Guccio, Calogero and Pignataro, Giacomo and Rizzo, Ilde (2009): The performance of local government in the execution of public works.
Download (181Kb) | Preview
This paper aims at analysing the procurement of public works paying attention to the level of government involved. Such an issue has not received so far attention in the literature on fiscal federalism nor in the public works procurement literature. We focus the attention upon the execution stage of public works: indeed, their efficient provision and their capability to deliver the planned benefits are severely affected by the problems arising at the execution stage because of the incompleteness of the underlying contract. The main result is that local governments seem to be less efficient in the management of the execution process, suffering from longer delays than central government. This phenomenon is more severe for small municipalities and when the contract is mainly financed with external resources.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||The performance of local government in the execution of public works|
|English Title:||The performance of local government in the execution of public works|
|Keywords:||public procurement; local government; soft budget|
|Subjects:||H - Public Economics > H5 - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies > H57 - Procurement
H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations > H77 - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism; Secession
H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations > H72 - State and Local Budget and Expenditures
|Depositing User:||Calogero Guccio|
|Date Deposited:||07. Jul 2009 17:32|
|Last Modified:||16. Feb 2013 02:18|
Andrews, C.W. and de Vries, M.S (2007), High expectations, varying outcomes: decentralization and participation in Brazil, Japan, Russia and Sweden, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73, 424-451.
Ambrosiano, M. F., and Bordignon, M. (2006), Normative versus Positive Theories of Revenue Assignments, in E. Ahmad and G. Brosio (eds), Handbook of Fiscal Federalism, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, United Kingdom
Bajari, P. and Lewis, G. (2008), Procurement contracting with time incentives: theory and evidence, mimeo.
Barankay, and Lockwood, B. (2006), Decentralization and the Productive Efficiency of Government: Evidence from Swiss Cantons, IZA Discussion Paper No. 2477
Bardhan, P. and Mookherjee, D. (2006), Decentralisation and accountability in infrastructure delivery in developing countries, Economic Journal, 116, 101-127.
Besley, T. and Coate, S. (2003), Centralized Versus Decentralized Provision of Local Public Goods: A Political Economy Approach, Journal of Public Economics 87, 2611–2637.
Bird, R.M. (1995), Decentralizing Infrastructure: For Good or for Ill?, in A. Estache (ed.), Decentralizing Infrastructure. Advantages and Limitations, World Bank Discussion Paper n. 290, Washington, D.C., pp. 22-51.
Bordignon, M. (2000), Problems of Soft Budget Constraints in Intergovernmental Relationships: The Case of Italy, Inter-American Development Bank, Working paper R-398
Bordignon,M, Colombo, and Galmarini (2003), Fiscal Federalism and Endogenous Lobbies Formation, CESIfo Working Paper 1017
Brennan, G. and J. M. Buchanan. (1980). The Power to Tax: Analytical Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Commissione Tecnica della Finanza Pubblica (2008), La revisione della spesa pubblica, Rapporto 2008, Ministero del Tesoro, Roma.
Estache, A and M. Fay, Current Debates on Infrastructure Policy, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper n. 4410, Washington, D.C.
Fisman, R., and R.Gatti (2002) .Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence Across Countries, Journal of Public Economics, 83(3), 325-45.
Fiva, J. (2005), New evidence on fiscal decentralization and the size of government, Cesifo working paper no. 1615
Guccio, C.- Pignataro, G. and Rizzo, I. (2008), Determinants of Adaptation Costs in Procurement: An Empirical Estimation on Italian Public Works Contracts, mimeo
Guccio, C.- Pignataro, G. and Rizzo, I., Selezione dei fornitori e incentivi alla rinegoziazione in contratti incompleti: rilevanza empirica nel settore dei lavori pubblici, in Rivista Italiana degli Economisti, (forthcoming).
La Pecorella, F., and I. Rizzo (2002), La regolamentazione del mercato dei lavori pubblici: alcune indicazioni di policy, in D. Piacentino – G. Sobbrio (eds.), Stato o mercato? Intervento pubblico e architettura dei mercati, F. Angeli, pp. 201-218.
Oates, W. (2005), Toward a Second-Generation Theory of Fiscal Federalism, International Tax and Public Finance, 12, 349–373.
Qian, Y. and Weingast, B. R. (1997), Federalism as a Commitment to Preserving Market Incentives, Journal of Economic Perspectives 11, 83–92.
Redoano, M. (2007), Does centralization affect the number and size of lobbies? Cesifo working paper no. 1968
Rizzo I. (2000), Government Purchasing in the European Union, in M. Marrelli – G. Pignataro (eds.), Public Decision Making Processes and Asymmetric Information, Kluwer, pp. 147-164.
Tommasi, M. and Weinschelbaum F. (2007), Centralization vs. Decentralization: a principal-agent analysis, Journal of public economic theory, 9 (2), , pp. 369–389.
Wildasin, D. E. (2004), The Institutions of Federalism: Toward an Analytical Framework, National Tax Journal, 57, 247–72.