IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bdr/borrec/203.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decentralised Provision of Quasi- Private Goods: The Case of Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Ana María Iregui

Abstract

This paper quantifies the welfare effects of decentralisation in Colombia, using a multiregional CGE model.We investigate to what extent will the Colombian Population be better off when goods such as health and education, are delivered locally as against centrally. A provision scheme based on the median voter is consided.According to the results, the provision of health and education by regional governments improves the welfare of the Colombian Population as a whole, since regional governments provide goods and services in a way that better caters to local preferences. More importantly,these welfare gains vary from 1.3% to 2.3% of GDP, a substantial magnitude especially when compared with the efficiency gains associated to the tax reforms of the early nineties.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana María Iregui, 2002. "Decentralised Provision of Quasi- Private Goods: The Case of Colombia," Borradores de Economia 203, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
  • Handle: RePEc:bdr:borrec:203
    DOI: 10.32468/be.203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.32468/be.203
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.32468/be.203?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudio Thum & Marcel Thum, 2001. "Repeated Interaction and the Public Provision of Private Goods," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(4), pages 625-643, December.
    2. John Whalley, 1984. "Trade Liberalization among Major World Trading Areas," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262231204, December.
    3. Oates, Wallace E., 1993. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Development," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 46(2), pages 237-43, June.
    4. Lockwood, Ben, "undated". "Distributive Politics and the Benefits of Decentralisation," Economic Research Papers 268795, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    5. St-Hilaire, France & Whalley, John, 1987. "A Microconsistent Data Set for Canada for Use in Regional General Equilibrium Policy Analysis," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 33(3), pages 327-343, September.
    6. Lockwood, Ben, 2000. "The Assignment of Powers in Federal and Unitary States," Economic Research Papers 269340, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    7. Alessandro BALESTRINO, 1995. "Public Provision of Private Goods and User Charges," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1995043, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    8. Besley, Timothy, 1991. " Welfare Improving User Charges for Publicly Provided Private Goods," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(4), pages 495-510.
    9. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1998. "Topping Up or Opting Out? The Optimal Design of Public Provision Schemes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 399-411, May.
    10. Epple, Dennis & Romano, Richard E, 1996. "Public Provision of Private Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 57-84, February.
    11. Bruce C. Greenwald & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1984. "Pecuniary & Market Mediated Externalities: Towards a General Theory of the Welfare Economics & Economies with Imperfect Information & Incomplete Mrkts," NBER Working Papers 1304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Israel Fainboim Yaker & Olga Lucía Acosta Navarro & Héctor José Cadena Clavijo, 1994. "El proceso reciente de descentralización fiscal en Colombia y sus perspectivas," Coyuntura Social 13234, Fedesarrollo.
    13. Blomquist, Suren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1995. " Public Provision of Private Goods as a Redistributive Device in an Optimum Income Tax Model," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(4), pages 547-567, December.
    14. John Williamson, 1994. "The Political Economy of Policy Reform," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 68, October.
    15. Dawkins, Christina & Srinivasan, T.N. & Whalley, John, 2001. "Calibration," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 58, pages 3653-3703, Elsevier.
    16. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1971. "A Utilitarian Approach to the Concept of Equality in Public Expenditures," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 85(3), pages 409-415.
    17. Bird, Richard M., 1993. "Threading the Fiscal Labyrinth: Some Issues in Fiscal Decentralization," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 46(2), pages 207-27, June.
    18. Besley, Timothy & Coate, Stephen, 1991. "Public Provision of Private Goods and the Redistribution of Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 979-984, September.
    19. Munro, Alistair, 1991. "The optimal public provision of private goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 239-261, March.
    20. Thum, Claudio & Thum, Marcel, 2001. " Repeated Interaction and the Public Provision of Private Goods," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(4), pages 625-643, December.
    21. Robert Inman, 1978. "Testing political economy’s ‘as if’ proposition: is the median income voter really decisive?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 45-65, December.
    22. Boadway, Robin & Roberts, Sandra & Shah, Anwar, 1994. "The reform of fiscal systems in developing and emerging market economies : a federalism perspective," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1259, The World Bank.
    23. Boadway, Robin W, 1974. "The Welfare Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 84(336), pages 926-939, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mardones D., Cristián, 2012. "Chile: building a computable general equilibrium model with an application to the Bío Bío region," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.
    2. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jaime Bonet & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Fernando S. Perobelli, 2008. "Efectos regionales de una mayor liberación comercial en Colombia: Una estimación con el Modelo CEER," Documentos de trabajo sobre Economía Regional y Urbana 104, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    3. Eduardo Haddad & Weslem Faria & Luis Armando Galvis-Aponte & Lucas Wilfried Hahn-De-Castro, 2016. "Matriz insumo-producto interregional para Colombia, 2012," Documentos de trabajo sobre Economía Regional y Urbana 247, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    4. Jesús Otero & Luis Fernando Gamboa & Andrés García-Suaza, 2011. "An analysis of the relationship between wages in the public and private sector in colombia: a panel data approach," Documentos de Trabajo 8738, Universidad del Rosario.
    5. E.A. Haddad & J. Bonet & G.J.D. Hewings & F.S. Perobelli, 2009. "Spatial aspects of trade liberalization in Colombia: A general equilibrium approach," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(4), pages 699-732, November.

    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. Simona GRASSI, 2006. "On the characteristics of a mixed system of provision of a private good. An application to health care," Departmental Working Papers 2006-14, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    2. Zanola, Roberto, 2000. "Public goods versus publicly provided private goods in a two-class economy," POLIS Working Papers 12, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    3. Laura Mayoral & Joan Esteban, 2019. "A politico-economic model of public expenditure and income taxation," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 479-507, November.
    4. Sören Blömquist & Vidar Christiansen, 1998. "Price Subsidies Versus Public Provision," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 5(3), pages 283-306, July.
    5. Margarita Katsimi & Thomas Moutos, 2004. "Monopoly, Inequality and Redistribution via the Public Provision of Private Goods," CESifo Working Paper Series 1318, CESifo.
    6. Balestrino, Alessandro, 1999. "User Charges as Redistributive Devices," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 1(4), pages 511-524.
    7. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1998. "Topping Up or Opting Out? The Optimal Design of Public Provision Schemes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 399-411, May.
    8. Sören Blomquist & Vidar Christiansen, 2003. "Is there a Case for Public Provision of Private Goods if Preferences are Heterogeneous? An Example with Day Care," CESifo Working Paper Series 938, CESifo.
    9. Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay & Joan Esteban, 2009. "Redistributive Taxation, PublicExpenditure and the Size of Government," STICERD - Distributional Analysis Research Programme Papers 095, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    10. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1999. "The political economy of publicly provided private goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 31-54, July.
    11. Luciano G. Greco, 2011. "Optimal Redistribution with Productive Social Services," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 113(1), pages 55-73, March.
    12. Gasparini, Leonardo C. & Pinto, Santiago M., 2006. "Equality of opportunity and optimal cash and in-kind policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 143-169, January.
    13. Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay & Joan Esteban, 2007. "Redistributive Taxation and PublicExpenditures," STICERD - Distributional Analysis Research Programme Papers 95, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    14. Blomquist, Sören & Christiansen, Vidar, 2004. "Welfare Enhancing Marginal Tax Rates: The Case of Publicly Provided Day Care," Arbetsrapport 2004:6, Institute for Futures Studies.
    15. Alessandro Balestrino, 2000. "Mixed Tax Systems and the Public Provision of Private Goods," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 7(4), pages 463-478, August.
    16. Zohal Hessami & Claudio Thum & Silke Uebelmesser, 2012. "A Political Economy Explanation for In-kind Redistribution: The Interplay of Corruption and Democracy," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2012-25, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    17. Thum, Claudio & Thum, Marcel, 2001. " Repeated Interaction and the Public Provision of Private Goods," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(4), pages 625-643, December.
    18. Akutagawa, Kazunori & Mun, Se-il, 2005. "Private goods provided by local governments," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 23-48, January.
    19. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    20. Chiara Canta & Helmuth Cremer, 2021. "Opting out and topping up reconsidered: Informal care under uncertain altruism," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 259-283, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Decentralisation; applied CGE modelling; quasi-private goods.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bdr:borrec:203. 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: Clorith Angélica Bahos Olivera (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/brcgvco.html .

    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.