Studies in Comparative International Development

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 57–80 | Cite as

Decentralization and municipal governance: Suggested approaches for cross-regional analysis

  • Eduardo J. Gómez
Research Forum: Decentralization

Abstract

The study of decentralization and municipal governance has captured much scholarly attention. This article highlights the importance of factors that have been generally ignored, and, in the process, suggests dimensions that facilitate comparison, including at the cross-regional level. First, regarding the creation and reform of decentralization policy, scholars may compare cases based on thehorizontal andex-post vertical political processes of reform. Second, cases can be compared based on the degree of center-statepolicy fluctuation, i.e., the institutions and incentives generating continual policy change and delayed outcomes, over time. Finally, I encourage scholars to scale down to the municipal level, comparing cases based on the following variables: historical state-municipal fiscal relations, institutional innovations, and the policy-making process. I close by explaining the various benefits associated with these approaches and the new research questions and challenges that they pose for comparative scholars.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrucio, Fernando and David Samuels. 1999. “A ‘Nova’ Política dos Governadores: Política Subnacional e Transicão Democrático no Brasil.”Lua Nova 40/41: 137–66.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, Robert J., ed. 1994.Local Government and Market Decentralization: Experiences in Industrialized, Developing, and Former Eastern Bloc Countries. New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Burki, Shavid, Guillermo Perry, and William Dillinger. 2000.Beyond the Center: Decentralizing the State. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
  4. Corrales, Javier. 2001. “The Political Causes of Argentina’s Recession.” Paper presented at Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars, Washington, D.C., March 1.Google Scholar
  5. Dillinger, William and Steven Webb. 2001a.Fiscal Management in Federal Democracies: Argentina and Brazil. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
  6. —. 2001b.Decentralization and Fiscal Management in Colombia. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
  7. Eaton, Kent. 1998.The Politics of Tax Reform: Economic Policy Making in Developing Presidential Democracies. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Political Science, Yale University.Google Scholar
  8. —. 2002. “Fiscal Policy-Making in the Argentine Congress: Party versus Province.” Pp. 287–314 inLegislative Politics in Latin America, eds. Scott Morgenstern and Benito Nacif. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Eaton, Kent and Tyler Dickovick. Forthcoming. “Decentralization and Re-Centralization in Argentina and Brazil.” InDecentralization in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Latin America and South Asia, eds. Eduardo J. Gómez, and Paul Smoke.Google Scholar
  10. Edmonds-Poli, Emily and Eduardo J. Gómez. 2001. “The Politics of Decentralization and Municipal Autonomy in Mexico and India.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, August 29–September 2.Google Scholar
  11. Escobar-Lemon, Maria. 2001. “Fiscal Decentralization and Federalism in Latin America.”Publius: The Journal of Federalism 31, 4 (Fall).Google Scholar
  12. Echeverri-Gent, John. 1998. “Weak State, Strong Reforms? Globalization, Partisan Competition, and the Paradox of India’s Economic Reforms.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, September 3–6.Google Scholar
  13. Geddes, Barbara. 1990. “How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics.” Pp. 131–50 inPolitical Analysis, vol. 2, ed. James A. Stimson. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gilbert, Alan G. and Julio D. Dávila. 2002. “Bogotá: Progress within a Hostile Environment.” Pp. 29–64 inCapital City Politics in Latin America: Democratization and Empowerment, eds. David Myers and Henry Dietz. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gómez, Eduardo J. 2000. “A Political Economy of Brazil’s Debt Crisis.” Paper presented atThe Political Economy of Reform in Latin America, David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies, Harvard University, November 15.Google Scholar
  16. Gómez, Eduardo J. 2001. “Presidents, Coalitions, and Subnational Borrowing Controls in Developing Nations.” Paper presented at the Fiscal Affairs Department, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  17. Gómez, Eduardo J. 2002. “Subnational Authoritarian Withdrawals: Method and Evidence.” Unpublished manuscript, Brown University.Google Scholar
  18. Gómez, Eduardo J. and Paul Smoke, eds. Forthcoming.Decentralization in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Latin America and South Asia.Google Scholar
  19. Grindle, Merilee, ed. 1997.Getting Good Government: Capacity Building in the Public Sector in Developing Countries. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. — 2000.Audacious Reforms: Institutional Invention and Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Haggard, Stephan and Robert Kaufman. 1995.The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Haggard, Stephan and Steven Webb. 2003. “Transfers and Incentives: Inter-governmental Fiscal Relations in Latin America,” Pp. 235–270 inDecentralization and Democracy in Latin America, eds. David Samuels and Alfred Montero. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hutchcroft, Paul. 2001. “Centralization and Decentralization in Administration and Politics: Assessing Territorial Dimensions of Authority and Power.”Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration 14, 1 (January): 23–53.Google Scholar
  24. King, Gary, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994.Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kirkow, P. 1996. “Distributive Coalitions, Budgetary Problems, and Fiscal Federalism in Russia.”Communist Studies and Economic Transformation 8.Google Scholar
  26. Litvack, Jennifer, Junaid Ahmad, and Richard Bird. 1998.Rethinking Decentralization. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mainwaring, Scott and David Samuels 2003. “Federalism and Constraints on Economic Reform in Brazil.” Pp. 85–130 inFederalism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Edward Gibson. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Manor, James. 1999.The Political Economy of Democratic Decentralization. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge and Jameson Boex. 2001.Russia’s Transition to a New Federalism. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  30. Maurel, Marie-Claude. 1994. “Local Government Reforms and the Viability of Rural Communities in Eastern Central Europe.” Pp. 92–112 inLocal Government and Market Decentralization: Experiences in Industrialized, Developing, and Former Eastern Bloc Countries, ed. Robert Bennett. New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  31. McCarten, William. 2003. “Soft Budget Constraints in India.” Pp. 249–86 inFiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints, eds. Jonathan Rodden, Jennifer Litvack, and Gunnar Eskeland. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. McCarten, William and Vinod Vyasulu. Forthcoming. “Experiments in Indian Democratic Decentralization: The Case of Madhya Pradesh.” InDecentralization in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Latin America and South Asia, eds. Eduardo J. Gómez and Paul Smoke.Google Scholar
  33. Montero, Alfred. 2002.Decentralization and Subnational Industrial Policy in Brazil and Spain. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Montero, Alfred. 2000. “After Decentralization: Patterns of Institutional Change in Argentina, Brazil, Spain, Venezuela, and Mexico.” Paper presented at the Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Miami, March 16–18.Google Scholar
  35. Myers, David and Henry Dietz, eds. 2002.Capital City Politics in Latin America: Democratization and Empowerment. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Press.Google Scholar
  36. Nascimento, Edson. 2002. “Dos Anos de Lei Responsabilidade Fiscal.” Unpublished manuscript, Ministry of Finance, Brasilia, Brasil.Google Scholar
  37. Nickson, Andrew. 1995.Local Government in Latin america. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Press.Google Scholar
  38. North, Douglas. 1989.Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. O’Neill, Kathleen. 1999. “Tugging From the Purse Strings: The Politics of Fiscal Decentralization in the Andean Region of Latin America.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, September 1–5.Google Scholar
  40. O’Neill, Kathleen. 2001. “Return to Center? Fiscal Decentralization and Re-centralization in Comparative Perspective.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, August 29–September 2.Google Scholar
  41. Penfold-Becerra, Michael. 2001. “Institutional Electoral Incentives and Decentralization Outcomes: State Reform in Venezuela.” Paper presented at the Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Washington, D.C., September 6–8.Google Scholar
  42. Rasyid, Ryaas. 2002. “The Policy of Decentralization in Indonesia.” Paper presented at “Can Decentralization Help Rebuild Indonesia?” Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, May 1.Google Scholar
  43. Regulski, Jerzy and W. Kocan. 1994. “From Communism Towards Democracy: Local Government Reform in Poland,” Pp. 41–66 inLocal Government and Market Decentralization: Experiences in Industrialized, Developing, and Former Eastern Bloc Countries, ed. Robert J. Bennett. New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Remmer, Karen. 1990. “Democracy and Economic Crisis: The Latin american Experience,”World Politics 2: 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rodden, Jonathan, Jennifer Litvack, and Gunnar Eskeland, eds. 2003.Fiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rodden, Jonathan. Forthcoming. “Comparative Federalism and Decentralization: On Meaning and Measurement.”Comparative Politics.Google Scholar
  47. Samuels, David and Alfred Montero. 2003.Decentralization and Democracy in Latin America. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  48. Samuels, David. 2003.Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Shah, Anwar and Theresa Thompson. 2002. “Implementing Decentralized Local Governance: A Treacherous Road with Potholes, Detours, and Road Closures.” Unpublished manuscript, The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
  50. Shirk, Susan. 1993.The Political Logic of Economic Reform in China. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  51. Snyder, Richard. 2001. “Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method,”Studies in Comparative International Development 36 1 (Spring).Google Scholar
  52. Stoner-Weiss, Kathryn. 1999. “Central Weakness and Provincial Autonomy: Observations on the Devolution Process in Russia.”Post Soviet Affairs 15, 1: 87–106.Google Scholar
  53. Stoner-Weiss, Kathryn. 2001. “The Regional Sources of Russia’s Stalled Reforms.” Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
  54. Sutela, Pekka. 1999. “Fiscal Federalism in Russia.” Pp. 151–172 inEconomic Institutions, Markets, and Competition: Centralization and Decentralization in the Transformation of Economic Systems, eds. Bruno Dallago and Luigi Mittone. New Hampshire: Edward Elgar publishers.Google Scholar
  55. Tendler, Judith. 1997.Good Government in the Tropics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Wescott, Clay. Forthcoming. “Decentralization Policy and Practice in Viet Nam: 1991–2001.” InDecentralization in Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Latin America and South Asia, eds. Eduardo J. Gómez and Paul Smoke.Google Scholar
  57. Wetzel, Deborah and Anita Papp. 2003. “Strengthening Hard Budget Constraints in Hungary.” Pp. 393–428 inFiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints, eds. Jonathan Rodden, Jennifer Litvack, and Gunnar Eskeland. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. World Bank. 2000a.Decentralization Network, <http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/decentralization>.Google Scholar
  59. World Bank. 2000b.Decentralization “Toolkit” <http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/decentralization/toolkit.htm>.Google Scholar
  60. Willis, Eliza, Christopher da C.B. Garman, and Stephan Haggard. 1999. “The Politics of Decentralization in Latin America.”Latin American Research Review 34, 1: 7–56.Google Scholar
  61. Yang, Dali. 2001. “Economic Transformation and State Rebuilding in China.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, August 29–September 2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo J. Gómez

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations