Blockchain Papers

Miguel Urquiola

No abstract is available for this record.

Massimo Bordignon

Problems of `soft budget` constraints in intergovernmental relationships are currently at the frontier of research in local public economics. This paper reviews the Italian experience in the field, starting from the mid-1970s up to the present period, compares it with that of other countries, and uses it to comment upon the state of the literature. The paper argues that the soft budget constraint problem has been a rampant one in Italian local public finance, generating efficiency losses, lack of political accountability and undermining the soundness of public finances. The paper inquires into the causes and possible solutions to the problem, and in particular describes and comments upon the decentralization process of the 1990s. Finally, the Italian debate on fiscal federalism of the 1990s is also reviewed, arguing that some of the suggestions of this debate may be of interest more generally.

Roy Bahl

Fiscal Decentralization is a popular economic development strategy among transition and developing countries. This article reviews the advantages of fiscal decentralization in a theoretical context, but critiques the relevance of the standard theory of federalism as it applies to emerging economies. It is argued that the macroeconomic benefits of fiscal centralization, the absence of good instruments of local government finance, and the centralist politics that characterize most low income countries have been strong enough to hold back increased emphasis on local government finance.

Gilles Duranton, Stéphane Déo

No abstract is available for this record.

Kevin J. Lansing

No abstract is available for this record.

Chong‐En Bai, Pan Yu, Yijiang Wang

Local governments (LGs) are seen as producers of the local public good ('the good'). An authoritarian country is one in which the government decides if the good should be produced and how much to tax to finance it, as versus a democracy in which voters decide. This paper identifies conditions under which it is more efficient for a non-democratic government to delegate to the LGs the authority to 1) decide whether or not to produce the good and2) Collect tax to finance it if the good is produced. Two conditions are identified First, when the net benefit of producing the good is sufficiently small so that, compared with the benefit, inducing LGs effort under the centralized system is too costly (a moral hazard problem). Second, when the net benefit of the is higher in a locale with a higher production cost parameters, making it difficult for the center to induce the LGs to truthfully reveal the cost parameter (an adverse selection problem). These results are consistent with the experience of China in the past several decades, where "too small to be worth bothering" and "too diversified and complicated local conditions for the center to know" have been the two most prominent official arguments made by the communist government itself for decentralization

Pranab Bardhan, Dilip Mookherjee, Bardhan, Pranab, Mookherjee, Dilip

This two-part paper provides a theoretical framework for appraising trade-offs between alternative methods of delegating authority over the delivery of public services, on the targeting and cost-effectiveness of public spending programs in developing countries. Authority over these programs has to be delegated owing to absence of information at the central level concerning local needs and costs of specific communities. In a top-down centralized system, this authority is delegated to bureaucrats by a central government that has limited ability to monitor their performance with respect to either service delivery or cost control. In a decentralized system, it is allocated instead to elected local governments or client groups, which may be subject to capture by local elites. Both systems are thus prone to local corruption and lack of accountability. Part 1 of the paper studies the relevant tradeoffs in the context of a poverty alleviation program, whose aim is to deliver a private merit good available on competitive markets to the poor. Decentralization generally dominates with respect to inter-community targeting as well as cost-effectiveness. However, the ranking of intracommunity targeting under the two systems is ambiguous, and depends on the relative degree of capture that local and national governments are prone to, besides the nature of uncertainty and preferences of the good by the nonpoor. Part 2 of the paper considers an infrastructure service provided by a public enterprise which has a natural monopoly. In this context it is shown that decentralization dominates if the following four conditions are satisfied: (i) local governments are not vulnerable to capture; (ii) local governments have access to adequate local financing sources; (iii) there are no interjurisdictional externalities in service provision; and (iv) local governments have all the bargaining power and access to relevant cost information vis-a-vis public enterprise managers. Absent any one of these institutional conditions, however, decentralization may perform worse than centralization. The Appendix develops a model of electoral competition (adapted from Grossman-Helpman (1996)) where parties are prone to capture by special interest groups, which helps identify some of the institutional determinants of the degree of capture of local and central governments.

Pedro Cavalcanti Ferreira

In this paper a competi tive general equilibrium model is used to investigate the welfare and long run allocation impacts of privatization. There are two types of capital in this model economy, one private and the other initially public ('infrastructure'), and a positive extemality due to the latter is assumed. A benevolent governrnent can improve upon decentralized allocation intemalizing the extemality, but it introduces distortions in the economy through the finance of its investments. It is shown that even making the best case for public action - maximization of individuais' welfare, no operation inefficiency and free supply to society of infrastructure services - privatization is welfare improving for a large set of economies. Hence, arguments against privatization based solely on under-investment are incorrect, as this maybe the optimal action when the financing of public investment are considered. When operation inefficiency is introduced in the public sector, gains from privatization are much higher and positive for most reasonable combinations of parameters.

Alex Mourmouras

Government financing of schooling is necessitated by capital market imperfections. Governments are also res­ ponsible for maintaining a stock of public capital that enters private production function. In this paper the welfare implications and politics of these investments are examined in a version of Diamond (1965) growth model. It is argued that in decentralized environments where the working generation is decisive each period significant underinvestment in both schooling and in­ frastructure will be observed relative to the Ramsey equilibrium.

Cecilia Ugaz, Ugaz, Cecilia

This paper is the fruit of an attempt to distinguish the elements, present in a fiscal decentralization process, that are likely to contribute to efficiency enhancement in the provision of social services in developing countries. From the methodological point of view, the paper makes an effort, whenever possible, to isolate the economic from the political in the arguments for and against fiscal decentralization. These two sets of arguments, economic and political, both equally important, are often intermingled in the literature. The distinction between them may improve our understanding of the advantages and limitations of the selection of a 'decentralized' provision of social services. Although nearly all the aspects of the fiscal decentralization process may be of some relevance in terms of the issue of equitable social service provision, the paper tries to stress the need to provide adequate incentives to local bureaucracies through the design of transfers and through community participation.

Josef T. Yap

Via regression analysis, this study is able to establish factors that impinge on per capita social sector expenditures. In addition, 32 out of the 62 provincial governments have allocated less on social sectors than what is needed to maintain their 1991 expenditure level in real terms. Inconsistencies regarding budget allocation of provincial governments on the social sectors and the objective indicators are detected.

Robin Boadway, Isao Horiba, Raghbendra Jha, Boadway, Robin · 6 authors

It has realized since Pigou (1947) that if public goods are financed by distortionary taxation, the marginal social cost of providing the public good will exceed the actual resource cost by the marginal deadweight cost of taxation.

Jeni Klugman

No abstract is available for this record.

Jeni Klugman

Decentralization has been a popular theme in development thinking and practice due to the impact of decentralisation of government expenditures and revenues upon human development. This survey explores the extensive literature on decentralisation, revealing the lack of quantitative and rigorous studies. A detailed analysis of the various dimensions of decentralisation - participation, financing and comparative priorities - and of the relevant effects upon efficiency, resource availability and equity, enable the author to draw some interesting lessons from its theory and practice.

Jonathan Levin

To measure subnational governments, only external money flows are counted, excluding intra-level transactions in measuring a level of government and all intergovernmental transactions in measuring general government. Control, finance, and administration should be distinguished in measuring centralization and each level’s share of general government, administered expenditures being net of grants given to other governments and financed expenditures net of grants received. Disparate decentralization of finance, control, and administration brings vertical imbalance, measured by the portion of a government’s expenditures not covered by its own resources and by the ratio of intergovernmental grants to total government expenditures.

Robert J. Barro

One strand of endogenous-growth\tmodels assumes constant returns to a broad concept of capital. I extend these models to include tax- financed government services that affect production or utility. Growth and saving rates fall with an increase in utility-type expenditures; the two rates rise initially with productive government expenditures but subsequently decline. With an income tax, the decentralized choices of growth and saving are "too low," but if the production function is Cobb-Douglas, the optimizing government still satisfies a natural condition for productive efficiency. Empirical evidence across countries supports some of the hypotheses about government and growth.

John M. Quigley

This paper considers the relative centralization or decentralization of public finance, and relates the equity and efficiency issues ot the special features of developing economies. The paper considers the centralization of taxation and service provision in Indonesia in relation to these theoretical prinicples and indicates ways in which we may expect decentralization to proceed in the Indonesian context.

Philip J. Grossman

This paper analyzes one method governments employ to circumvent the discipline of a competitive system of fiscal federalism - intergovernmental collusion in the form of intergovernmental grants. Grants, it is argued, serve to encourage the expansion of the public sector by concentrating taxing powers in the hands of the central government and by weakening the fiscal discipline imposed on governments forced to self-finance their expenditures. The results reported suggest that intergovernmental grants do encourage growth in the public sector. The results offer further support for the use of monopoly government assumptions in public sector modeling.

R. Lawson Veasey, Wesley Moody

When the Reagan Administration took office in 1981, it concentrated its domestic efforts upon national government spending, deficits, and inflation. Its major proposed remedies have consisted of "supply-side" economics, cuts in the rates of federal spending on non-military programs and a return to greater state/local responsibility for public policy initiatives and financing. It is with this last aspect of the Reagan proposals that the present work is concerned: the impact and policy implications of federal decentralization on Arkansas. The option of a state tax increase is explored as Arkansas' response.

John Laitner

This article constructs a decentralized growth model with two production sectors, one having competitive firms and the other oligopolists. Since capitalized pure profits for the latter sector constitute an asset which household savings must finance, we show that imperfect competition can reduce steady-state national output through both a "static effect" on allocative efficiency and a "dynamic effect" on aggregative capital accumulation. After presenting a theoretical analysis, we generate several numerical examples. The latter suggest that the "dynamic effect" of monopoly may be significantly larger than the "static effect" in practice.