No. 53 (2020)
Artículos

Entorno fiscal federal y eficiencia de los gobiernos locales en México: el impacto de la crisis de 2008

PDF (Español (España)) HTML (Español (España)) XML (Español (España))
  • Alfonso Mendoza-Velázquez,
  • Mónica Rubio García
Alfonso Mendoza-Velázquez
Centro de Investigación e Inteligencia Económica CIIE-UPAEP
Bio
Mónica Rubio García
Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla
Published July 31, 2020

Copyright (c) 2020 Economía teoría y práctica

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Los modelos de Segunda Generación de Federalismo Fiscal consideran los efectos de equidad (equity) y eficiencia de las transferencias federales en sistemas fiscales descentralizados (Oates, 2005), así como los incentivos de los gobiernos locales para generar prosperidad en las regiones a partir de inversión pública (Weingast, 2009). Las transferencias pueden afectar negativamente el desempeño de las administraciones públicas al promover gastos desvinculados a sus ingresos propios. A partir de medidas de productividad extraídas de un índice de Malmquist este trabajo investiga la relación que guarda el entorno fiscal federal con la productividad, la eficiencia y el cambio técnico de las administraciones públicas estatales en México de 2003 a 2013.

PDF (Español (España)) HTML (Español (España)) XML (Español (España))

References

  1. Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., & Tanzi, V. (2010). Public sector efficiency: evidence for new EU member states and emerging markets. Applied Economics, 42(17), 2147-2164.
  2. Alene, A. D. (2010). Productivity growth and the effects of R&D in African agriculture. Agricultural Economics, 41(3?4), 223-238.
  3. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The review of economic studies, 58(2), 277-297.
  4. Artana D., Auguste S., Cristini M., Moskovitz C. y Templado I. (2012) “Sub-National Revenue Mobilization in Latin American and Caribean Countries: The Case of Argentina”. Fundación de Investigaciones Latinoamericanas, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (IDB) Working Paper Series Nº IDB-WP-297.
  5. Ávila Abud Jorge Alberto y Oscar Javier Cárdenas Rodriguez. 2012, El Impacto de las Transferencias Condicionadas en la Eficiencia Técnica de las Entidades Federativas. En http://www.cefp.gob.mx/portal_archivos/convocatoria/pnfp2012/ pnfp2012_segundolugar.pdf Accesado 13 de septiembre, 2013.
  6. Balassone, F., Franco, D., & Zotteri, S. (2006). EMU fiscal indicators: a misleading compass?. Empirica, 33(2-3), 63-87.
  7. Balaguer-Coll, M.T., Prior, D. & Tortosa-Ausina, E. Decentralization and efficiency of local government Ann Reg Sci (2010) 45: 571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-009-0286-7.
  8. Block, S. A. and Vaaler, P. M. (2004). The Price of Democracy: Sovereign Risk Ratings, Bond Spreads and Political Business Cycles in Developing Countries. Journal of International Money and Finance, 23(6):917–946.
  9. Brender, A., & Drazen, A. (2005). How do budget deficits and economic growth affect reelection prospects? Evidence from a large cross-section of countries(No. w11862). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  10. Butkiewicz, J. L., & Yanikkaya, H. (2011). Institutions and the impact of government spending on growth. Journal of Applied Economics, 14(2), 319-341.
  11. Caves, D. W., Christensen, L. R., & Diewert, W. E. (1982). The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1393-1414.
  12. Celasun, O. and Harms, P. (2011). Boon Or Burden? The Effect Of Private Sector Debt On The Risk Of Sovereign Default In Developing Countries. Economic Inquiry, 49(1):70–88.
  13. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European journal of operational research, 2(6), 429-444.
  14. Dimitrakopoulos, S. and Kolossiatis, M. (2015). State Dependence and Stickiness of Sovereign Credit Ratings: Evidence from a Panel of Countries. Journal of Applied Econometrics, forthcoming.
  15. Duygun, M., Ozturk, H., & Shaban, M. (2016). The role of sovereign credit ratings in fiscal discipline. Emerging Markets Review.
  16. Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of operational research, 132(2), 245-259
  17. Eaton, J., & Gersovitz, M. (1981). Debt with potential repudiation: Theoretical and empirical analysis. The Review of Economic Studies, 48(2), 289-309.
  18. Färrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 120(3), 253-290
  19. Ferri, G., Liu, L. G., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1999). The procyclical role of rating agencies: Evidence from the East Asian crisis. Economic Notes, 28(3), 335-355.
  20. Gamkhar, Shama and Shah, Anwar (2007). The impacto of intergorvernmental fiscal transfers: a synthesis of the conceptual and empirical literature. En: Boadway and Sha, Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: principles and practice. IRBD The World Bank, DOI: 10.1596/978-0-8213-6492
  21. Hanusch, M. and Vaaler, P. M. (2013). Credit Rating Agencies and Elections in Emerging Democracies: Guardians of Fiscal Discipline? Economics Letters, 119(3):251–254.
  22. Hernández-Trillo, Fausto y Jarillo-Rabling, Brenda (2008). Is local beautiful? Fiscal decentralization in Mexico, World Development, 36(9), pp. 1547-1558.
  23. Holtz-Eakin, D., Newey, W., & Rosen, H. S. (1988). Estimating vector autoregressions with panel data. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1371-1395.
  24. Inman, R.P. (2008). The flypaper effect. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 14579.
  25. Koopmans, T. C. (1951). Efficient allocation of resources. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 455-465.
  26. Kumar, M. and Ter-Minassian, T. (2007). Promoting Fiscal Discipline. International Monetary Fund.
  27. Ligthart, J. E., & van Oudheusden, P. (2015). In government we trust: The role of fiscal decentralization. European Journal of Political Economy, 37, 116-128.
  28. Navarro-Chávez JCL y Delfin-Ortega, OV (2017). Educación y Pobreza en México. Un análisis de eficiencia a nivel estados. Acta Universitaria, 27(NE-1), 33-45.
  29. Malmquist, S. (1953). Index numbers and indifference surfaces. Trabajos de Estadística y de Investigacion Operativa, 4(2), 209-242.
  30. McLure, C.E. (1995). Comment on “The Dangers of Descentralization”, The World Bank Research Observer, 10(2), pp. 221-226
  31. Oates, W.E. (2005). Toward a second-generatio theory of fiscal federalism. International Tax and Public Finance. Vol 12, pp.349-373.
  32. Pinilla, D.E., Jiménez, J.D. y Granados (2014). La decentralización y la eficiencia social del estado en América Latina. Una evaluación de frontera a partir de resultados recientes. Instituto de Estudios Fiscales, No 3.
  33. Primož Pevcin, (2014) "Efficiency levels of sub-national governments: a comparison of SFA and DEA estimations", The TQM Journal, Vol. 26 Issue: 3, pp.275-283, https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-12-2013-0127
  34. Prud’homme, R. (1995). The dangers of descentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10(2), pp. 201-220.
  35. Rosen, H.S. and Gayer, T. (2014). Public Finance. Mac Graw Hill education, tenth edition.
  36. Scheel, H. (2001). Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. European journal of operational research, 132(2), 400-410.
  37. Selva, C. y Sanz, M.M. (2015). La eficiencia municipal en la prestación de bienes y servicios públicos: de la medición de su nivel al análisis de sus posibles causas. Tribuna Economía, 882, ICE.
  38. http://www.revistasice.com/CachePDF/ICE_882_157-170__0A353A34DFF887A62F6074EC55B9E7DC.pdf
  39. Sewel, D.O. (1996). “The dangers of descentralization” according to prudg’homme: some further aspects. The World Bank Research Observer, 11(1), pp. 143-150.
  40. Shi, M., & Svensson, J. (2006). Political budget cycles: Do they differ across countries and why?. Journal of public economics, 90(8), 1367-1389.
  41. Sinclair, T. J. (2005) The New Masters of Capital: American Bond Rating Agencies and the Politics of 42 Creditworthiness, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  42. Thanassoulis, E., Portela, M. C., & Despic, O. (2008). Data envelopment analysis: the mathematical programming approach to efficiency analysis. The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity growth, 251-420.
  43. Tiebout, C.M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), pp. 416-424.
  44. White, L. J. (2010). Markets: The Credit Rating Agencies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2):211–26.
  45. Worthington Andrew & Brian Dollery (2000). An empirical survey of frontier efficiency measurement techniques in local government, Local Government Studies, 26:2, 23-52, DOI:10.1080/03003930008433988