Descentralización: ¿panacea o caja de Pandora? Perversidad fiscal en México: Decentralization: Panacea or Pandora’s Box? Fiscal Perversity in Mexico

Roberto Guerrero Compeán

doi:10.29105/ensayos27.2-4

Authors

Roberto Guerrero Compeán

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29105/ensayos27.2-4

Keywords:

descentralización, perversidad fiscal, México.

Abstract

Advocacy for decentralization has grown in Mexico at a rapid pace during the last decade. The gains of decentralization, however, are rather unclear and many times the assumptions and the outcomes of the process depart from the standard theory of fiscal federalism. There are serious drawbacks that should be considered before fully endorsing any decentralization program. As decentralization has progressed in Mexico, for instance, it has become evident that most of Mexican states have incurred in large fiscal deficits, majorly due to excessive overspending. This paper explains the reasons why such a trend has been observed in recent years based on a simultaneous equation model of state revenues and expenditures. The results suggest that increases in fiscal deficits are significantly associated with more intense political competition at the subnational sphere, the stage of the political business cycle, and fiscal perversity caused by political decentralization. This implies that regions expect to be bailed out by the federal government in case of financial trouble and thus do not have an incentive to observe fiscal discipline. Keywords: decentralization, fiscal perversity, Mexico.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Belsey, D.A., 1988, “Two- or Three-Stage Least Squares”, Computational Economics, 1, 1: 21-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435200

Dabla-Norris, E., 2006, “The Challenge of Fiscal Decentralization in Transition Countries”, Comparative Economic Studies, 48: 100-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100063

Calsamiglia, X. et al., 2004, Why Do Differences in the Degree of Fiscal Decentralization Endure?, Unpublished paper.

Cornelius, W., 1996, Mexican Politics in Transition, University of California San Diego: San Diego, CA.

Germán-Soto, V., 2005, “Generación del producto interno bruto mexicano por entidad federativa, 1940-1992”, El Trimestre Económico, 72, 3: 617-653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20430/ete.v72i287.574

Giugale, M., F. Hernández Trillo, J.C. Oliveira, 2000, “Subnational Borrowing and Debt Management”, in Giugale, M. and S. Webb (eds.), Achievements and Challenges of Fiscal Decentralization in Mexico, The World Bank Group: Washington, D.C, pp. 237-270.

Grindle, M.S., 2007, Going Local: Decentralization, Democratization, and the Promise of Good Governance, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.

Guerrero Compeán, R., 2005, Determinantes del potencial de crecimiento regional y mecanismos de convergencia económica de las entidades federativas en México, B.A. thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, San Nicolás de los Garza.

Hernández Trillo, F., A. Díaz Cayeros, R. Gamboa González, 2002a, “Determinants and Consequences of Bailing Out States in Mexico”, Eastern Economic Journal, 28, 3: 365-380.

Hernández Trillo, F., A. Díaz Cayeros, R. Gamboa González, 2002b, “Fiscal Decentralization in Mexico: The Bailout Problem”, Research Network Working Paper R-447, Latin American Research Network, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1814706

Hu, T. and B.H. Booms, 1971, “A Simultaneous Equation Model of Public Expenditure Decisions in Large Cities”, Annals of Regional Science, 5, 2: 73-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01286515

McLure, C.E., 1995, “Comment on ‘The Dangers of Decentralization’ by Prud’homme”, World Bank Research Observer, 10, 2: 221-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/10.2.221

Molinar, J., 1991, “Counting the Number of Parties: An Alternative Index”, American Political Science Review, 85, 4: 1383-1391. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1963951

Netzer, D. (ed.), 2003, The Property Tax, Land Use and Land Use Regulation, Edward Elgar in association with the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781950852

Prud’homme, R., 1995, “The Dangers of Decentralization”, World Bank Research Observer, 10, 2: 201-220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/10.2.201

Rodden, J. et al. (eds.), 2003, Fiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints, MIT Press, Cambridge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3021.001.0001

Tanzi, V., 1995, “Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization: A Review of Some Efficiency and Macroeconomic Aspects”, Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics, 295-316.

Tiebout, C.M., 1956, “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures”, Journal of Political Economy, 64, 5: 416-424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/257839

Velázquez, C., 2002, Three Essays on Political Economy, The University of Chicago, AAT 3060275.

World Bank, 2000, Achievements and Challenges of Fiscal Decentralization. Lessons from Mexico, Giugale, M.M. and S.B. Webb (eds.), The World Bank Group, Washington.