Is Local Beautiful? Fiscal Decentralization in Mexico
Summary In this study, we present evidence from Mexico regarding the weak effectiveness of federal transfers and low absorption capacity of sub-national governments in poor areas, when political opportunistic behavior is present. We show that the distribution of conditional transfers is discretionary, due to a monitoring problem, and deficiency in institutional frameworks. This may be the cause for opportunistic behavior by political elites. The results suggest that more funds are distributed to areas with more voters. In addition, localities with a higher number of swing voters also receive more resources. These results show that the poorest populations receive the least amount of money from the community-based development funds.
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.:
- Wallis, John Joseph, 1998. "The Political Economy of New Deal Spending Revisited, Again: With and without Nevada," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 140-170, April.
- Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2002.
"Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing,"
Boston College Working Papers in Economics
545, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 14 Feb 2003.
- Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2003. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, March.
- Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2002. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2003 02, Stata Users Group.
- Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2002. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2003 05, Stata Users Group.
- Dilip Mookherjee & Pranab K. Bardhan, 2000. "Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 135-139, May.
- . Pranab Bardhan and Dilip Mookherjee. Revised, 2000. "Decentralizing Anti-Poverty Program Delivery in Developing Countries" and C98-104.2 "Corruption and Decentralization of Infrastructure Delivery in Developing Countries," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C98-104.1, University of California at Berkeley.
- Alesina, Alberto & Dollar, David, 2000.
" Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?,"
Journal of Economic Growth,
Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 33-63, March.
- Alberto Alesina & David Dollar, 1998. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?," NBER Working Papers 6612, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dollar, David & Alesina, Alberto, 2000. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?," Scholarly Articles 4553020, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Galasso, Emanuela & Ravallion, Martin, 2005. "Decentralized targeting of an antipoverty program," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(4), pages 705-727, April.
- Wallis, John, 2001. "The Political Economy of New Deal Spending, Yet Again: A Reply to Fleck," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 305-314, April.
- Svensson, Jakob, 2003. "Why conditional aid does not work and what can be done about it?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 381-402, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:36:y:2008:i:9:p:1547-1558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.