commission on fiscal imbalance 合集

The theoretical argument for fiscal decentralization

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: from the people for democratization (Rojas, 1999). In Africa, decentralization has served as a path to national unity (World Bank, 1999). This diversity in the list of factors that have contributed the interest in decentralization reflects institutional differences across countries. Institutional factors, such as political, social, legal, and economic conditions, are generally important for the analysis of public finance issues, but they are especially important for the analysis of fiscal decentralization. The institutional context of fiscal decentralization entails the overall economic development, the nature of the legal system, ongoing process of economic and political reform, the organization of monetary and financial institutions, and tensions arising from ethnic, religious, or economic differences (Wildasin, 1997). This institutional background determines the design of intergovernmental financial system and ultimately affects the outcome of fiscal decentralization reform process. During the last two decades, the economic reforms in different parts of the world largely focused on the role of markets and understated the importance of the organization of the public sector in achieving broader objectives such as economic stability, sustainable growth, and provision of basic public services equitably across people and jurisdictions (World Bank, 1999). The key element underlying the interest in fiscal decentralization is to achieve these objectives by increasing efficiency, transparency, and accountability in the public sector. In a fiscally decentralized system, the policies of subnational branches of governments are permitted to differ in order to reflect the preferences of their residents. Furthermore, fiscal decentralization brings government closer to the people and a representative government works best when it is closer to the people (Stigler, 1957). The theoretical argument for fiscal decentralization is formulated as "each public service should be provided by the jurisdiction having control over the 1 minimum geographic area that would internalize benefits and costs of such provision." However, much of the established theoretical literature of fiscal federalism has been based on issues that arose within developed countries, particularly the US and Canada and the definition and implementation of fiscal decentralization differ greatly across developing countries due to differences in economic and political structures. This diversity creates challenges to measure and compare the degree of decentralization across countries and to make generalizations about it. 1.1. Existing Decentralization Indicators Figure 1 shows the population weighted average shares of subnational expenditure and revenue in total public sector for those 28 countries reported in the Government Finance Statistics of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) between 2 1980 and 1998 . The average expenditure and revenue shares of subnational governments in this group of countries 3 has been increasing steadily over time since 1980. 1 2 3 Oates, 1972. Argentina, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Finland, Hungary, Iceland,...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/06/2013 for the course ECON 220 taught by Professor Paulo during the Spring '13 term at University of Liverpool.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online