This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Relative Capture of Local and Central Governments: An Essay in the Political Economy of Decentralization

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Pranab Bardhan (Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley)
Dilip Mookherjee (Boston University)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

A common presumption is that decentralization is prone to a potential pitfall owing to the greater vulnerability of local governments to capture by local elites. We investigate the determinants of relative capture of local and national governments theoretically, in the context of an extended version of the Baron-Grossman-Helpman model of electoral competition with lobbying by special interest groups. A number of factors do provide support to the traditional presumption, such as reduced cohesiveness of interest groups, higher levels of voter awareness, and greater electoral competition at the national level. A number of other factors may, however, create an opposite tendency for lower capture at the local level. These include less electoral uncertainty at the national level, and a higher value of campaign funds in national elections owing to their fungibility across different districts. Relative capture also depends on heterogeneity across districts with respect to levels of local inequality and poverty: accordingly decentralization will tend to increase capture in high inequality districts and lower it in low inequality districts. Power-sharing between parties at the national level, due either to coalition governments or proportional representation, limits the extent of national capture. We conclude that empirical research is necessary to investigate the extent and determinants of relative capture.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=iber/cider
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for International and Development Economics Research, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley in its series Center for International and Development Economics Research, Working Paper Series with number 1013.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 25 Mar 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cdl:ciders:1013

Note: oai:cdlib1:iber/cider-1013
Contact details of provider:
Postal: F502 Haas, Berkeley CA 94720-1922
Phone: (510) 642-1922
Fax: (510) 642-5018
Email:
Web page: http://repositories.cdlib.org/iber/cider/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: capture; decentralization; electoral competition; local government;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. R. L. Hanson & J. T. Hartman, . "Do welfare magnets attract?," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1028-94, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty. [Downloadable!]
  2. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1997. "Political Economics and Macroeconomic Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 1759, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Galasso, Emanuela & Ravallion, Martin, 2000. "Distributional outcomes of a decentralized welfare program," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2316, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
  4. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1996. "Electoral Competition and Special Interest Politics," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 63(2), pages 265-86, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Elbers, Chris & Lanjouw, Jean O. & Lanjouw, Peter, 2002. "Micro-level estimation of welfare," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2911, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
  2. Sebastian Eckardt, 2007. "Political Accountability, Fiscal Conditions, and Local Government Performance – Cross-Sectional Evidence from Indonesia," Working Papers 02-2007, Institute of Local Public Finance. [Downloadable!]
  3. Baleiras, Rui Nuno, 2001. "To Fragment or to Consolidate Jurisdictions: the Optimal Architecture of Government," FEUNL Working Paper Series wp401, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia. [Downloadable!]
  4. Dilip Mookherjee & Pranab Bardhan, 2005. "Decentralization, Corruption And Government Accountability: An Overview," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2005-023, Boston University - Department of Economics, revised Jun 2005. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Pouyet, Jérôme, 2000. "The Subsidiarity Bias in Regulation," IDEI Working Papers 96, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  6. Irina Slinko & Evgeny Yakovlev & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2003. "Laws for Sale: Evidence from Russia," Working Papers w0031, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  7. Lekha S. Chakraborty, 2006. "Fiscal Decentralisation and Local Level Gender Responsive Budgeting In The Philippines: An Empirical Analysis," Working Papers id:770, esocialsciences.com. [Downloadable!]
  8. Claudio Agostini & Phillip Brown, 2007. "Spatial Inequality in Chile," ILADES-Georgetown University Working Papers inv178, Ilades-Georgetown University, School of Economics and Bussines. [Downloadable!]
  9. Claudio Agostini & Phillip Brown, 2007. "Desigualdad geográfica en Chile," Revista de Analisis Economico – Economic Analysis Review, Ilades-Georgetown University, Economics Department, vol. 22(1), pages 3-33, June. [Downloadable!]
  10. Odd-Helge Fjeldstad, 2004. "Decentralisation and corruption," CMI Working Papers WP 2004: 10, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway. [Downloadable!]
  11. repec:dia:wpaper:dt200512 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Fernanda Brollo, 2008. "Who Is Punishing Corrupt Politicians – Voters or the Central Government? Evidence from the Brazilian Anti-Corruption Program," Working Papers 336, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University. [Downloadable!]
  13. Shantiko, Bayuni, 2006. "Unfinished business: customary land individualization in olilit village, tanimbar islands," MPRA Paper 918, University Library of Munich, Germany. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? RePEc stands for Research Papers in Economics.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.