Decentralization Dilemma: Measuring the Degree and Evaluating the Outcomes

Sharma, Chanchal Kumar (2004): Decentralization Dilemma: Measuring the Degree and Evaluating the Outcomes. Published in: Indian Journal of Political Science , Vol. Vol. (, No. No. (1) (March 2006): pp. 49-64.

Abstract

Though decentralization for past one and half decade or so has become the most favoured policy priority among the policy makers yet the countries around the world differ dramatically in the degree of decentralization that is accommodated. While diversity in degree of decentralization across the world is a fact yet there is no consensus in the empirical literature over the questions like ‘which country is more decentralized?’ This is because decentralization is defined and measured differently in different studies. In fact, a true assessment of the degree of decentralization in a country can be made only if a comprehensive approach is adopted and rather than trying to simplify the syndrome of characteristics into the single dimension of autonomy, interrelationships of various dimensions of decentralization are taken into account. Thus it is to be realized that there is no simple one dimensional, quantifiable index of degree of decentralization in a given country. As there is wide diversity in the studies on degree of decentralization so is the case with the literature on outcomes of it. Outcome varies not only because decentralization can appear in various forms and combinations across countries but also because different instruments may have very different effects in different ccircumstances. Thus arriving at the precise definition of decentralization and associating it with particular outcomes is neither possible nor desirable for the simple reason that generalization of any kind can create pitfalls that can obscure rather than clarify the facts. What is more important is the need for a strictly contextual yet comprehensive approach while going beyond the blunt measures like expenditure decentralization and taking politics and institutional arrangements of the specific case under investigation also into account.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Decentralization; measurement; outcome
• Subjects: Z - Other Special Topics > Z0 - General; H - Public Economics > H0 - General; H - Public Economics > H1 - Structure and Scope of Government; H - Public Economics > H1 - Structure and Scope of Government > H11 - Structure, Scope, and Performance of Government; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations > H77 - Intergovernmental Relations ; Federalism ; Secession; H - Public Economics > H8 - Miscellaneous Issues; H - Public Economics > H8 - Miscellaneous Issues > H83 - Public Administration ; Public Sector Accounting and Audits

References

Ahmad, E. (1997) Financing Decentralized expenditures— An International Comparison of Grants. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishers.

Akai, N., Sakata M. (2002) “Fiscal Decentralization Contributes to Economic Growth: Evidence from State-level Cross-section Data for the United States,” Journal of Urban Economics, 52(1), 93-108.

Ames Barry. (2001) The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press.

Azfar Omar , Satu Kähkönen, Anthony Lanyi, Patrick Meagher, and Diana Rutherford (1999) ‘Decentralization, Governance and Public Services: The Impact of Institutional Arrangements; A Review of Literature’, IRIS Center, University of Maryland, College Park September p1-34.

Bird, R.M. (1993) “Threading the Fiscal labyrinth: Some Issues in Fiscal Decentralization.” National tax Journal 46 (3) : 207-227.

Blanchard, Olivier and Andrei Shleifer. (2000) “Federalism With an Without Political Centralization: China versus Russia,” NBER Working Paper No. 7616 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research)

Breton, Albert and Anthony Scott (1978) The Economic Constitutions of Federal states, University of toronto Press, Toronto.

Burki Shahid Javed ,Guillermo E. Perry and William R. Dillinger (1999) Beyond the Center: Decentralizing the State (Washington, D.C : World Bank)

Byskov,S. ( 2001) “Measuring Levels of Decentralization: The strengths and Weaknesses of Government Finance statistics”, Available at: www1.worldbank.org/publicsector.

Cohen, J.M, Peterson, S.B. (1999) Administrative Decentralization: Strategies for Developing Countries, Kumarian Press (Published for United Nations) June 1999. D. Xie , H. Zou, H. Davoodi (1999) ‘Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in the United States’, Journal of Urban Economics 45, 228-239 Davodi, H., Zou, H. (1998) “Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Study,” Journal of Urban Economics, 43, 244-257.

de Mello, L., Barenstein, M. (2001) “Fiscal Decentralization and Governance: a Cross-Country Analysis,” IMF Working Paper, WP/01/71.

Dillinger, William, and Stephen B. Webb (1999) “Fiscal Management in Federal Democracies:Argentina and Brazil,” WP, World Bank.

Ehdaie, J. (1994) Fiscal Decentralization and the Size of Government: An Extension with Evidence from Cross-Country Data, The World Bank, Policy Research Department, Public Economics Division, 1994. p.18

Enikolopov,R and E.Zhuravaskaya (2003) “ Decentralization and Political Institutions”, Mimeo, April.

Fisman, R., Gatti, R. (2002) “Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence across Countries,” Journal of Public Economics, 83(3), 325-346.

Fiszbein, Ariel (1997) “The Emergence of Local Capacity: Lessons from Colombia.” World Development, Vol. 25, No. 7: 1029-1043.

Goldsmith, Arthur A. (1999). “Slapping the Grasping Hand: Correlates of Political Corruption in Emerging Markets,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58(4) pp 865-863.

Grossman, P.J. (1989), Fiscal Decentralisation and Government Size: An Extension, Public Choice, 62 (1): pp.63-69 H. Davoodi H. Zou (1998) “Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: A cross-country study”, Journal of Urban Economics 43 224-257. Hayek, Friedrich von. (1939). “The Economic Conditions of Interstate Federalism,” reprinted in Friedrich von Hayek, Individualism and the Economic Order, ch.12. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.

Huther, J. & Shah, A.(2000). " Anti-Corruption Policies and Programs: A Framework for Evaluation”, Papers 2501, World Bank - Country Economics Department Inter-American Development Bank. (1997). Latin America After A Decade of Reforms: Economic and Social Progress. Johns Hopkins University Press Jin, H., Qian, Y., Weingast, B. (1999) “Regional Decentralization and Fiscal Incentives: Federalism, Chinese Style” Mimeo.

Joumard, isabelle and Per Mathis Kongsrud (2003) “Fiscal Relations Across government Levels”, Working Paper No:375, Economic department OECD, France.

Kee James Edwin (2003) “ Fiscal decentralization : Theory as Reform” VII Congreso Internatcional del CLAD sobre la Reforma del Estado y de la Administracion Publica, Panama, 28-31 Oct. 2003.

Lin, J.Y., Liu, Z. (2000) “Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in China,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 49 (1), 1-22.

Litvek,J., Ahmad,J., Bird,R (1999), Rethinking Decentralization in Developing Countries -A discussion Paper, World Bank, Washington D.C.

Mainwaring Scott (1999), Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil, Stanford, Stanford University Press.

Marlow (1988) "Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size," Public Choice 56(3) (March 1988), 259-69.

McKinnon, Ronald, and Thomas Nechyba. (1997). “Competition in Federal Systems: Political and Financial Constraints,” in John Ferejohn and Barry R. Weingast, eds., The New Federalism: Can the States be Trusted? Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.

Meloche, Jean-Philippe., François Vaillancourt., Serdar Yilmaz (2004) ‘Decentralization or Fiscal Autonomy? What Does Really Matter? Effects on Growth and Public Sector Size in European Transition Countries’,World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3254, World Bank Institute, WB( March 2004).

Nelson, Michael A. (1986), “An Empirical Analysis of State and Local Tax Structure in the Context of the Leviathan Model of Government,” Public Choice 49 (3): 283–94.

Nice, D.C. (1987), Federalism: The Politics of Intergovernmental Relations, New York: St Martin’s Press.

Oates, Wallace (1972) Fiscal Federalis, New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Oates, Wallace E. (1985), “Searching for Leviathan: An Empirical Study,” American Economic Review 75 (September):748–57.

Ostom, Elinor, Larry Schroeder and susan Wynne (1993), Institutional Incentives and Sustainable development 9Boulder, CO: Westview Press .

Pranab K. Bardhan & Dilip Mookherjee. (2000). "Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels," American Economic Review, Vol. 90 (2) pp. 135-139

Prud’homme, R. (1995) “On the dangers of Decentralization.” World Bank Economic Review 9 Putnam, R. D. (1993) “ The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life” in the American Prospect, 4:13 Robalino, D., Picazo, O., Voetberg, A. (2001) “Does Fiscal Decentralization Improve Health Outcomes? Evidence from Cross-Country Analysis,” World Bank: Policy Research Working Paper #2565.

Rodden, Jonathan. (2000). “The Dilemma of Fiscal Federalism: Hard and Soft Budget Constraints around the World.” W.P. M.I.T.

Rojas, Fernando. (1998). “LAC Regional Study on Decentralization.” Background Paper for World Development Report 1999/2000, September. Washington, D.C.

Rondinelli, D.A. and Nellis,J.R. (1986), “Assessing Decentralization Policies in Developing Countries : The Case for Cautious Optimism’, Development Policy Review, Volume 4, pp 3-23. Rubinfeld, Daniel. 1987. "Economics of the Local Public Sector," Handbook of Public Economics vol. II, ed. by A. J. Auerbach and M. Feldstein. New York: Elsevier.

Sanguinetti, Pablo J. (1994). “Intergovernmental Transfers and Public Sector Expenditures: A Game-Theoretic Approach.” Estudios de Economia. 21(2): 179-212.

Schneider Aaron. (2003). Who Gets What from Whom? The Impact of Decentralization on Tax capacity and Pro-Poor Policy. IDS Working Paper 179, Institute of Development Studies, France.

Seabright, Paul. (1996). “Accountability and decentralization in Government: An Incomplete Contracts Model.” European economic review 40(1): 61-89.

Shah, Anwar. (1997). “Federalism Reform Imperatives, Restructuring Principles and Lessons for Pakistan,” Pakistan Development Review 36(4 part II): 499-536

Shugart Matthew and Carey John M. (1992) Presidents and Assemblies : Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamic, Cambridge, MA : Cambridge University Press.

Stein, Ernesto. (1998) “Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size in Latin America,” pp. 95-119. In Kiichiro Fukasako and Ricardo Hausmann, eds., Democracy, Decentralization and Deficits in Latin America. Washington, D.C.: IADB-OECD.

Tanzi, V. (1996) “Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization: A Review of Some Efficiency and Macroeconomic Aspects,” Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics, 1995. World Bank, Washington, DC, 295-316

Tiebout, Charles, (1956) “ A Pure Theory of Local Government Expenditures’, Journal of Political Economy (October 1956).

Tiebout, Charles. (1956). “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures,” Journal of PoliticalEconomy, 64, October, 416-24.

Treisman, D. (2000) “Decentralization and the Quality of Government,” Mimeo, UCLA

UNCDF [United nations Capital Development Fund] (1999), Taking Risks : Background Papers, September, 1999.

Watts, Ronald L., (2001) The International Evolution of Federal Systems in the Twentieth Century, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations: Queen’s University-Kingston.

Weingast, Barry R (2000) “The Comparative Theory of Federalism.” WP, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

Whiteford (2001), “Reconciling Devolution and Equity in Income Security” International Social Science Journal, Vol 53 (1), pp111-120.

Wildasin, David E. (1997). "Externalities and Bailouts: Hard and Soft Budget Constrains in ntergovernmental Fiscal Relations.” mimeo, Vanderbilt University.

Willis, Eliza, Christopher Garman, and Stephan Haggard. (1998). “The Politics of Decentralization in Latin America,” WP, UCSD.

Woller, G.M., Phillips, K. (1998) “Fiscal Decentralization and LDC Economic Growth: An Empirical Investigation,” Journal of Development Studies, 34(4), 139-148.

Xie, D., Zou, H., Davoodi, H. (1999) “Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in the United States,” Journal of Urban Economics, 45,228-239.

Yilmaz,S S. and Ebel, R.D. (2002) On Measurement and Impact of Fiscal Decentralization, Washington D.C; World Bank.

Zhang, T., Zou, H. (1998) “Fiscal Decentralization, Public Spending, and Economic Growth in China,” Journal of Public Economics, 67, 221-240.

Zhuravskaya, E. (2000) “Incentives to Provide Local Public Goods: Fiscal Federalism Russian Style,” Journal of Public Economics, 76 (3).