) (0.177) 
Constant 0.131 2.900 0.209 −2.952 −0.00266 14.20 
 (0.181) (5.514) (0.140) (5.401) (0.280) (7.402) 
Observations 21 21 21 21 16 16 
Controls No Yes No Yes No Yes 
(1) Tau(2) Tau(3) Tau(4) Tau(5) Tau(6) Tau
Dougherty measure −0.360 −0.394     
(all reforms) (0.169) (0.199)     
Dougherty measure   −0.480 −0.623   
(inspector reforms)   (0.162) (0.148)   
Besley-Burgess     0.223 0.235 
measure (regulations)     (0.178) (0.177) 
Constant 0.131 2.900 0.209 −2.952 −0.00266 14.20 
 (0.181) (5.514) (0.140) (5.401) (0.280) (7.402) 
Observations 21 21 21 21 16 16 
Controls No Yes No Yes No Yes 

This table tests for correlations between our estimated regulatory costs (tau) and other established measures of the regulatory environment from the previous literature. Controls include the log of net state domestic product per capita in 2005 and the share of privately owned establishments. Robust SEs are reported in parentheses. Observations are weighted by the inverse variance of tau and include all Indian states and union territories for which data are available.

Sources: Dougherty (2009), Besley and Burgess (2004), and RBI.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal