This study focuses on the relationship between fiscal decentralization and ICRG index of corruption risk in both categories of emerging and developing countries, using a sample of 38 countries for the period 2000-2014. The aim is to focus on expenditure and revenue decentralization giving importance to the effects of subnational revenue mobilization on this correlation as: Tax revenue, Non tax revenue and fiscal imbalances. The study shows a significant and robust correlation between expenditure decentralization and the index of corruption: expenditure decentralization tends to reduce the risk of corruption in these two categories of countries. The impact of Tax Revenue is as important in this relationship as it helps reduce the risk even more. While revenue decentralization and especially non-tax revenue has no significant relationship with the index.
Published in | International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences (Volume 4, Issue 4) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17 |
Page(s) | 211-222 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2016. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Fiscal Decentralization, Corruption, Developing Countries, Emerging Countries
[1] | ADES, A. et R., DI TELLA (1997). “National Champions and Corruption: some unpleasant interventionist arithmetic”. The Economic Journal July (107), 1023-1042. |
[2] | ADES, A. et R. WACZIARG. “Openess, country size and government”. Journal of Public Economics. 369 (69), 305-321. |
[3] | ALDERMAN, H. (2002). “Do local officials know something we don’t? Decentralization of targeted transfers in Albania”, Journal of Public Economics, 83 (3), 375-404. |
[4] | ALTUNBAS, Y. ET THORNTON, J. (2012). “Fiscal Decentralization and Governance”, Public Finance Review, 40 (1) 66-85. |
[5] | ARIKAN, G. G. (2004). “Fiscal decentralization: A remedy for corruption?”, International Tax and Public Finance, 11 (2), 175-195. |
[6] | BARDHAN, P. (2002). “Decentralization of governance and development”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16 (4), 185-205. |
[7] | BARDHAN, P. et D. MOOKHERJEE (2006). “Pro-poor targeting and accountability of local governments in West Bengal”, Journal of Development Economics, 79 (2), 303-327. |
[8] | BARENSTEIN, M., et L. de MELLO (2001). “Fiscal decentralization and governance: A cross-country analysis”. IMF Working Papers 01/71, International Monetary fund. |
[9] | BESLEY, T., et A. CASE (1995). “Incumbent behavior: Vote-seeking, tax-setting, and yardstick competition”. American Economic Review, 85 (1), 25-45. |
[10] | CALDEIRA, E., et G. ROTA-GRAZIOSI (2014). “La décentralisation dans les pays en développement: une revue de la littérature”, Revue d’économie du développement, 2014/4 Vol. 22, p5-37. DOI: 10.3917/edd.284.0005. |
[11] | DE MELLO, L. R. (2000). “Fiscal decentralization and intergovernmental fiscal relations: a cross-country analysis”. World development, 28 (2), 365-380. |
[12] | DREHER, A. (2006). “Power to the People? The Impact of Decentralization on Governance”. Swiss Institute for Business Cycle Research, No. 121, January 2006. |
[13] | ENIKOLOPOV, R., et E. ZHURAVSKAYA (2007). “Decentralization and political institutions”, Journal of Public Economics, 91 (11-12), 2261-2290. |
[14] | FAN, C. S., C. LIN, et D. TREISMAN (2009). “Political decentralization and corruption: Evidence from around the world”, Journal of Public Economics, 93 (1-2), 14-34. |
[15] | FISMAN, R., et R. GATTI (2002). “Decentralization and corruption: Evidence across countries”, Journal of Public Economics, 83 (3), 325-345. |
[16] | HAYEK, F. A. (1948). “Individualism and economic order”. Chicago: Chicago University Press. |
[17] | HUTHER, J., et A. SHAH (1998). “Applying a simple measure of good governance to the debate on fiscal decentralization”, Policy Research Working Paper Series 1894, The World Bank. |
[18] | JIN, H., QIAN, Y., WEINGAST, B. R., (1999). “Regional decentralization and fiscal incentives: federalism, Chinese style”. Working Paper, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. |
[19] | KAUFMANN, D., KRAAY, A., et P. ZOIDO-LOBATON (1999). “Governance matters”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, n 2196. |
[20] | KNACK, S. et P. KEEFER (1995). “Institutions and economic performance: cross-country tests using alternative institutional measures”. Economics and Politics 3, 207-227. |
[21] | LEITE, CARLOS A. et J. WEIDMANN (2002). “Does Mother Nature Corrupt? Natural Resources, Corruption and Economic Growth”. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. In Governance, Corruption and conomic Performance, edited by Georges T. Abed and Sanjeev Gupta, 159-96. |
[22] | INMAN, R., RUBINFELD, D. (1997). “Rethinking Federalism”. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 11, No. 4. (Autumn, 1997), pp. 43-64. |
[23] | MONTINOLA, YINGYI AND WEINGEST (1995). “Federalism, Chinese Style: The Political Basis for Economic Success”. World Politics 48.1 (1996) 50-81 |
[24] | MUSGRAVE, R. A. (1959). The theory of public finance. Mc Graw-Hill, New York. |
[25] | OATES, W. E. (2005). “Toward A second-Generation Theory of Fiscal Federalism”, International Tax and Public Finance, 12 (4), 349-373. |
[26] | OATES, W. E. (1972). Fiscal federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. |
[27] | PERSSON, T. TABELLINI, G. (2000). “Constitutional determinants of government spending”. Mimeo. |
[28] | PANIZZA, U (1998). “On the determinants of fiscal centralization: Theory and evidence”. Journal of Public Economics 74 (1999) 97–139. |
[29] | PRUD’HOMME, R. (1995). “The dangers of decentralization”, World Bank Research Observer, 10 (2), 201-20. |
[30] | PRYOR, R. J. (1968). “Defining the Rural-Urban Fringe”. University of North Carolina Press. Social Forces, Vol. 47, No. 2, 202-215 |
[31] | SALMON, P. (1987). “Decentralisation as an incentive scheme”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 3 (2), 24-43. |
[32] | SEABRIGHT, P. (1996). “Accountability and decentralization in government: An incomplete contracts model”, European Economic Review, 40 (1), 61-89. |
[33] | TANZI, V. (1996). “Fiscal federalism and decentralization: A review of some efficiency and macroeconomic aspects”, annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics 295-316, The World Bank, Washington, D. C. |
[34] | TIEBOUT, C. M. (1956). “Apure theory of local expenditures”. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416. |
[35] | TREISMAN, D. (2000). “The causes of corruption: a cross-national study”, Journal of Public Economics, 76 (3), 399-457. |
[36] | TREISMAN, D. (2007). “The architecture of government: rethinking political decentralization”. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[37] | Weingast, R. (1995). “The economic role of political institutions: market-preserving federalism and economic development”. The journal of law, Economics & Organization V11, N1. |
APA Style
Miri Meriem, Taacha El Hassan, Benatia Mohamed Ayman. (2016). Fiscal Decentralization and Corruption in Emerging and Developing Countries. International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences, 4(4), 211-222. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17
ACS Style
Miri Meriem; Taacha El Hassan; Benatia Mohamed Ayman. Fiscal Decentralization and Corruption in Emerging and Developing Countries. Int. J. Econ. Finance Manag. Sci. 2016, 4(4), 211-222. doi: 10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17
AMA Style
Miri Meriem, Taacha El Hassan, Benatia Mohamed Ayman. Fiscal Decentralization and Corruption in Emerging and Developing Countries. Int J Econ Finance Manag Sci. 2016;4(4):211-222. doi: 10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17
@article{10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17, author = {Miri Meriem and Taacha El Hassan and Benatia Mohamed Ayman}, title = {Fiscal Decentralization and Corruption in Emerging and Developing Countries}, journal = {International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences}, volume = {4}, number = {4}, pages = {211-222}, doi = {10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijefm.20160404.17}, abstract = {This study focuses on the relationship between fiscal decentralization and ICRG index of corruption risk in both categories of emerging and developing countries, using a sample of 38 countries for the period 2000-2014. The aim is to focus on expenditure and revenue decentralization giving importance to the effects of subnational revenue mobilization on this correlation as: Tax revenue, Non tax revenue and fiscal imbalances. The study shows a significant and robust correlation between expenditure decentralization and the index of corruption: expenditure decentralization tends to reduce the risk of corruption in these two categories of countries. The impact of Tax Revenue is as important in this relationship as it helps reduce the risk even more. While revenue decentralization and especially non-tax revenue has no significant relationship with the index.}, year = {2016} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Fiscal Decentralization and Corruption in Emerging and Developing Countries AU - Miri Meriem AU - Taacha El Hassan AU - Benatia Mohamed Ayman Y1 - 2016/08/06 PY - 2016 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17 DO - 10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17 T2 - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences JF - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences JO - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences SP - 211 EP - 222 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2326-9561 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20160404.17 AB - This study focuses on the relationship between fiscal decentralization and ICRG index of corruption risk in both categories of emerging and developing countries, using a sample of 38 countries for the period 2000-2014. The aim is to focus on expenditure and revenue decentralization giving importance to the effects of subnational revenue mobilization on this correlation as: Tax revenue, Non tax revenue and fiscal imbalances. The study shows a significant and robust correlation between expenditure decentralization and the index of corruption: expenditure decentralization tends to reduce the risk of corruption in these two categories of countries. The impact of Tax Revenue is as important in this relationship as it helps reduce the risk even more. While revenue decentralization and especially non-tax revenue has no significant relationship with the index. VL - 4 IS - 4 ER -