IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v41y2004i1p195-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fiscal Externality, Rent Sharing and Equalisation Transfers in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Hikaru Ogawa

    (School of Economics, Nagoya University, Furocho Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, 464-8601 Japan, ogawa@soec.reagoya-u.ac.jp, Martin School of Public Policy and Administration, University of Kentucky, USA,)

Abstract

This article describes a quantitative analysis of Japanese equalisation transfers based on the fiscal externality models of Hartwick, Boadway and Flatters. In particular, it examines whether the actual level of equalisation transfers matches the theoretically optimal level from the efficiency point of view. Although the purpose of interregional fiscal transfer is not necessarily in the pursuit of an efficient allocation of resources, equalisation transfer surely affects it. It is often said in Japan that the equalisation transfer may distort efficiency too much and that it is one of the causes of serious fiscal conflict between the metropolitan area and local (rural) prefectures. The quantitative results show that the actual amount of transfers from resource-rich to resource-poor prefectures was below the optimal level in the 1980s. However, the resource-poor prefectures have received an excessive transfer after 1990. Specifically, the direction of the optimal transfer might change in the second half of the 1990s. The estimates for 1997 show that, at most, 1445 billion yen net should be transferred to relatively high-tax and resource-rich prefectures.

Suggested Citation

  • Hikaru Ogawa, 2004. "Fiscal Externality, Rent Sharing and Equalisation Transfers in Japan," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(1), pages 195-205, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:41:y:2004:i:1:p:195-205
    DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000155740
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/0042098032000155740
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0042098032000155740?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bergstrom, Theodore C & Goodman, Robert P, 1973. "Private Demands for Public Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 280-296, June.
    2. Myers, Gordon M. & Papageorgiou, Yorgos Y., 1997. "Efficient Nash equilibria in a federal economy with migration costs," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4-5), pages 345-371, August.
    3. John M. Hartwick, 1980. "The Henry George Rule, Optimal Population, and Interregional Equity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 13(4), pages 695-700, November.
    4. Borcherding, Thomas E & Deacon, Robert T, 1972. "The Demand for the Services of Non-Federal Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 891-901, December.
    5. Robin W. Boadway & Frank R. Flatters, 1982. "Efficiency and Equalization Payments in a Federal System of Government: A Synthesis and Extension of Recent Results," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 15(4), pages 613-633, November.
    6. Mieszkowski, Peter & Zodrow, George R, 1989. "Taxation and the Tiebout Model: The Differential Effects of Head Taxes, Taxes on Land Rents, and Property Taxes," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 1098-1146, September.
    7. Mansoorian, Arman & Myers, Gordon M., 1993. "Attachment to home and efficient purchases of population in a fiscal externality economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 117-132, August.
    8. Dixon, Peter B & Madden, John R & Peter, Matthew W, 1993. "The Effects of Reallocating General Revenue Assistance among the Australian States," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 69(207), pages 367-381, December.
    9. Wellisch, Dietmar, 1994. "Interregional spillovers in the presence of perfect and imperfect household mobility," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 167-184, October.
    10. Peter B. Dixon & John R. Madden & Matthew W. Peter, 1993. "The Effects of Reallocating General Revenue Assistance among the Australian States," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 69(4), pages 367-381, December.
    11. Matthias Wrede, 1997. "Local public goods, heterogeneous population, voluntary transfers, and constrained efficient allocations," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 31(3), pages 217-234.
    12. Myers, Gordon M., 1990. "Optimality, free mobility, and the regional authority in a federation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 107-121, October.
    13. Flatters, Frank & Henderson, Vernon & Mieszkowski, Peter, 1974. "Public goods, efficiency, and regional fiscal equalization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 99-112, May.
    14. Buchanan, James M. & Goetz, Charles J., 1972. "Efficiency limits of fiscal mobility: An assessment of the tiebout model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 25-43, April.
    15. Petchey, Jeffrey D, 1993. "Equalisation in a Federal Economy with Inter-state Migration," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(61), pages 336-354, December.
    16. Jeffrey Petchey, 1995. "Resource Rents, Cost Differences and Fiscal Equalization," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 71(4), pages 343-353, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robin Boadway & Katherine Cuff & Maurice Marchand, 2003. "Equalization and the Decentralization of Revenue–Raising in a Federation," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 201-228, April.
    2. Georg Anetsberger & Volker Arnold, 2019. "Horizontal versus vertical fiscal equalization: the assignment problem," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(2), pages 357-380, April.
    3. Tidiane Ly, 2018. "Sub-metropolitan tax competition with household and capital mobility," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(5), pages 1129-1169, October.
    4. Albouy, David, 2012. "Evaluating the efficiency and equity of federal fiscal equalization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9-10), pages 824-839.
    5. Robin Boadway & Katherine Cuff, 2017. "The impressive contribution of Canadian economists to fiscal federalism theory and policy," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1348-1380, December.
    6. Arman Mansoorian, 2000. "Risk sharing in a federation with population mobility and long horizons," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 662-676, August.
    7. Hoel, Michael, 2004. "Interregional interactions and population mobility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 419-433, November.
    8. Bucovetsky, S., 2011. "Incentive equivalence with fixed migration costs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1292-1301.
    9. Boadway, Robin & Song, Zhen & Tremblay, Jean-François, 2013. "Non-cooperative pollution control in an inter-jurisdictional setting," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 783-796.
    10. Mitsui, Kiyoshi & Sato, Motohiro, 2001. "Ex ante free mobility, ex post immobility, and time consistency in a federal system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 445-460, December.
    11. Anping Chen & Nicolaas Groenewold, 2011. "Regional Equality and National Development in China: Is There a Trade‐Off?," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 628-669, December.
    12. Nicolaas Groenewold & A.J. Hagger, 2004. "Regional Unemployment Disparities: Can Fiscal Policy Help?," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 7(1), pages 13-37, March.
    13. Volker Arnold, 2005. "Competitive Versus Cooperative Federalism: Is a Fiscal Equalization Scheme Necessary from an Allocative Point of View?/ Kompetitiver versus kooperativer Föderalismus: Ist ein horizontaler Finanzausgle," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(3), pages 259-282, June.
    14. Arman Mansoorian, 1996. "Fiscal Externalities Over Long Horizons," Working Papers 1996_04, York University, Department of Economics.
    15. Bucovetsky, S., 1995. "Rent seeking and tax competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 337-363, November.
    16. Naoto Aoyama & Emilson C. D. Silva, 2010. "Equitable and Efficient Federal Structures with Decentralized Leadership, Spillovers, and Attachment of Heterogeneous Labor," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(2), pages 323-343, April.
    17. Haavio, Markus, 2005. "Transboundary pollution and household mobility: Are they equivalent?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 252-275, September.
    18. Wellisch, Dietmar, 1992. "On the decentralized provision of public goods with spillovers in the presence of household mobility," Tübinger Diskussionsbeiträge 19, University of Tübingen, School of Business and Economics.
    19. Anping Chen & Nicolaas Groenewold, 2013. "The national and regional effects of fiscal decentralisation in China," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(3), pages 731-760, December.
    20. Robin Boadway, 2004. "The Theory and Practice of Equalization," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 50(1), pages 211-254.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:41:y:2004:i:1:p:195-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.