+7 925 966 4690, 9am6pm (GMT+3), Monday – Friday
ИД «Финансы и кредит»

JOURNALS

  

FOR AUTHORS

  

SUBSCRIBE

    
Finance and Credit
 

Vectors of budgetary decentralization and interbudgetary regulation efficiency

Vol. 20, Iss. 35, SEPTEMBER 2014

Available online: 19 September 2014

Subject Heading: INTERBUDGETARY REGULATION

JEL Classification: 

Pages: 2-11

Shash N.N. National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation
nat_vshu@mail.ru

Borodin A.I. Financial University under Government of Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation
aib-2004@yandex.ru

Tatuev A.A. Moscow State University of Food Production, Moscow, Russian Federation
arsen.tatuev@mail.ru

The article notes that using special-purpose programs and introducing a result-oriented budgeting into budgetary practice require reconsidering the issues related to budget decentralization of the budgetary system both horizontally and vertically. However, for the time being, the federal center and the majority of the RF subjects have little interest in applying new technologies of the budgetary process organization. This situation makes it impossible to take full advantage of program-based budgeting.

Keywords: program-based budgeting, program, budget, budgetary, policy, interbudgetary regulation, efficiency, process, federalism

References:

  1. Asatryan Z., Feld L.P., Geys B. Partial Fiscal Decentralization and Sub-National Government Fiscal Discipline: Empirical Evidence from OECD Countries, October 2012, pp. 1–28. Available at: Link.
  2. Baskaran T., Hessami Z. Fiscal Decentralization and Budgetary Stability, Transitory Effects and Long-Run Equilibria. In: Fiscal Relations across Government Levels in Times of Crisis – Making Compatible Fiscal Decentralization and Budgetary Discipline. Brussels, European Commission, DG ECFIN, pp. 79-103.
  3. Blochlinger H., Charbit C. Fiscal Equalization. OECD Economic Studies, January 2008, no. 44, pp. 1–22.
  4. Blochlinger H., King D. Less Than You Thought: the Fiscal Autonomy of Sub-Central Governments. OECD Economic Studies, February 2006, no. 43, pp. 155–188.
  5. Dziobek C., Mangas C.G., Kufa Ph. Measuring Fiscal Decentralization – Exploring the IMF’s Databases. IMF Working Papers, June 2011, pp. 1–30.
  6. Duranton G., Gobillon L., Overman H. G. Assessing the Effects of Local Taxation Using Microgeografic Data. The Economic Journal, Sept. 2011, vol. 121, no. 555, pp. 1017–1046.
  7. Gruber J. Public Finance and Public Policy. New York, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010, 860 p.
  8. Hagen J., Foremny D. Sub-national Budgetary Discipline during Times of Crisis: the Impact of Fiscal Rules and Tax Autonomy, Oct. 2012, pp. 1–31. Available at: Link.
  9. Hammond G.W., Tosun M.S. The Impact of Local Decentralization on Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Counties. Journal of Regional Science, Feb. 2011, vol. 51, no 1, pp. 47–64.
  10. Rosefielde S., Vennikova N. Fiscal Federalism in Russia: a Critique of the OECD Proposals. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2004, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 307–317.
  11. Wallis J.J., Oates W.E. Decentralization in the Public Sector: An Empirical Study of State and Local Government. In: Fiscal Federalism, Quantitative Studies, pp. 5–32. Available at: Link.

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-8709 (Online)
ISSN 2071-4688 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 30, Iss. 3
March 2024

Archive