How Does Fiscal Autonomy Influence Fiscal Outcomes Depending on Corruption
As fiscal decentralization has been vigorously implemented, fiscal autonomy has become more prevalent in subnational governments. However, fiscal outcomes with greater fiscal autonomy depend upon how well and how responsibly government finances are managed. This study examines how fiscal autonomy affects fiscal outcomes depending on the level of corruption by using a panel data set of 83 cities in South Korea from 2010 to 2017. According to the results, fiscal autonomy causes local governments to spend more. However, its effectiveness may differ based on the composition of fiscal autonomy and its expenditure categories. Additionally, this study finds that less corrupt local governments spend less and have less debt under higher levels of fiscal autonomy.
Albornoz, F. & Cabrales, A. (2013). Decentralization, political competition and corruption, Journal of Development Economics, 105, pp. 103-111.
Alt, J. E. & Lowry, R. C. (1994). Divided government, fiscal institutions, and budget deficits: Evidence from the states, American Political Science Review, 88(4), pp. 811-828.
Arze del Granado, F. J., Martinez-Vazquez, J. & McNab, R. (2005) Fiscal decentralization and the functional composition of public expenditures, International Studies Program Working Paper, 501 (Atlanta: Georgia State University).
Ashworth, J., Geys, B. & Heyndels, B. (2005) Government weakness and local public debt development in Flemish municipalities, International Tax and Public Finance, 12(4), pp. 395-422.
Bastida, F., Guillamon, M. D. & Benito, B. (2017) Fiscal transparency and the cost of sovereign debt, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(1), pp. 106-128.
Belo, F., Gala, V. D. & Li, J. (2013). Government spending, political cycles, and the cross section of stock returns, Journal of Financial Economics, 107(2), pp. 305-324.
Benito, B., Guillamon, M. D. & Bastida, F. (2016) The impact of transparency on the cost of sovereign debt in times of economic crisis, Financial Accountability & Management, 32(3), pp. 309-334.
Benfratello, L., Del Monte, A. & Pennacchio, L. (2018) Corruption and public debt: a cross-country analysis. Applied Economics Letters, 25(5), pp. 340-344.
Blöchliger, H. & King, D. (2006) Less than you thought: the fiscal autonomy of sub-central governments (No. 43) (Paris: OECD Publishing).
Blöchliger, H. & Rabesona, J. (2009). The fiscal autonomy of sub-central governments: An update (No. 9) (Paris: OECD Publishing).
Boetti, L., Piacenza, M. & Turati, G. (2010) Decentralization and local governments’ Performance: How Does Fiscal Autonomy Affect Spending Efficiency?, Working paper 11, Former Department of Economics and Public Finance (Torino: University of Torino).
Bröthaler, J. & Getzner, M. (2011) Fiscal Autonomy and Total Government Expenditure: An Austrian Case-study, International Advances in Economic Research, 17, pp. 134-156.
Cassette, A. & Paty, S. (2010) Fiscal decentralization and the size of government: a European country empirical analysis, Public Choice, 143(1-2), pp. 173-189.
Chapman, J. I. (1999) Local Government, Fiscal Autonomy and Fiscal Stress: The Case of California (Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy).
Chapman, J. I. (2003) Local government autonomy and fiscal stress: The case of California counties, State and Local Government Review, 35(1), pp. 15-25.
Cooray, A., Dzhumashev, R. & Schneider, F. (2017). How Does Corruption Affect Public Debt? An Empirical Analysis, World Development, 90, pp. 115-127.
Cordis A. S. (2014) Corruption and the composition of public spending in the United States, Public Finance Review, 42(6), pp. 745-773.
Corrado, G. & Rossetti, F. (2018) Public corruption: A study across regions in Italy. Journal of Policy Modeling, 40(6), pp. 1126-1139.
d’Agostino, G., Dunne, J. P. & Pieroni, L. (2012) Corruption, military spending and growth, Defence and Peace Economics, 23(6), pp. 591-604.
Darby, J., Muscatelli, A. & Roy, G. (2002) Fiscal federalism and fiscal autonomy: lessons for the UK from other industrialised countries, Working paper 2002_12 (Glasgow: University of Glasgow, Business School-Economics).
De la Croix, D. & Delavallade, C. (2008) Growth, public investment and corruption with failing institutions. Economics of Governance, 10(3), pp. 187-221.
Delavallade, C. (2006) Corruption and distribution of public spending in developing countries, Journal of Economics and Fiance, 30(2), pp. 222-239.
Eyraud, L. & Lusinyan, L. (2013) Vertical fiscal imbalances and fiscal performance in advanced economies. Journal of Monetary Economics, 60(5), pp. 571-587.
Feld, L. P., Kirchgassner, G. & Schaltegger, C. A. (2011) Municipal debt in Switzerland: new empirical results, Public Choice, 149(1-2), pp. 49-64.
Fiva, J. H. (2006) New Evidence on the Effect of Fiscal Decentralization on the Size and Composition of Government Spending, Public Finance Analysis, 62(2), pp. 250-280.
Foremny, D. (2014) Sub-national deficits in European countries: The impact of fiscal rules and tax autonomy, European Journal of Political Economy, 34, pp. 86-110.
Garcia-Milà, T., McGuire, T. J. & Oates, W. E. (2018) Strength in diversity? Fiscal federalism among the fifty US states, International Tax and Public Finance, 25(4), pp. 1071-1091.
Ivanyna, M. & Shah, A. (2011). Decentralization and corruption: new cross-country evidence, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29(2), pp. 344-362.
Joassart-Marcelli, P. M., Musso, J. A. & Wolch, J. R. (2005) Fiscal consequences of concentrated poverty in a metropolitan region, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 95(2), pp. 336-356.
Joulfaian, D. & Marlow, M. L. (1990) Government size and decentralization: Evidence from disaggregated data, Southern Economic Journal, 56(4), pp. 1094-1102.
Kim, E. & Kim, S. (2015). Corruption and Financial Management: Evidence from Korean Local Governments, Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 30(2), pp. 177-192.
Kim, J. (2009) A Political Economic Analysis of Decentralization: Fiscal Autonomy and Primary System, KDI Journal of Economic Policy, 31(1), pp. 27-69.
Liu, C. & Mikesell, J. L. (2014). The impact of public officials’ corruption on the size and allocation of US state spending, Public Administration Review, 74(3), pp. 346-359.
Liu, C., Moldogaziev, T. T. & Mikesell, J. L. (2017) Corruption and State and Local Government Debt Expansion, Public Administration Review, 77(5), pp. 681–690.
Marco, B., Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., Santis, S. & Citro, F. (2018) Budgetary solvency of Italian local governments: an assessment, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32(2), pp. 122-141.
Marlow, M. L. (1988) Fiscal decentralization and government size, Public Choice, 56(3), 259-269.
Mauro, P. (1995) Corruption and Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), pp. 681–712.
Mauro, P. (1997) The Effect of Corruption on Growth, Investment and Government Expenditure: A cross country Analysis (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).
Mauro, P. (1998) Corruption and the composition of government expenditure, Journal of Public Economics, 69(2), 263-279.
Ministry of Interior and Safety (2017) Summary of Budget for FY2017 (Seoul: Ministry of Interior and Safety).
Ministry of Interior and Safety (2018) Summary of Budget for FY2018 (Seoul: Ministry of Interior and Safety).
Ministry of Interior and Safety (2019) Summary of Budget for FY2019 (Seoul: Ministry of Interior and Safety).
Moldogaziev, T. T., Liu, C. & Luby, M. J. (2017). Public Corruption in the US States and Its Impact on Public Debt Pricing, International Review for Social Sciences, 70(2), pp. 306-329.
Oyun, G. (2016) Interstate Spillovers, Fiscal Decentralization, and Public Spending on Medicaid Home- and Community-Based Services, Public Administration Review, 77(4), pp. 566-578.
Pack, J. R. (1998) Poverty and urban public expenditures, Urban Studies, 35(11), pp. 1995-2019.
Pettersson-Lidbom, P. (2010) Dynamic commitment and the soft budget constraint: An empirical test, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(3), pp. 154-79.
Renyaan, J. P. A., Ubud, S., Idrus, M. S. & Djumahir (2012) Effect of Fiscal Autonomy and Economic Growth on Local Financial Performance (A Study on Local Government of Papua Province), International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 1(1), pp. 16-21.
Rose-Ackerman (2008) Corruption, In: Rowley, C. & Schneider, F. (eds.) Readings in public choice and constitutional political economy (New York, NY: Springer).
Rompuy, P. V. (2016) Sub-national Tax Autonomy and Deficits: Empirical Results for 27 OECD Countries, Regional Studies, 50(7), pp. 1248-1259.
Shi, Y. (2018) An empirical assessment of local autonomy and special district finance in the US, Local Government Studies, 44(4), pp. 531-551.
Tanzi, V. (1998) Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures, Staff Papers, 45(4), pp. 559-594.
Tanzi, V. & Davoodi, H. (1998) Corruption, public investment, and growth. In The welfare state, public investment, and growth (tokio: Springer).
Tanzi, V. & Davoodi, H. (2000) Corruption, growth, and public finances. In The political economy of corruption (London: Routledge).
Tellier, G. (2006) Public expenditures in Canadian provinces: An empirical study of politico-economic interactions, Public Choice, 126(3-4), pp. 367-385.
Thorton, M., & Ulrich, M. (1999) Constituency size and government spending, Public Finance Review, 27(6), pp. 588-598.
Wang, W., Zheng, X. & Zhao Z. (2011) Fiscal Reform and Public Education Spending: A Quasi-natural Experiment of Fiscal Decentralization in China, The Journal of Federalism, 42(2), pp. 334-356.
Wei, S. J. & Zeckhauser, R. (1999) Dark deals and dampened destinies: corruption and economic performance, Japan and the World Economy, 11(3), pp. 443-454.
Wolman, H. & R. McManmon (2010) Comparing Local Government Autonomy across States, In: Bell, M. E., Brunori, D. & Youngman, Y. (eds.) The Property Tax and Local Autonomy (Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy).
It is a condition that the authors assign copyright or license the publication rights in their articles, including abstracts, to Institute for Local Self-Government Maribor. This enables us to ensure full copyright protection and to disseminate the article, and of course Journal, to the widest possible readership in print and electronic formats as appropriate. Authors retain many rights under the Institutes' right policies, which can be found at journal.lex-localis.press. Authors are themselves responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyright material from other sources.