Arends, H. The Dangers of Fiscal Decentralization and Public Service Delivery: a Review of Arguments. The characteristics of the level of government to which the service is to be decentralized are crucial as well. Eine Positionierung aus Sicht der Lehr-Lernforschung.
2011.
Tabellini, Guido. Between Ambition and Realities. With regard to health, two recent surveys (Cobos Muñoz et al.
In fact, the literature on fiscal decentralization and public service delivery provides a number of clues that are important to bear in mind in order to avoid the dangers of decentralization.
Review of Economics and Statistics 36:387–389. Fiscal decentralization and regional disparities: evidence from several European Union countries. Economics of Education Review 29(4):658–668.
The fear that local governments have incentives to become overindebted stems from the debate about soft budget constraints.
The distinction between developed and developing economies is relevant as well. While the first generation assumes the public servant is a welfare maximizer, the second generation argues that public servants at the local level may have other interests than promoting the public good, potentially compromising the beneficial effects of decentralization (Khan et al. 2016, pp.
You can also search for this author in
2003.
The American Economic Review 90(2):135–139.
Part of Springer Nature. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-020-00233-7, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-020-00233-7, Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips, Not logged in Economics Letters 111(3):191–193. There are some exceptions. Merit wants refer to those wants that, in principle, could be satisfied by the private market but which are of such importance that the government takes on the role of providing the service to all members of society (Musgrave 1959, p. 13). However, they curtail local fiscal autonomy and can increase inequality when they contain a strong element of benefit taxation, i.e., people are taxed according to the benefits they receive from a public service, ultimately excluding poorer households from being able to afford the services (Hines 2000).
Duke Center for International Development Furthermore, discussion of these dangers of decentralization puts the spotlight on a previously underreported additional danger, namely the danger of local corruption and collusion (see Rodríguez-Pose and Gill 2005, p. 406). Hart, Tom, and Brym Welham. A smaller body of literature revolves around the question of whether fiscal decentralization increases regional inequalities. 2017.
1961). Chapter 11 the economics of the local public sector. Production efficiency, in turn, is present when a given quantity and quality of public service is being produced and provided at the lowest costs (Litvack et al.
1987.
This is an important question, as social inequalities are subject to major public and social debates. Weingast, Barry R., Kenneth A. Shepsle, and Christopher Johnsen. Brain drain and economic growth: theory and evidence.
Musgrave, Richard.
July 11 – July 30, 2021. Olson, Mancur, Jr.. 1969. Journal of Political Economy 89(4):642–664. Warren, Mark E. 2004. Constitutional Political Economy 5(2):193–219.