The study of the influence of decentralisation on economic growth has received some attention in recent years, but very few studies deal with its impact on regional inequalities. This paper analyses the impact of both fiscal and political decentralisation on regional inequalities using alternative measures for a sample of 17 OECD countries. In order to check for other possible influences, the study also includes measures of public-sector size and the type of party in government. The final section studies the relevance of fiscal decentralisation in the regional convergence process observed by several authors during the past two decades. The research reveals a strong negative correlation between decentralisation, especially fiscal decentralisation, and regional inequalities, and also a positive influence of decentralisation on regional convergence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Armstrong, H. (1995) An appraisal of the evidence from cross-sectional analysis of the regional growth process within the European Union, in: H. W. Armstrong and R. W. Vickerman (Eds) Convergence and Divergence among European Regions, pp. 40-65. London: Pion Ltd .
2.
Armstrong, H. AND Taylor, J. (2000) Regional Economics and Policy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
3.
Atkinson, A. (1970) On the measurement of inequality, Journal of Economic Theory, 3, pp. 244-263.
4.
Barro, R. and Sala-I-Martin, X. (1991) Convergence across states and regions, Brooking Papers on Economic Activity, 1, pp. 107-182.
5.
Brennan, G. and Buchanan, J.M. (1980) The Power to Tax. Analytical Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Cameron, D. (1978) The expansion of the public economy: a comparative analysis, American Political Science Review, 72(4), pp. 1243-1261.
7.
Castles, F. (1999) Decentralisation and the postwar political economy , European Journal of Political Research, 36(1), pp. 1-26.
8.
Champernowne, C. and Cowel, F. (1998) Economic Inequality and Income Distribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Colomer, J. (1995) Introduccion, in: J. M. Colomer (Ed.) La politica en Europa, pp. 7-25. Barcelona : Ariel.
10.
Cuadrado, J.R. (2001) Regional convergence in the European Union: from hypothesis to the actual trends, The Annals of Regional Science , 35(3), pp. 333-356.
11.
Danson, M., Halkier, H. and Cameron, G. (2000) Regional governance, institutional change and regional development, in: M. Danson, H. Halkier and G. Cameron (Eds) Governance, Institutional Change and Regional Development , pp. 1-7. Aldershot: Ashgate.
12.
Davoodi, H. and Zou, H. (1998) Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth: a cross-country study, Journal of Urban Economics, 43(2), pp.244-257.
13.
Dillinger, W. (1994) Decentralisation and its implication for urban service delivery. Urban Management Program Discussion Paper 16, World Bank, Washington, DC.
14.
Elazar, D.J. (1995) Federalism, in: S. M. Lipset (Ed.) The Encyclopedia of Democracy Vol. 2, pp. 472-482. London: Routledge .
15.
Esteban, J. (1994) La desigualdad interregional en Europa y en Espana: descripcion y analisis, in: J. Esteban and X. Vives (Eds) Crecimiento y convergencia regional en España y Europa, Vol. 2, pp. 13-84. Barcelona: Instituto de Analisis Economico and Fundacion de Economia Analitica.
16.
Fisman, R. and Gratti, R. (2000) Decentralization and corruption: evidence across countries. World Bank Working Paper 2290, Washington, DC.
17.
Freinkman, L. and Yossifov, P. (1999) Decentralisation in regional fiscal systems in Russia: trends and links to economic performance. World Bank Working Paper 2100, Washington, DC.
18.
Gil, C., Pascual, P. and Rapun, M. (2002) Structural change, infrastructure and convergence in the regions of the European Union, European Urban and Regional Studies, 9(2), pp. 115-135.
19.
Heil, J.B. (1991) The search for Leviathan revisited, Public Finance Quarterly, 19, pp. 334-346.
20.
Holtz-Eakin, D. and Schwartz, A.E. (1995) Spatial productivity spillovers from public infrastructure: evidence from state highways, International Tax and Public Finance, 2, pp. 459-468.
21.
Kelejian, H. and Robinson, D. (1997) Infrastructure productivity estimation and its underlying econometric specifications: a sensitivity analysis, Papers in Regional Science, 76(1), pp.115-131.
22.
Keman, H. (2000) Federalism and policy performance. a conceptual and empirical inquiry, in: U. Wachendorfer-SCHMlDt (Ed.) Federalism and Political Performance, pp. 196-227. London : Routledge.
23.
Lancaster, T. and Hicks, A. (2000) The impact of federalism and neo-corporatism on economic performance, in: U. Wachendorfer-Scmidt (Ed.) Federalism and Political Performance, pp. 228-242. London : Routledge.
24.
Lane, J.E. and Ersson, S. (2000) The New Institutional Politics: Performance and Outcomes. London: Routledge.
25.
Levine, R. and Renelt, D. (1992): A sensitivity analysis of cross-country growth regressions, American Economic Review, 82(4), pp. 942-963.
26.
Lijphart, A. (1984) Democracies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
27.
Lin, J.Y. and Liu, Z. (2000) Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth in China, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 49(1), pp. 1-22.
28.
Ma, J. ( 1997) Intergovernmental fiscal transfer: a comparison of nine countries. World Bank Working Paper 1822 , Washington, DC.
29.
Martinez-Vazquez, J. and McNab R. (2001) Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth. Working Paper 01-1, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
30.
Mera, K. (1973) Regional production functions and social overhead capital: an analysis of the Japanese case, Regional and Urban Economics, 3(2), pp. 157-186.
31.
Musgrave, R. (1959) The Theory of Pubic Finance. New York: McGraw-Hill.
32.
North, D.C. (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Gates, W.E. (1972) Fiscal Federalism. New York : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
34.
Oates, W.E. (1985) Searching for Leviathan: an empirical study, American Economic Review, 75, pp. 748-757.
35.
Oates, W.E. (1993) Fiscal decentralisation and economic development , National Tax Journal, 2, pp. 237-243.
36.
Oates, W.E. (1999) An essay on fiscal federalism, Journal of Economic Literature, 37, pp.1120-1149.
37.
Pierson, P. (1995) Fragmented welfare states: federal institutions and the development of social policy, Governance, 8, pp. 449-478.
38.
Prudhomme, R. (1995) On the dangers of decentralisation. Policy Research Working Paper 1252, World Bank , Washington, DC.
39.
Rodriguez-Pose, A. (1998) The Dynamics of Growth in Regional Europe: Social and Political Factors. Oxford: Oxford University Press
40.
Rodriguez-Pose, A. (1999) Convergence or divergence ? Types of regional responses to socio-economic change in western Europe, Tijdschrift voor Economische en SociaLeGeografie, 90(4), pp. 363-378.
41.
Sala-I-Martín, X. (1996) Regional cohesion: evidence and theories of regional growth and convergence, European Economic Review, 40, pp. 1325-1352.
42.
Schmidt, M.G. (1996) When parties matter: a review of the possibilities and limits of partisan influence on public policy, European Journal of Political Research, 30, pp 155-183.
43.
Sen, A. ( 1973) On Economic Inequality. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
44.
Shah, A. (1998) FiscaL federaLism and macroeconomic governance: for better or for worse? World Bank Working Paper 2005, Washington, DC.
45.
Shankar, R. and Shah, A. (2001) Bridging the economic divide within nations: a scorecard on the performance of regional development policies in reducing regional economic disparities. Policy Research Working Paper 2717, Washington, DC.
46.
Tanzi, V. (1996) Fiscal federalism and decentralisation: a review of some efficiency and macroeconomic aspects, in: M. Bruno and B. Pleskovic (Eds) Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics, pp. 295-316. Washington, DC: World Bank.
47.
Tentkin, L.S. (1993) Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48.
Tiebout, C.H. (1956) A pure theory of local expenditures, Journal of Political Economy, 64, pp. 416-424.
49.
Tomaney, J. and Ward, N. (2000) England and the 'new regionalism', Regional Studies, 34(5), pp.471-478.
50.
Tsui, K. (1996) Economic Reform and Inter-provincial Inequalities in China, Journal of Development Economics50, pp. 353-368.
51.
Tunstall, R. (2001) Devolution and user participation in public services: how they work and what they do, Urban Studies, 38(13), pp. 2495-2514.
52.
Woller, G. and Phillips, K. (1998) Fiscal decentralisation and LDC economic growth: an empirical investigation, Journal of Development Studies , 34(4), pp. 139-148.
53.
World Bank (2000) World Development Report 1999/2000. Entering the 21st Century. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
54.
Xie, D., Zou H. and Davoodi, H. (1999) Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth in the United States, Journal of Urban Economics, 45, pp. 228-239.
55.
Zhang, T. and Zou, H. (1997) Fiscal decentralisation, the composition of public spending, and regional growth in India. Development Research Group Working Paper, World Bank, Washington, DC.
56.
Zhang, T. and Zou, H. (1998) Fiscal decentralisation, public spending, and economic growth in China, Journal of Public Economics, 67(2), pp.221-240.
57.
Zhao, X. and Tong, S. (2000) Unequal economic development in China: spatial disparities and regional policy reconsideration, 1985-1995, Regional Studies, 34(6), pp. 549-561.
