The second-generation theory (SGT) of fiscal federalism, which draws upon contemporary economic and industrial organization theory, hitherto focuses only on the negative benefits of public decentralization: the potentially superior ability to align perverse incentives vis-à-vis the centralized governance alternative. The SGT neglects the positive benefits of decentralization (mistake-ridden learning, flexibility, and option discovery), although the limitations of organization theory do not justify such neglect. By likening intergovernmental grants to incomplete contracts, this work shows that the SGT can include the laboratory nature of decentralization.
Blank, Rebecca M.1997. Policy Watch: The 1996 Welfare Reform. Journal of Economic Perspectives11 (1): 168-177.
3.
Bolton, Patrick, and Joseph Farrell. 1990. Decentralization, duplication, and delay. Journal of Political Economy98(4): 803-826.
4.
Boschken, Herman L.1982. Organization theory and federalism: Interorganizational networks and the political economy of the federalist. Organization Studies3 (4): 355-373.
5.
Brennan, Geoffrey, and Jonathan Pincus. 1990. An implicit contract theory of intergovernmental grants. Publius: The Journal of Federalism29 (4): 129-144.
6.
Breton, Albert. [1985] 1987. Towards a theory of competitive federalism. European Journal of Political Economy3 (1-2): 263-329.
7.
Breton, Albert. 1996. Competitive governments: An economic theory of politics and public finance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Breton, Albert, and Anthony Scott. 1978. The economic constitution of federal states. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
9.
Bryce, James Viscount. [1888] 2004. The American commonwealth, volume 1 (with an “Introduction” by G. L. McDowell). Indianapolis: Online PDF Liberty Fund. http://oll.libertyfund.org/Texts/LFBooks/Bryce0057/AmericanCommonwealth/0004-01_eBk.pdf
10.
Casella, Alessandra. 1999. Tradable deficit permits: Efficient implementation of the stability pact in the European Monetary Union. Economic Policy14 (29): 323-361.
11.
Coase, Ronald H.1937. The nature of the firm. Economica, N.S., 4 (16): 386-405.
12.
Coase, Ronald H.1960. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics3 (1): 1-44.
13.
Cooter, Robert D.2000. The strategic constitution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Crémer, Jacques, Antonio Estache, and Paul Seabright. 1996. Decentralizing public services: What can we learn from the theory of the firm?Revue d’économie politique106 (1): 37-60.
15.
Dahlman, Carl J.1979. The problem of externality. Journal of Law and Economics22 (1): 141-162.
16.
de Tocqueville, Alexis. [1835] 1990. Democracy in America, volume I(with a “New Introduction” by D. J. Boorstin). New York: Vintage Classics.
17.
Demsetz, Harold. 1969. Information and efficiency: Another viewpoint. Journal of Law and Economics12 (1): 1-22.
18.
Dosi, Giovanni. 1988. Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature26 (3): 1120-1171.
19.
Egidi, Massimo. 1992. Organizational learning, problem solving and the division of labor. In Economics, bounded rationality and the cognitive revolution, edited by Massimo Egidi and Robin Marris, 148-173. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.
20.
Forte, Francesco. 1982. The law of selection in the public economy as compared to the market economy. Public Finance/Finances Publiques37 (2): 224-245.
21.
Foss, Nicolai J.1996. Firms, incomplete contracts, and organizational learning. Human Systems Management15:17-26.
22.
Garzarelli, Giampaolo. 2004. Old and new theories of fiscal federalism, organizational design problems, and Tiebout. Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice22 (1-2): 91-104.
23.
Garzarelli, Giampaolo, and Yasmina Reem Limam. 2003. Knowledge, coordination, and fiscal federalism: An organizational perspective. In I sistemi di welfare tra decentramento regionale e integrazione europea, edited by Daniele Franco and Alberto Zanardi, 231-240. Milan, Italy: FrancoAngeli.
24.
Hamilton, Alexander, John Jay, and James Madison. [1787-1788] 2001. The federalist. Edited with an “Introduction” by G. W. Carey and J. McClellan. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
25.
Hayek, Friedrich A. von. 1945. The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review35 (4): 519-530.
26.
Hayek, Friedrich A. von. 1948. Individualism and economic order. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
27.
Hayek, Friedrich A. von. [1968] 1978. New studies in philosophy, politics, economics and the history of ideas. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
28.
Jensen, Michael C., and William H. Meckling. 1992. Specific and general knowledge, and organizational structure. In Contract economics, edited by Lars Werin and Hans Wijkander, 251-274. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
29.
Langlois, Richard N.2002. Modularity in technology and organization. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization49 (1): 19-37.
30.
Langlois, Richard N., and Nicolai J. Foss. 1999. Capabilities and governance: The rebirth of production in the theory of economic organization. Kyklos52 (2): 201-218.
31.
Langlois, Richard N., and Paul L. Robertson. 1995. Firms, markets, and economic change: A dynamic theory of business institutions. London: Routledge.
32.
Loasby, Brian J.1976. Choice, complexity and ignorance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Milgrom, Paul, and John Roberts. 1986. Relying on the information of interested parties. RAND Journal of Economics17 (1): 18-32.
34.
Nelson, Richard R., and Sidney G. Winter. 1977. In search of useful theory of innovation. Research Policy6 (1): 36-76.
35.
New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 282 (1932).
36.
Oates, Wallace E.1972. Fiscal federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
37.
Oates, Wallace E.1999. An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature37 (3): 1120-1149.
38.
Oates, Wallace E.2002. A reconsideration of environmental federalism. In Recent advances in environmental economics, edited by John A. List and Aart de Zeeuw, 1-32. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
39.
Oates, Wallace E. Forthcoming. Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism. International Tax and Public Finance.
40.
Olson, Mancur, Jr.1969. The principle of ‘fiscal equivalence’: The division of responsibilities among different levels of government. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings59 (2): 479-487.
41.
Ostrom, Vincent. 1987. The political theory of a compound republic: Designing the American experiment. 2nd ed., revised and enlarged. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
42.
Ostrom, Vincent, and Elinor Ostrom. 1965. A behavioral approach to the study of intergovernmental relations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science359:137-146.
43.
Ostrom, Vincent, Charles M. Tiebout, and Robert Warren. 1961. The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review55 (4): 831-842.
44.
Pelikan, Pavel. 1988. Can the imperfect innovation system of capitalism be outperformed? In Technical change and economic theory, edited by Giovanni Dosi, Christopher Freeman, Richard Nelson, Gerald Silverberg, and Luc Soete, 370-398. London: Pinter Publishers.
45.
Qian, Yingyi, and Barry R. Weingast. 1997. Federalism as a commitment to preserving market incentives. Journal of Economic Perspectives11 (4): 83-92.
46.
Richardson, George B.1972. The organization of industry. Economic Journal82 (327): 883-896.
47.
Rose-Ackerman, Susan. 1980. Risk taking and reelection: Does federalism promote innovation?Journal of Legal Studies9 (3): 593-616.
48.
Saiegh, Sabastian, and Mariano Tommasi. 2000. An ‘incomplete-contracts’ approach to intergovernmental transfer systems in Latin America. In Decentralization and accountability of the public sector, edited by Shahid Javed Burki and Guillermo E. Perry, 127-144. Washington, DC: World Bank.
49.
Seabright, Paul. 1996. Accountability and decentralization in government: An incomplete contract model. European Economic Review40 (1): 61-89.
50.
Simon, Herbert A.1951. A formal theory of the employment relationship. Econometrica19 (3): 293-305.
51.
Simon, Herbert A. [1962] 1998. The architecture of complexity: Hierarchic systems. In The sciences of the artificial, edited by Herbert A. Simon, 183-216. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52.
Strumpf, Koleman S.2002. Does government decentralization increase policy innovation?Journal of Public Economic Theory4 (2): 207-241.
53.
Teece, David J.1980. Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization1 (3): 223-247.
54.
Tiebout, Charles M.1956. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy64 (5): 416-424.
55.
Tommasi, Mariano, and Federico Weinschelbaum. 2003. Centralization vs. decentralization: A principal-agent analysis. Unpublished paper.
56.
Truax v. Corrigan, 257 U.S. 312 (1921).
57.
Vanberg, Viktor, and James M. Buchanan. 1986. Organization theory and fiscal economics: Society, state, and public debt. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization2 (2): 215-227.
58.
Vihanto, Martti. 1992. Competition between local governments as a discovery procedure. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics148 (3): 411-436.
59.
Weingast, Barry R.1995. The economic role of political institutions: Market-preserving federalism and economic growth. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization11 (1): 1-31.
60.
Wicksell, Knut. [1896] 1958. A new principle of just taxation. In Classics in the theory of public finance, edited by Richard A. Musgrave and Alan T. Peacock, 72-118. New York: St. Martin’s.
