DECENTRALIZATION OF INTER-BUDGET RELATIONS: THEORY, PRACTICE, AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published: Oct 29, 2019
https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-4-182-196

  Liudmyla Pidchosa

  Igor Lyutyy

  Oleksandr Pidchosa

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to justify the methods of budget policy for the redistribution of cash flows in terms of differentiating powers at different levels of government and to analyse intergovernmental regulation improvement. The subject of the study is the methods of budget policy and intergovernmental regulation improvement. Research methodology. The research is based on analysis, comparison, and generalization of statistical data concerning territorial development, distribution of production capacities, migration of population and its determinants, statistical data on the state of macro-financial turbulence. The hypothesis is based on the above data. Practical implication. The budget policy is directed to reaching a certain socio-economic effect at a certain stage of social development, is implemented by the authorities with appropriate powers in a certain territory. In the administrative and budgetary reform, intergovernmental relations are multidimensional and their research needs to be conducted from the point of their categorization in terms of scale and long-term achievement of the set goals and objectives, as well as depending on priorities in the budget process management. Achievement of the effective system of intergovernmental relations is possible only if there is the unity of all subjects of the budget system. In this context, the most pressing issues of intergovernmental interactions and regulation of cash flows are highlighted. Value/originality. The proposed model of principles, tools, and mechanism of distribution and regulation of intergovernmental fiscal flows will provide an opportunity to ensure the unity of all levels of the budget system and their interaction, which, in turn, will ensure macro-financial stability of the state, efficient allocation of budget expenditure, development of society’s democratization and uniform socio-economic development of some regions.

How to Cite

Pidchosa, L., Lyutyy, I., & Pidchosa, O. (2019). DECENTRALIZATION OF INTER-BUDGET RELATIONS: THEORY, PRACTICE, AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 5(4), 182-196. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-4-182-196
Article views: 605 | PDF Downloads: 359

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

budget, intergovernmental fiscal regulation, fiscal decentralization, local authorities, territorial justice, editing coefficient, negative transfers, governmental grants, subsidies, local communities, local budgets

References

Alfirman, L. (2003). Estimating Stochastic Frontier Tax Potential: Can Indonesian Local Governments Increase Tax Revenues Under Decentralization. Center for Economic Analysis, University of Colorado at Boulder. Working paper. Working paper, 03–19.

Amenta, E. (2016). Neoliberal globalization, democratization, and movement responses. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 21(4), 389–391.

Bordignon, M. (2006). Fiscal Decentralization: how to Harden the Budget Constraint. Fiscal Policy Surveillance in Europe, 109–136.

Brueckner, J. K., & Saavedra, L. A. (2001). Do Local Governments Engage in Strategic Property – Tax Competition? National Tax Journal, 203–229.

Budget Code of Ukraine (2017). Law, № 2456-VI.

Cheng, J. (2018). Intergovernmental Relations, and Market Development. Springer.

Dabla-Norris, E., & Wade, P. (2002). The Challenge of Fiscal Decentralization in Transition Countries.

De Borger, B. et al. (1994). Explaining Differences in Productive Efficiency: an Application to Belgian Municipalities. Public Choice, 80(3), 339–358.

De Mello, L. et al. (2018). The Global Crisis and Intergovernmental Relations: Revisiting the Centralisationdecentralisation Debate ten years on presentation at the Third International Conference on “Decentralisation after the Great Recession: Fine-Tuning or Paradigm Shift.

De Mello, L. R. (2000). Fiscal Decentralization and Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations: a Cross-country Analysis. World Development, 28(2), 365–380.

Rodden, J., & Eskeland, G. S. (2003). Decentralization F. the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints.

Eccleston, R., & Krever, R. (2017). The Future of Federalism: Intergovernmental Financial Relations in an Age of Austerity. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Fisman, R., & Gatti, R. (2002). Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence from US Federal Transfer Programs. Public Choice, 113(1), 25–35.

Gershberg, A., & Winkler, D. (2004). Education Decentralization in Africa: A Review of Recent Policy and Practice. Building State Capacity in Africa, 323.

State Statistics Service of Ukraine (2018).

Harvey, D. (2010). Social Justice and the City. University of Georgia Press, 1.

Holtz-Eakin, D., & Rosen, H. S. (1988). Tax Deductibility and Municipal Budget Structure. Fiscal Federalism: Quantitative Studies. University of Chicago Press, 107–136. IMF Data (2017).

Kyrylenko, O. P. (2001). Financial Independence of Local Self-Government. Finance of Ukraine, 1, 34–39.

Kyrylenko, O. P. (2002). Local Budgets in the Economic System of the State. Thesis for the Degree of Candidate of Economic Sciences: speciality 08.04.01 "Finance, Money Circulation and Credit".

Kyrylenko, O. P. (2004). Public Finances in the Conditions of Formation of a Democratic Society. The World of Finance, 1(1), 22–33.

Lunina, I. (2014). Budget Decentralization: the Goals and Directions of Reforms. Ekonomika Ukrainy (Economics of Ukraine), 11(636), 61–75.

Lyuty, I. O. (2004). Recent Trends in the Development of the Financial System of the State. Finance of Ukraine, 5, 24–29.

Lyuty, I. O. (2009). Theoretical and Methodological Principles of the Budget Policy of the State. Finance of Ukraine, 12, 13–19.

Marlow, M. L. (1988). Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size. Public Choice, 56(3), 259–269.

Nogin, V. D. (2005). Generalized Edgeworth-Pareto Principle and its Applicability Limits. Economics and Mathematical Methods, 41(3), 128–134.

Patsias, C., & Latendresse, A., (2013). Participatory Democracy, Decentralization and Local Governance: The Montreal Participatory Budget in the Light of ‘Empowered Participatory Governance. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(6), 2214–2230.

Prud'Homme, R. (1995). The Dangers of Decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10(2), 201–220.

Rodden, J. (2000). Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints.

Rodden, J., & Eskeland, G. S. (2003). Fiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints. MIT press.

Saburov, N., & Tipenko, N. (2001). Budget Federalism and Interbudgetary Relations. Problems of Economic Transition, 43(11), 76–92.

Stenberg, C. W., & Hamilton, D. K. and Hamilton. (2018). Intergovernmental Relations in Transition: Reflections and Directions. Routledge.

Sutcliffe, J. B. (2017). Intergovernmental Relations in the European Union and Canada: The place of local government. Crossing the Atlantic. Routledge, 85–105.

Worldbank enforcement (2017).

Wright, D. S., & Stenberg, C. W. (2018). Federalism, Intergovernmental Relations, and Intergovernmental Management: The Origins, Emergence, and Maturity of Three Concepts across Two Centuries of Organizing Power by Area and by Function. Handbook of public administration. Routledge, 407–479.

Grossi, G., & Cinquini, L. (2018). External Pressures and Internal Dynamics in the Institutionalization of Performance-Based Budgeting: An Endless Process? Public Performance & Management Review, 41(2), 224–252.

Grossi, G., & Brorstrom, S., et al. (2018). Translating Sustainable and Smart City Strategies into Performance Measurement Systems. Public Money & Management, 38(3), 193–202.

Grossi, G., & Bourmistrov, A., et al. (2018). Participatory Budgeting as a Form of Dialogic Accounting in Russia: Actors' Institutional Work and Reflexivity Trap. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(4), 1098–1123.

Issue
Vol. 5 No. 4 (2019): Baltic Journal of Economic Studies