IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Constitutions, regulations, and taxes: Contradictions of different aspects of decentralization

  • Libman, Alexander
Registered author(s):

    The paper confronts different aspects of decentralization: fiscal decentralization, postconstitutional regulatory decentralization, and constitutional decentralization - using a single dataset from Russian Federation of the Yeltsin period as a politically asymmetric country and a variety of indicators. It finds no robust correlation between different decentralization aspects; moreover, three processes of devolution appearing in the same country at the same time seem to be driven by different (though partly overlapping) forces. Hence, a specific aspect of decentralization is hardly able to serve as a proxy for another one or for the overall decentralization process.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/36693/1/630495602.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Frankfurt School of Finance and Management in its series Frankfurt School - Working Paper Series with number 138.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2010
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:fsfmwp:138
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Sonnemannstraße 9-11, 60314 Frankfurt am Main
    Phone: 069 154008-0
    Web page: http://www.frankfurt-school.de/

    More information through EDIRC

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Dan Stegarescu, 2005. "Public sector decentralisation: measurement concepts and recent international trends," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 301-333, September.
    2. Fernando Albornoz & Antonio Cabrales, 2010. "Fiscal Centralization and the Political Process," Working Papers 2010-02, FEDEA.
    3. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Andrey Timofeev, 2009. "Decentralization Measures Revisited," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper0913, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    4. Lorenz Blume & Stefan Voigt, 2008. "Federalism and Decentralization – A Critical Survey of Frequently Used Indicators," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200821, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    5. Feld, Lars P. & Schaltegger, Christoph A. & Schnellenbach, Jan, 2008. "On government centralization and fiscal referendums," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 611-645, May.
    6. Weingast, Barry R., 2009. "Second generation fiscal federalism: The implications of fiscal incentives," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 279-293, May.
    7. Besley, Timothy J. & Coate, Stephen, 2000. "Elected Versus Appointed Regulators: Theory And Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2381, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Lars P. Feld & Jan Schnellenbach, 2010. "Fiscal Federalism and Long-Run Macroeconomic Performance," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1009, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    9. Chang, Howard F. & Sigman, Hilary & Traub, Leah G., 2014. "Endogenous decentralization in federal environmental policies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-50.
    10. Jan Schnellenbach & Lars P. Feld & Christoph A. Schaltegger, 2006. "The Impact of Referendums on the Centralisation of Public Goods Provision: A Political Economy Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 1803, CESifo Group Munich.
    11. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Lars P. Feld, 2009. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in OECD Countries: Is there a Relationship?," CESifo Working Paper Series 2721, CESifo Group Munich.
    12. Xavier X. Sala-i-Martin, 1997. "I Just Ran Four Million Regressions," NBER Working Papers 6252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Buchanan, James M & Faith, Roger L, 1987. "Secession and the Limits of Taxation: Toward a Theory of Internal Exit," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 1023-31, December.
    14. Koleman S. Strumpf & Felix Oberholzer-Gee, 2002. "Endogenous Policy Decentralization: Testing the Central Tenet of Economic Federalism," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(1), pages 1-36, February.
    15. Roger Congleton & Andreas Kyriacou & Jordi Bacaria, 2003. "A Theory of Menu Federalism: Decentralization by Political Agreement," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 167-190, September.
    16. Panizza, Ugo, 1999. "On the determinants of fiscal centralization: Theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 97-139, October.
    17. Freinkman, Lev & Plekhanov, Alexander, 2009. "Fiscal Decentralization in Rentier Regions: Evidence from Russia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 503-512, February.
    18. Cerniglia, Floriana, 2003. "Decentralization in the public sector: quantitative aspects in federal and unitary countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 749-776, November.
    19. Irina Slinko & Evgeny Yakovlev & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2004. "Laws for Sale: Evidence from Russia," Economics Working Papers 0046, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    20. Vladimir Popov, 2004. "Fiscal Federalism in Russia: Rules versus Electoral Politics," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 46(4), pages 515-541, December.
    21. Desai, Raj M. & Freinkman, Lev & Goldberg, Itzhak, 2005. "Fiscal federalism in rentier regions: Evidence from Russia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 814-834, December.
    22. Arzaghi, Mohammad & Henderson, J. Vernon, 2005. "Why countries are fiscally decentralizing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(7), pages 1157-1189, July.
    23. Ebel, Robert D. & Yilmaz, Serdar, 2002. "On the measurement and impact of fiscal decentralization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2809, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:fsfmwp:138. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.