The 'Dangers of Decentralization' and Their Relevance to Local Public Services
Helge Arends
Abstract
Helge Arends
Abstract
This dissertation empirically evaluates the relevance of the three prominent dangers of fiscal decentralization, namely inefficiencies, regional inequalities and deficient accountability for the provision of local public goods related to health, education and public security. The major argument holds that the promise of fiscal decentralization theory does not always materialize. In fact, decentralization reforms should assess the risks related to increased inefficiencies, regional inequalities and deficient accountability in the context of public service provision. Also, the dissertation adds further insights to a debate which is characterized by a strong focus on the relationship between decentralization and economic growth, by a misconception of the notion of a efficiency and by a lacking understanding of the micro-level mechanisms that underlie macro-level effects.
OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This dissertation empirically evaluates the relevance of the three prominent dangers of fiscal decentralization, namely inefficiencies, regional inequalities and deficient accountability for the provision of local public goods related to health, education and public security. The major argument holds that the promise of fiscal decentralization theory does not always materialize. In fact, decentralization reforms should assess the risks related to increased inefficiencies, regional inequalities and deficient accountability in the context of public service provision. Also, the dissertation adds further insights to a debate which is characterized by a strong focus on the relationship between decentralization and economic growth, by a misconception of the notion of a efficiency and by a lacking understanding of the micro-level mechanisms that underlie macro-level effects.
Key concepts: Decentralization, Relevance (law), Public administration, Political science, Law