Three essays in public economics: fiscal decentralization, coordination and secessions

Abstract

This PhD thesis falls within the fields of public finance and public choice. It studies the following issues: ideological polarization, decentralization and conflict. It consists of three chapters can be read independently. In the first chapter the focus is on the importance of ideological polarization between but also within political parties on the level and composition of cantonal public spending. The analysis is on Swiss cantonal parliaments and is based on the use and econometric treatment of a very rich database. We made two contributions to the literature on the impact of political fragmentation on public spending. First, we showed that ideological dispersion within political parties is associated with higher public spending while the dispersion between political parties is associated with less public spending. This finding implies that the mode of organization and discipline within political parties are both important. This result is particularly interesting given that previous literature has completely abstracted from ideological dispersion within political parties. Lastly, we showed that ideological dispersion between and within political parties is mainly relevant for current expenditures. The second chapter focuses on the conflict of objectives that may exist between economic agents in a two-stage game with asymmetric payoffs. The literature showed that coordination failures are frequent in one-stage games and that communication can help individuals coordinate with the use of take turn strategies that allow for a reduction in the payoffs’ inequality in the long run. Our contribution was to study whether communication has the same capacity in a two-stage game where the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium requires both players to make opposite choices at both stages of the game and accept unequal payoffs. Our results show that coordination failures occur half of the time and that 18% of the pairs use the take turn strategy. Communication significantly increases coordination on the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium because it increases the ability of subjects to initiate a take turn strategy and to maintain it. Thus, communication allows subjects to establish a long-term strategy that increases efficiency and reduces payments differences, induced by the asymmetry in payoffs, by exchanging their relative positions in a fair way. Our results show that communication can solve coordination conflicts, even in more complex situations than in one-stage games usually studied until now. The last chapter focuses on a particular type of conflict: political secessions. Specifically, it addresses the link between secessions, decentralization and group identity. We aim at determining, by means of a laboratory experiment, if decentralizing the provision of public goods reduces the likelihood of secession. We emphasize the importance of local identity. Our experimental design, obviously, do not reproduce all the trade-offs that separatist movements face in the real world. It allows, however, capturing at least two key forces that drive these movements: the proximity to public goods that reduces the phenomena of free-riding and brings public goods closer to citizens’ preferences and the importance of local identities. Our results indicate that the Decentralization treatment increases contributions to local public goods and decreases the likelihood of secessions also when identity is made more salient. If fact, reinforcing local group identity increases the likelihood of secession only when local group members are cooperators.