IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwppe/0509009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Old and New Theories of Fiscal Federalism, Organizational Design Problems, and Tiebout

Author

Listed:
  • Giampaolo Garzarelli

    (University of Rome, 'La Sapienza')

Abstract

This work is a contribution to the Second Generation Theory (SGT) of fiscal federalism that studies fiscal federalism through contemporary economic and industrial organization theory. First, it establishes context by introducing the two classic motivations in support of federalism, namely, incentives and knowledge. Second, it succinctly discusses the incentive-based organizational approach of the SGT. Third, it shows that the Tiebout model already embeds an organizational approach, which instead rests on a knowledge motivation. The underlying theme is that the SGT should include both the incentive and knowledge motivations for fiscal decentralization.

Suggested Citation

  • Giampaolo Garzarelli, 2005. "Old and New Theories of Fiscal Federalism, Organizational Design Problems, and Tiebout," Public Economics 0509009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwppe:0509009
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/pe/papers/0509/0509009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oliver Volckart, 2002. "No Utopia: Government Without Territorial Monopoly in Medieval Central Europe," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(2), pages 325-343, June.
    2. Ostrom, Vincent & Tiebout, Charles M. & Warren, Robert, 1961. "The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 831-842, December.
    3. Yingyi Qian & Barry R. Weingast, 1997. "Federalism as a Commitment to Reserving Market Incentives," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 83-92, Fall.
    4. Mariano Tommasi & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2007. "Centralization vs. Decentralization: A Principal‐Agent Analysis," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(2), pages 369-389, April.
    5. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1996. "Federal Fiscal Constitutions: Risk Sharing and Moral Hazard," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(3), pages 623-646, May.
    6. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64, pages 416-416.
    7. Charles M. Tiebout, 1961. "An Economic Theory of Fiscal Decentralization," NBER Chapters, in: Public Finances: Needs, Sources, and Utilization, pages 79-96, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Seabright, Paul, 1996. "Accountability and decentralisation in government: An incomplete contracts model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 61-89, January.
    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. Achakorn Wongpredee & Tatchalerm Sudhipongpracha, 2014. "The Politics of Intergovernmental Transfers in Northeast Thailand," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 30(3), pages 343-363, September.
    2. Giampaolo Garzarelli, 2006. "Cognition, Incentives, and Public Governance," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(3), pages 235-257, May.
    3. Samuel Adams & Kingsley Agomor, 2020. "Decentralization, Partisan Politics, and National Development in Ghana," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 351-366, June.
    4. Vigvári, András, 2009. "Atipikus önkormányzati eladósodás Magyarországon [Atypical local-government indebtedness in Hungary]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 709-730.

    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. Giampaolo Garzarelli, 2005. "Cognition, Incentives, and Public Governance:Laboratory Federalism from the Organizational Viewpoint," Public Economics 0512013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Giampaolo Garzarelli, 2006. "Cognition, Incentives, and Public Governance," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(3), pages 235-257, May.
    3. Prakash Chandra Jha, 2015. "Theory of fiscal federalism: an analysis," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 17(2), pages 241-259, October.
    4. Wallace Oates, 2005. "Toward A Second-Generation Theory of Fiscal Federalism," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(4), pages 349-373, August.
    5. Garzarelli, Giampaolo, 2018. "Internal Organization in a Public Theory of the Firm: Toward a Coase-Oates Federalism Nexus," MPRA Paper 86955, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. ., 2019. "Economic theory of non-territorial unbundling," Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Non-Territorial Exit, chapter 1, pages 14-38, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Tristan Canare, 2021. "Decentralization and Development Outcomes: What Does the Empirical Literature Really Say?," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 237(2), pages 111-151, June.
    8. Michele Cincera & Antonio Estache & Wolf Alexander, 2012. "Would Less Fiscal Decentralization Reduce Public Sector Size across Sectors in Europe ?," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2012-028, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Martin Bodenstein & Heinrich Ursprung, 2005. "Political yardstick competition, economic integration, and constitutional choice in a federation:," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 329-352, September.
    10. Gradstein, Mark, 2017. "Government decentralization as a commitment in non-democracies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 110-118.
    11. Antonio Farfan-Vallespin, 2012. "Decentralization as Unbundling of Public Goods Provision - New Effects of Decentralization on Efficiency and Electoral Control," Discussion Paper Series 21, Department of International Economic Policy, University of Freiburg, revised Nov 2012.
    12. Trent J. MacDonald, 2019. "The Political Economy of Non-Territorial Exit," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 18871.
    13. Maxime Desmarais-Tremblay, 2014. "On the Definition of Public Goods. Assessing Richard A. Musgrave's contribution," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14004, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    14. Leonzio Rizzo, 2006. "Le inefficienze della competizione fiscale: una rassegna dei principali modelli teorici," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 1, pages 89-120.
    15. Francesc Trillas, 2008. "Regulatory federalism in network industries," Working Papers 2008/8, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    16. Bo, Shiyu, 2020. "Centralization and regional development: Evidence from a political hierarchy reform to create cities in china," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    17. Antonio Sciala' & Paolo Liberati, 2008. "The impact of economic openness on the vertical structure of the public sector," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0085, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    18. Chen, Shaoling & Gao, Qing & Peng, Qing & Yang, Haisheng, 2021. "Government-decentralized power: Measurement and effects," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    19. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Agnese Sacchi, 2017. "The Impact Of Fiscal Decentralization: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1095-1129, September.
    20. Breuille, Marie-Laure & Gary-Bobo, Robert J., 2007. "Sharing budgetary austerity under free mobility and asymmetric information: An optimal regulation approach to fiscal federalism," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 1177-1196, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic organization; Incentives; Knowledge; Second Generation Theory of fiscal federalism.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D79 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Other
    • H10 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - General
    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism

    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:wpa:wuwppe:0509009. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.