Abstract
The paper, ‘the Political Economy of Transfers’ by Stuti Khemani, has brought up an important but often underemphasized aspect of intergovernmental transfers. Politics, as the author has discussed, determines the outcomes of transfers in an important way. The paper has brought up an important aspect for the success of equalization schemes by discussing this dimension of transfers. It has also proposed that intergovernmental transfers are likely to be a blunt instrument for resource allocation if implemented without consideration of the political economy surrounding them. The author has argued for greater dissemination of information to increase debate in support of equalization schemes. The discussion is valid from the point of view of ensuring sucess of those schemes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
ADB/WB/DfID. 2004. Devolution in Pakistan, Asian Development Bank/World Bank/Department for International Development, UK, Islamabad, Pakistan
Ahmad, Nuzhat, and Syed Ashraf Wasti. 2003. Pakistan. In Intergovernmental fiscal transfers in Asia: Currents practice and challenges for the future (Asian Development Bank, TA 5902), Paul Smoke and Kin Yun-Hwan, eds., 176–218. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Intergovernmental_Fiscal_Transfers/Intergovernmental_Fiscal_Transfers.pdf
Bahl, Roy. 2001. Equitable vertical sharing and decentralizing government finance in South Africa. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Working Paper, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
Bogdanor, Vernon. 2001. Devolution in the United Kingdom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Department of Finance, Sindh. 2004. Report on Implementation of Sindh Province Finance Commission Awards During FY 2002-03 & 2003-04, Karachi, Pakistan.
Edevbie, David. 2000. The politics of 13 percent derivation principle, remarks of commissioner for finance and economic planning, Delta state Nigeria, quoted on website of Urhobo Historical Society. Retrieved from http://www.waado.org/Environment/FedGovt_NigerDelta/RevenueAllocation/13PercentAllocation.htm
Guihery, Laurent. 2001. An economic assessment of German fiscal equalization schemes since 1970—What prospects for a unified Germany. Public Finance and Management, 1(4): 393–419.
Lockwood, Ben. 2005. Fiscal Decentralization—A Political Economy Perspective. Coventry, UK: University of Warwick and CEPR.
Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge, and Boex, Jameson. 2001. Russia’s transition to a new federalism. World Bank Institute Working Paper, Washington, DC.
McKay, John. 2004. Questions Posed to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance during debate on Bill C-24—Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements.
McLean, Iain. 2003. Fiscal Federalism in Canada. Oxford, UK: Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
Popov, Vladimir. 2004. Fiscal federalism in Russia: Rules versus electoral politics. Comparative Economic Studies, 44(4): 515–41
Sato, Motohiro. 2002. Political Economy of Fiscal Decentralization. Tokyo, Japan: Hitsubashi University.
Uche, Chibuike & Uche, Ogbonnaya. 2004. Oil and the politics of revenue allocation in Nigeria. ASC Working Paper 54/2004, African Studies Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cyan, M.R. (2007). Discussant Comments. In: Martinez-Vazquez, J., Searle, B. (eds) Fiscal Equalization. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-48988-9_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-48988-9_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-48987-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-48988-9
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)