16183
Views
934
Downloads |
Decentralization and welfare: theory and an empirical analysis using Philippine data
Tristan Canare* 
Tristan Canare
Affiliation: Department of Economics, School of Social Sciences, Ateneo de Manila University, Katipunan Ave., Loyola Heights, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines 1108
 0000-0001-7737-3217
Correspondence
tristan.canare@gmail.com
Article | Year: 2021 | Pages: 93 - 123 | Volume: 45 | Issue: 1 Received: July 9, 2020 | Accepted: November 28, 2020 | Published online: March 9, 2021
|
FULL ARTICLE
FIGURES & DATA
REFERENCES
CROSSMARK POLICY
METRICS
LICENCING
PDF
|
Government Setup
|
Utility Function
|
|
Constraint
|
|
Decentralized
|
Ui = Xi + θigβ
|
(1)
|
|
M = X + P * g
|
(3)
|
|
Centralized
|
Ui=Xi + (1-ω) θigβ
|
(2)
|
|
M = X + (1-σ)P*g
|
(4)
|
|
|
Income per capita
|
HDI
|
Poverty
|
|
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
(5)
|
(6)
|
(7)
|
(8)
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fiscal_indep
|
10,935***
|
14,638***
|
8,981*
|
0.0701**
|
0.0847***
|
0.0776**
|
-4.717
|
-7.551
|
-3.679
|
|
(4,094)
|
(4,263)
|
(5,072)
|
(0.0302)
|
(0.0311)
|
(0.0326)
|
(7.011)
|
(6.583)
|
(9.013)
|
|
sng_popn
|
-291.8**
|
-855.2***
|
-504.4***
|
-0.00426***
|
-0.0116***
|
-0.00579***
|
0.486*
|
1.573***
|
1.086***
|
|
(133.3)
|
(289.0)
|
(152.6)
|
(0.00121)
|
(0.00222)
|
(0.00129)
|
(0.292)
|
(0.467)
|
(0.270)
|
|
sng_area
|
97.04
|
91.45
|
-65.16
|
0.000610
|
0.00106
|
-0.000264
|
-0.518***
|
-0.382*
|
-0.497**
|
|
(146.6)
|
(137.8)
|
(125.9)
|
(0.00111)
|
(0.00107)
|
(0.00104)
|
(0.187)
|
(0.227)
|
(0.214)
|
|
fiscal_indep*governance
|
|
812.5***
|
|
|
0.00446***
|
|
|
-0.540**
|
|
|
(165.1)
|
|
|
(0.00124)
|
|
|
(0.227)
|
|
|
sng_popn*governance
|
|
17.86***
|
|
|
0.000203***
|
|
|
-0.0266**
|
|
|
(6.722)
|
|
|
(5.29e-05)
|
|
|
(0.0115)
|
|
|
sng_area*governance
|
|
-4.601
|
|
|
-5.12e-05
|
|
|
-0.00107
|
|
|
(4.357)
|
|
|
(3.69e-05)
|
|
|
(0.00600)
|
|
|
fiscal_indep*lowinc
|
|
|
-26,005***
|
|
|
-0.0596
|
|
|
18.37
|
|
|
(7,574)
|
|
|
(0.0540)
|
|
|
(13.30)
|
|
sng_popn*lowinc
|
|
|
-813.6***
|
|
|
-0.00624***
|
|
|
2.008***
|
|
|
(258.6)
|
|
|
(0.00227)
|
|
|
(0.467)
|
|
sng_area*lowinc
|
|
|
1.739
|
|
|
0.000923
|
|
|
-0.724*
|
|
|
(227.9)
|
|
|
(0.00191)
|
|
|
(0.408)
|
|
governance
|
84.94***
|
119.7***
|
78.36***
|
0.000535***
|
0.000802***
|
0.000481***
|
-0.0935***
|
-0.129***
|
-0.103***
|
|
(22.12)
|
(21.10)
|
(21.09)
|
(0.000170)
|
(0.000165)
|
(0.000157)
|
(0.0282)
|
(0.0290)
|
(0.0278)
|
|
lowinc
|
|
|
-6,140***
|
|
|
-0.0517***
|
|
|
7.770***
|
|
|
|
(1,001)
|
|
|
(0.00738)
|
|
|
(1.424)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observations
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
237
|
|
R-squared
|
0.749
|
0.777
|
0.798
|
0.814
|
0.826
|
0.851
|
0.666
|
0.680
|
0.736
|
|
Notes
|
1. Heteroskedasticity-robust SEs in parentheses
2. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
3. Results are robust to the use of
cluster-robust SEs
4. Control variables included: year fixed
effects, island group fixed effects, governance, educ, and urban
5. Results are robust to adding bankdep
and provrevpc among the controls
|
1. Heteroskedasticity-robust SEs in parentheses
2. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
3. Results are robust to the use of
cluster-robust SEs
4. Control variables included: year fixed
effects, island group fixed effects, governance, educ, and urban
5. Results are robust to adding bankdep
and provrevpc among the controls
|
1. Heteroskedasticity-robust SEs in parentheses
2. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
3. When cluster-robust SEs are used: a) sng_area
and most of the significant interaction terms became insignificant; b) fiscal_indep
remains insignificant
4. Control variables included: year fixed
effects, island group fixed effects, governance, educ, and urban
5. When bankdep and provrevpc were
included among the controls: a) about half of the significant
decentralization variables and their interaction terms became insignificant;
b) fiscal_indep remains insignificant
|
|
Variable
|
Description
|
|
Mean
|
Std. Dev.
|
Observations
|
|
per capita income
|
Per capita income (PPP) in
2012 Metro Manila Philippine Peso (PhP)
|
overall
|
40,772
|
12,173
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
11,652
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
3,678
|
T = 3
|
|
hdi
|
Human development index
|
overall
|
0.53
|
0.11
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
0.11
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
0.03
|
T = 3
|
|
poverty
|
Population poverty
incidence (in %)
|
overall
|
36.00
|
14.99
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
14.28
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
4.76
|
T = 3
|
|
fiscal_indep
|
Ratio of provincial
government own-sourced revenue to provincial government expenditures
|
overall
|
0.18
|
0.16
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
0.15
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
0.06
|
T = 3
|
|
sng_popn
|
Number of local
government units (cities and municipalities) per 100 thousand population
|
overall
|
3.38
|
4.18
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
4.19
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
0.23
|
T = 3
|
|
sng_area
|
Number of local
government units (cities and municipalities) per 1,000 square kilometers
|
overall
|
6.83
|
5.20
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
5.22
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
0.00
|
T = 3
|
|
governance
|
Good governance index
|
overall
|
123.81
|
23.36
|
N = 237
|
|
between
|
|
23.46
|
n = 79
|
|
within
|
|
0.00
|
T = 3
|
|
educ
|
Mean years of schooling
|
overall
|
8.24
|
1.11
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
1.03
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
0.44
|
T = 3
|
|
urban
|
Percent of population
living in urban areas
|
overall
|
25.49
|
22.96
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
22.97
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
1.95
|
T = 3
|
|
bankdep
|
Total bank deposits in
millions PhP
|
overall
|
15,861.98
|
29,186.78
|
N = 239
|
|
between
|
|
28,184.31
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
7,847.41
|
T = 2.99
|
|
provrevpc
|
Provincial government
total revenue per capita
|
overall
|
1,293.80
|
1,357.46
|
N = 240
|
|
between
|
|
1,305.74
|
n = 80
|
|
within
|
|
389.86
|
T = 3
|
|
|
fiscal_indep
|
sng_popn
|
sng_area
|
governance
|
educ
|
urban
|
bankdep
|
provrevpc
|
|
fiscal_indep
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sng_popn
|
-0.266
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sng_area
|
0.183
|
0.521
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
governance
|
0.092
|
0.344
|
0.406
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
educ
|
0.563
|
0.165
|
0.509
|
0.298
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
|
urban
|
0.518
|
-0.371
|
-0.049
|
0.000
|
0.283
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
bankdep
|
0.476
|
0.000
|
0.288
|
0.202
|
0.627
|
0.458
|
1.000
|
|
|
provrevpc
|
-0.160
|
0.911
|
0.462
|
0.423
|
0.236
|
-0.299
|
0.028
|
1.000
|
Agrawal, A. and Ribot, J. C., 1999. Accountability in Decentralization: A Framework with South Asian and West African Cases. Journal of Developing Areas, 33(4), pp. 473-502.
Akai, N. and Sakata, M., 2002. Fiscal Decentralization Contributes to Economic Growth: Evidence from State-Level Cross-Section Data for the United States. Journal of Urban Economics, 52(1), pp. 93-108 [ CrossRef]
Arikan, G. G., 2004. Fiscal Decentralization: A Remedy for Corruption? International Tax and Public Finance, 11, pp. 175-195 [ CrossRef]
Asante, F. and Ayee, J., 2007. Decentralization and poverty reduction. In E. Aryeetey, ed. The Economy of Ghana: Analytical Perspectives on Stability, Growth, & Poverty. Woeli Publishing Services: Accra, pp. 325-347.
Bahl, R., 1999. Fiscal decentralization as development policy. Public Budgeting & Finance, 19(2), pp. 59-75 [ CrossRef]
Balisacan, A. and Fuwa, N., 2004. Going Beyond Cross-Country Averages: Growth, Inequality, and Poverty Reduction in the Philippines. World Development, 32(11), pp. 1891-1907 [ CrossRef]
Balisacan, A. and Pernia, E., 2002. Probing Beneath Cross-National Averages: Poverty, Inequality, and Growth in the Philippines. Asian Development Bank ERD Working Paper Series, No. 7.
Bardhan, P., 2002. Decentralization of Governance and Development. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(4), pp. 185-225 [ CrossRef]
Boadway, R. and Shah, A., 2009. Fiscal Federalism: Principles and Practices of Multiorder Governance. New York: Cambridge University Press [ CrossRef]
Bodman, P., 2010. Fiscal Decentralisation and Economic Growth in the OECD. Applied Economics, 43(23), pp. 3021-3035 [ CrossRef]
Boone, C., 2003. Decentralization as Political Strategy in West Africa. Comparative Political Studies, 36, pp. 355-380 [ CrossRef]
Davoodi, H. and Zou, H., 1998. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: a cross-country study. Journal of Urban Economics, 43, pp. 244.257 [ CrossRef]
Faguet, J., 2004. Does decentralization increase government responsiveness to local needs? Evidence from Bolivia. Journal of Public Economics, 88, pp. 867-893 [ CrossRef]
Faguet, J., 2009. Governance from below in Bolivia: A theory of local government with two empirical tests. Latin American Politics and Society, 51, pp. 29-68 [ CrossRef]
Gemmell, N., Kneller, R. and Sanz, I., 2013. Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: Spending versus Revenue Decentralization. Economic Inquiry, 51, pp. 1915-1931 [ CrossRef]
Goel, R. K. and Saunoris, J. W., 2016. Virtual Versus Physical Government Decentralization: Effects on Corruption and the Shadow Economy. Public Budgeting and Finance, 36, pp. 68-93 [ CrossRef]
Hammond, G. W. and Tosun, M. S., 2011. The Impact of Local Decentralization on Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Counties. Journal of Regional Science, 51, pp. 47-64 [ CrossRef]
Hutchcroft, P. D., 2012. Re-slicing the Pie of Patronage: The Politics of the Internal Revenue Allotment in the Philippines, 1991-2010. Philippine Reviewof Economics, 49, pp. 109-134.
Jutting, J. [et al.], 2005. What Makes Decentralisation in Developing Countries Pro-poor? E uropean Journal of Development Research, 17, pp. 626-648 [ CrossRef]
Kim, J., 2018. Fiscal decentralisation and inclusive growth: An overview. In: OECD Fiscal Federalism Studies: Fiscal Decentralisation and Inclusive Growth /J. Kim and S. Dougherty, eds, pp. 9-20. Paris: OECD Publishing and Seoul: Korea Institute of Public Finance [ CrossRef]
Kubal, M., 2006. Contradictions and constraints in Chile's health care and education decentralization. Latin American Politics and Society, 48, pp. 105-135 [ CrossRef]
Llanto, G., 2009. Fiscal decentralization and local finance reforms in the Philippines. Philippine Institute for Development Studies Discussion Paper Series, No. 2009-10.
Musgrave, R., 1959. The Theory of Public Finance. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oates, W., 1972. Fiscal Federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Oates, W., 2005. Toward a Second-Generation Theory of Fiscal Federalism. International Tax and Public Finance, 12, pp. 349-373 [ CrossRef]
Persson, T. and Tabellini, G., 2000. Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy. Cambridge and London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Prud’homme, R., 1995. The Dangers of Decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10, pp. 201-220 [ CrossRef]
Qiao, B., Martinez-Vasquez, J. and Xu, Y., 2008. Growth and Equity Tradeoff in Decentralization Policy: China's Experience. Journal of Development Economics, 86, pp. 112-128 [ CrossRef]
Rodriguez-Pose, A. and Ezcurra, R., 2011. Is Fiscal Decentralization Harmful for Economic Growth? Evidence from the OECD countries. Journal of Economic Geography, 11, pp. 619-643 [ CrossRef]
Rodriguez-Pose, A. and Gill, N., 2003. The Global Trend Towards Devolution and Its Implications. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21, pp. 333-351 [ CrossRef]
Rodriguez-Pose, A., Tijmstra, S. A. R. and Bwire, A., 2009. Fiscal Decentralisation, Efficiency, and Growth. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 41, pp. 2041-2062 [ CrossRef]
Samuelson, P., 1954. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 36, pp. 387-389 [ CrossRef]
Samuelson, P., 1955. Diagrammatic Exposition of a Theory of Public Expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 37, pp. 350-356 [ CrossRef]
Shah, A., 1998. Balance, accountability, and responsiveness: lessons about decentralization. World Bank Policy Working Paper, No. 2021.
Shen, C., Jin, J. and Zou, H., 2012. Fiscal Decentralization in China: History, Impact, Challenges and Next Steps. Annals of Economics and Finance, 13, pp. 1-51.
Smoke, P., 2005. The Rules of the Intergovernmental Game in East Asia: Decentralization Frameworks and Processes. In: East Asia Decentralizes: Making Local Government Work. Washington: The World Bank, pp. 25-52 [ CrossRef]
Stansel, D., 2005. Local Decentralization and Local Economic Growth: A Cross-Sectional Examination of U.S. Metropolitan Areas. Journal of Urban Economics, 57, pp. 55-72 [ CrossRef]
Tanzi, V., 1996. Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization: A Review of Some Efficiency and Macroeconomic Aspects. In: M. Bruno and Pleskovic, eds. Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics. Washington: The World Bank, pp. 295-316 [ CrossRef]
Tiebout, C., 1956. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, pp. 416-424 [ CrossRef]
Tosun, M and Yilmaz, S., 2008. Decentralization, economic development, and growth in Turkish provinces. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, No. 4725 [ CrossRef]
Von Braun, J. and Grote, U., 2002. Does decentralization serve the poor? In: E. Ahmad and V. Tanzi, eds. Managing fiscal decentralization. London: Routledge, pp. 68-96 [ CrossRef]
Wallis, J. and Oates, W., 1988. Decentralization in the public sector: an empirical study of state and local government. In H. Rosen, ed. Fiscal federalism: quantitative studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 5-32.
Wetzel, D., 2001. Decentralization in the Transition Economies: Challenges and the Road Ahead. Washington: The World Bank.
Woller, G. M. and Phillips, K., 1998. Fiscal Decentralization and LDC Economic Growth: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Development Studies, 34, pp. 139-148.
World Bank, 2009. Local Government Discretion and Accountability: Application of a Local Governance Framework. World Bank Social Development Department Report, No. 49059-GLB.
Xie, D., Zou, H. and Davoodi, H., 1999. Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth in the United States. Journal of Urban Economics, 45, pp. 228-239 [ CrossRef]
|
|
March, 2021
I/2021
|
