904
Views
91
Downloads |
Fiscal decentralization and gender equality: empirical evidence across countries
Mustafa Rafat Zaman* 
Article | Year: 2024 | Pages: 203 - 209 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 2 Received: December 25, 2023 | Accepted: April 11, 2024 | Published online: June 10, 2024
|
FULL ARTICLE
FIGURES & DATA
REFERENCES
CROSSMARK POLICY
METRICS
LICENCING
PDF
Source: Author’s illustration.
|
Variables
|
Description
|
Sources
|
|
Democracy
index
|
A snapshot of
the state of democracy.
|
Economist
Intelligence Unit
|
|
Gender
equality index
|
A summary
measure of progress towards gender equality
|
World
Economic Forum
|
|
Financial
development index
|
Indicator of
depth, access and efficiency of financial institutions and markets.
|
International
Monetary Fund
|
|
Government
size
|
Index
measuring the size of the public sector in terms of consumption, investment,
transfers and subsidies etc.
|
Fraser
Institute
|
|
Gender
inequality index
|
A summary
measure of progress towards gender inequality
|
United
Nations Development Programme
|
|
Human
development index
|
A summary
measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development.
|
|
Expenditure
decentralization
|
The ratio of
sub-central to general government spending.
|
Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development
|
|
Union
|
The share of
wage and salary earners that are trade union members
|
|
Real GDP per
capita
|
GDP per
capita in 2015 U.S. dollars
|
World Bank
|
|
Urbanization
|
Ratio of
Urban population to Total population
|
|
Population
growth
|
Growth rate
value
|
|
Land area (sq.
km)
|
Land area
value
|
|
Unemployment
rate
|
Ratio of Unemployed
to Total labor force
|
|
Exports
|
Ratio of
Exports to GDP
|
|
Foreign
direct investment
|
Ratio of Foreign
direct investment to GDP
|
|
Population
|
Population
value
|
|
Population
density
|
Ratio of
Population to Land Area
|
|
Government
effectiveness
|
Governance
indicator capturing the perceptions of government effectiveness
|
|
Variable
|
Obs.
|
Mean
|
Std. Dev.
|
Min
|
Max
|
|
Gender equality index
|
432
|
0.75
|
0.05
|
0.64
|
0.91
|
|
Gender inequality index
|
432
|
0.12
|
0.08
|
0.01
|
0.43
|
|
Year
|
432
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
2006
|
2021
|
|
Expenditure decentralization (%)
|
431
|
32.40
|
16.12
|
5.60
|
69.11
|
|
Human development index
|
432
|
0.90
|
0.04
|
0.74
|
0.96
|
|
Log of Real GDP per capita
|
432
|
10.48
|
0.61
|
9.07
|
11.63
|
|
Government size
|
405
|
6.01
|
0.88
|
4.32
|
8.37
|
|
Urbanization (%)
|
432
|
77.82
|
10.96
|
53.73
|
98.12
|
|
Population growth (%)
|
432
|
0.64
|
0.68
|
-1.85
|
2.89
|
|
Unemployment rate (%)
|
432
|
7.39
|
4.17
|
2.01
|
27.47
|
|
Union
|
336
|
32.12
|
21.75
|
8.30
|
92.20
|
|
Exports (%)
|
432
|
52.96
|
34.63
|
10.20
|
211.43
|
|
Foreign direct investment (%)
|
432
|
5.68
|
16.64
|
-42.29
|
138.70
|
|
Financial development index
|
432
|
0.68
|
0.18
|
0.25
|
1.00
|
|
Government effectiveness
|
432
|
1.34
|
0.56
|
-0.31
|
2.35
|
|
Democracy index
|
378
|
8.40
|
0.89
|
5.57
|
9.93
|
|
Log of Population
|
432
|
16.44
|
1.49
|
12.62
|
19.62
|
|
Log of area (km2)
|
405
|
12.23
|
1.82
|
7.85
|
16.03
|
|
Log of Population density
|
405
|
4.20
|
1.38
|
0.98
|
6.25
|
|
|
Dependent variable: Gender
equality index
|
|
Variables
|
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
|
Expenditure decentralization
|
0.007
|
-0.042
|
-0.0321
|
0.542**
|
|
(0.079)
|
(0.062)
|
(0.068)
|
(0.233)
|
|
Real GDP per capita (log)
|
|
-6.826**
|
|
|
|
|
(2.910)
|
|
|
|
Government size
|
|
0.221
|
0.066
|
0.081
|
|
|
(0.707)
|
(0.715)
|
(0.430)
|
|
Urbanization
|
|
0.064
|
0.175
|
0.424***
|
|
|
(0.165)
|
(0.173)
|
(0.164)
|
|
Population growth
|
|
-0.107
|
-0.122
|
-0.633*
|
|
|
(0.314)
|
(0.354)
|
(0.375)
|
|
Unemployment rate
|
|
-0.234**
|
-0.125
|
-0.0169
|
|
|
(0.095)
|
(0.092)
|
(0.084)
|
|
Union
|
|
0.325***
|
0.325***
|
0.219***
|
|
|
(0.071)
|
(0.092)
|
(0.085)
|
|
Exports
|
|
0.085**
|
0.066***
|
0.108***
|
|
|
(0.031)
|
(0.024)
|
(0.035)
|
|
Foreign direct investment
|
|
0.015**
|
0.017**
|
0.024**
|
|
|
(0.006)
|
(0.007)
|
(0.012)
|
|
Financial development
|
|
4.188
|
5.304
|
1.810
|
|
|
(4.344)
|
(4.333)
|
(3.270)
|
|
Democracy
|
|
0.349
|
0.120
|
1.289*
|
|
|
(1.031)
|
(1.053)
|
(0.744)
|
|
Human development index
|
|
|
-1.688
|
-10.860
|
|
|
|
(25.740)
|
(21.210)
|
|
Constant
|
71.10***
|
118.8***
|
42.09*
|
|
|
(2.626)
|
(33.83)
|
(23.95)
|
|
|
No. of observations
|
431
|
288
|
288
|
288
|
|
Countries
|
27
|
27
|
27
|
27
|
|
Country fixed effects
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Year effects
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
KP (F-stat)
|
|
|
|
10.323
|
|
P-value (J-Stat)
|
|
|
|
0.372
|
Source: Author’s calculations.
|
Variables
|
Dependent variable:
Expenditure decentralization
|
|
Population (log)
|
18.53***
|
|
(3.61)
|
|
Government effectiveness
|
-2.310*
|
|
(-2.07)
|
|
Human development index
|
23.17
|
|
(0.99)
|
|
Government size
|
-0.374
|
|
(-0.79)
|
|
Urbanization
|
-0.395**
|
|
(-2.71)
|
|
Population growth
|
0.560
|
|
(1.84)
|
|
Unemployment rate
|
-0.258***
|
|
(-3.53)
|
|
Union
|
0.128
|
|
(1.27)
|
|
Exports
|
-0.0902**
|
|
(-3.11)
|
|
Foreign direct investment
|
-0.013
|
|
(-1.03)
|
|
Financial development
|
5.417
|
|
(1.52)
|
|
Democracy
|
-2.197**
|
|
(-2.71)
|
|
No. of observations
|
288
|
|
Country fixed effects
|
Y
|
|
Year effects
|
Y
|
Note: P-values (clustered by country) appear in parentheses below estimates; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01,
*** p < 0.001. First-stage regression results for the specification estimated in column 4 of table
2 above. Source: Author’s calculations.
|
|
Dependent
variable
|
|
|
|
Gender
inequality index
|
Gender
equality index
|
|
|
Variables
|
(5)
|
(6)
|
(7)
|
(8)
|
|
Expenditure decentralization
|
-0.354**
|
0.523**
|
0.390***
|
0.310**
|
|
(0.164)
|
(0.222)
|
(0.140)
|
(0.132)
|
|
Human development index
|
11.75
|
-10.56
|
-8.428
|
-7.144
|
|
(14.70)
|
(20.95)
|
(19.39)
|
(18.81)
|
|
Government size
|
-1.379***
|
0.0803
|
0.077
|
0.075
|
|
(0.318)
|
(0.426)
|
(0.406)
|
(0.398)
|
|
Urbanization
|
-0.509***
|
0.415***
|
0.358**
|
0.323**
|
|
(0.146)
|
(0.161)
|
(0.139)
|
(0.138)
|
|
Population growth
|
0.813***
|
-0.616*
|
-0.498*
|
-0.426
|
|
(0.252)
|
(0.365)
|
(0.299)
|
(0.277)
|
|
Unemployment rate
|
-0.180***
|
-0.021
|
-0.045
|
-0.061
|
|
(0.055)
|
(0.082)
|
(0.069)
|
(0.066)
|
|
Union
|
-0.107*
|
0.223***
|
0.247***
|
0.262***
|
|
(0.062)
|
(0.083)
|
(0.076)
|
(0.075)
|
|
Exports
|
-0.057**
|
0.107***
|
0.097***
|
0.091***
|
|
(0.023)
|
(0.034)
|
(0.028)
|
(0.027)
|
|
Foreign direct investment
|
-0.015**
|
0.024**
|
0.022**
|
0.021**
|
|
(0.008)
|
(0.011)
|
(0.01)
|
(0.009)
|
|
Financial development
|
2.096
|
1.926
|
2.737
|
3.226
|
|
(2.444)
|
(3.234)
|
(3.115)
|
(3.133)
|
|
Democracy
|
-2.677***
|
1.250*
|
0.979
|
0.815
|
|
(0.615)
|
(0.731)
|
(0.651)
|
(0.639)
|
|
No. of observations
|
288
|
288
|
288
|
288
|
|
Countries
|
27
|
27
|
27
|
27
|
|
Country fixed effects
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Year effects
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
KP (F-stat)
|
10.323
|
10.363
|
12.100
|
18.61
|
|
P-value (J-Stat)
|
0.919
|
0.342
|
0.295
|
0.440
|
Note: P-values (clustered by country) appear in parentheses below estimates; * p<0.10,
** p<0.05, *** p<0.01. Instruments used for the decentralization measure are population (in logs)
and government effectiveness in column 5; population density (in logs) and government effectiveness
in column 6; population (in logs), area (in logs), and government effectiveness in column 7;
population (in logs) and area (in logs) in column 8. The KP (F-stat) refers to the Kleibergen Paap
rk Wald F-statistic; the J-stat refers to Hansen’s overidentification test. Source: Author’s calculations.
Ahmad, E., Brosio, G. and Tanzi, V., 2008. Local Service Provision in Selected OECD Countries: Do Decentralized Operations Work Better? IMF Working Papers, No. 67.
Andersen, T. B., 2022. Does democracy cause gender equality? Journal of Institutional Economics, 19 (2), pp. 210-228 [ CrossRef]
Arzaghi, M. and Henderson, J. V., 2005. Why countries are fiscally decentralizing. Journal of Public Economics, 89(7), pp. 1157-1189 [ CrossRef]
Baskaran, T. and Feld, L. P., 2013. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in OECD countries: Is there a relationship? Public Finance Review, 41(4), pp. 421-445 [ CrossRef]
Besley, T. and Coate, S., 2003. Central versus Local Provision of Public Goods: A Political Economy Analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 87(4), pp. 2611-2637 [ CrossRef]
Bodman, P., 2011. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in the OECD. Journal of Applied Economics, 43, pp. 3021-3035 [ CrossRef]
Brady, D. and Burroway, R., 2012. Targeting, universalism, and single-mother poverty: a multilevel analysis across 18 affluent democracies. Demography, 49(2), pp. 719-746 [ CrossRef]
Cavusoglu, T. and Dincer, O., 2015. Does Decentralization Reduce Income Inequality? Only in the Rich States. Southern Economic Journal, 82(1), pp. 285-306 [ CrossRef]
Chakraborty, L. S., 2021. Fiscal Federalism, Expenditure Assignments and Gender Equality. MPRA Paper, No. 111949.
Downes, R., Von T., L. and Nicol, S., 2017. Gender budgeting in OECD countries. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 16(3), pp. 71-107 [ CrossRef]
Eller, M., 2004. The Determinants of Fiscal Decentralization and its Determinants on Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from a Panel of OECD Countries. Diploma Thesis.
Escolano, J. [et al.], 2012. Fiscal Performance, Institutional Design and Decentralization in European Union Countries. IMF Working Papers, No. 45.
Fernandez, R., Luna, F. and Rambousek, B., 2019. Gender Equality and Inclusive Growth. United Nations Women [ CrossRef]
Funk, P. and Gathmann, C., 2008. Gender Gaps in Policy Making: Evidence from Direct Democracy in Switzerland. Economic Policy, 30, pp. 141-181 [ CrossRef]
Gemmell, N., Kneller, R. and Sanz, I., 2013. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: spending versus revenue decentralization. Economic Inquiry, 51(4), pp. 1915-1931 [ CrossRef]
Global Affairs Canada, 2017. Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy. Global Affairs Canada.
Gornick, J., 2004. Women's economic outcomes, gender inequality, and public policy: findings from the Luxembourg Income Study. Socio-economic review, 2, pp. 213-238 [ CrossRef]
ILO, 2000. ABC of Women Workers’ Rights and Gender Equality. Geneva: International Labour Office.
Ivanyna, M. and Shah, A., 2011. Decentralization and corruption: new cross-country evidence. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29(2), pp. 344-362 [ CrossRef]
Jimenez-Rubio, D., 2011. The impact of decentralization of health services on health outcomes: evidence from Canada. Applied Economics, 43(26), pp. 3907-3917 [ CrossRef]
Joumard, I. and Kongsrud, P., 2003. Fiscal Relations across Government Levels. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 375 [ CrossRef]
King, T. [et al.], 2020. Associations between gender equality and health: a systematic review. Health Promotion International, 35(1), pp. 27-41 [ CrossRef]
Lessmann, C., 2009. Fiscal decentralization and regional disparity: Evidence from cross-section and panel data. Environment and Planning A, 41(10), pp. 2455-2473 [ CrossRef]
Lessmann, C., 2012. Regional Inequality and Decentralization: An Empirical Analysis. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(6), pp. 1363-1388 [ CrossRef]
Martinez-Vazquez, J., Lago-Peñas, S. and Sacchi, A., 2017. The impact of fiscal decentralization: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 31(4), pp. 1095-1129 [ CrossRef]
Naeem, S. and Khan, R. E. A., 2021. Fiscal Decentralization and Gender Equality in Developing Economies: Dynamics of Income Groups in Economies and Corruption. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 11(9), pp. 745-761 [ CrossRef]
Oates, W. E., 2005. Toward A Second-Generation Theory of Fiscal Federalism. International Tax and Public Finance, 12, pp. 349-373 [ CrossRef]
Pandey, U. C. and Kumar, C., 2021. Gender Equality and Equity in Urban Areas. In: W. Leal Filho [et al.], eds. Sustainable Cities and Communities. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Cham: Springer [ CrossRef]
Roodman, D., 2009. A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 71(1), pp. 135-158 [ CrossRef]
Seabright, P., 1996. Accountability and Decentralisation in Government: An Incomplete Contracts Model. European Economic Review, 40, pp. 61-89 [ CrossRef]
Sow, M. and Razafimahefa, I., 2018. Fiscal decentralization and the efficiency of public service delivery. In: J. Kim and S. Dougherty, eds. Fiscal Decentralisation and Inclusive Growth. Paris: OECD. [ CrossRef]
Stockemer, D. and Tremblay, M., 2015. Federalism and Women’s Representation: Do Federations have more Women Legislators than Centralized States? Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 45(4) pp. 605-625 [ CrossRef]
Thornton, J., 2007. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth reconsidered. Journal of Urban Economics, 61(1), pp. 64-70 [ CrossRef]
Treisman, D., 2000. Decentralization and Inflation: Commitment, Collective Action, or Continuity? American Political Science Review, 94(4), pp. 837-857 [ CrossRef]
Treisman, D., 2007. The Architecture of Government: Rethinking Political Decentralization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [ CrossRef]
Tselios, V. [et al.], 2012. Income Inequality, Decentralisation, and Regional Development in Western Europe. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(6), pp. 1278-1301 [ CrossRef]
Vickers, J., 2012. Is Federalism Gendered? Incorporating Gender into Studies of Federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 43(1), pp. 1-23 [ CrossRef]
Weingast, B. R., 2014. Second generation fiscal federalism: Political aspects of decentralization and economic development. World Development, 53, 14-25 [ CrossRef]
Williams, S. H., 2018. Federalism and Gender Equality. Federal Law Review, 46(4), pp. 491-519 [ CrossRef]
World Bank, 2023b. Gender Strategy 2024 - 2030: Accelerate Gender Equality for a Sustainable, Resilient, and Inclusive Future. Consultation Draft.
|
|
June, 2024
II/2024
|
