Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 73
Julio
Diciembre
2022
Recibido el 14/03/2022 Aceptado el 21/05/2022
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 73 (2022), 128-150
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Fiscal decentralization practices in
developing countries
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4073.06
Vitaliy Oluyko *
Igor Samsin **
Olha Stohova ***
Tatiana Filipenko ****
Anastasiia Filipenko *****
Abstract
The objective of the article was to identify and describe the
current state of scal decentralization in Ukraine, Armenia
and Georgia and the problems and achievements of territorial
communities. Observation and comparative analysis were
the main tools used. The study showed that eective scal
decentralization of territorial communities requires the
implementation of the relevant experience of developing countries
that have achieved signicant results. Fiscal decentralization, the transfer
of taxes and spending powers to lower levels of government has become
an important strategy for modern governance in developing countries.
Fiscal decentralization is facilitated by a combination of citizens’ struggle to
actively participate in the management process and dissatisfaction with the
outcomes of the centrally planned economy. It is concluded that adequate
decentralization strengthens the organs of local self-government and forces
states to be more accountable to their citizens. In this regard, the adequacy
and prospects of Sweden’s scal decentralization approach were also noted
as a model worthy of study.
Keywords: decentralization; scal administration; distribution of
competencies; scal potential; decentralization Index.
* Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Professor at the Department of Law, Khmelnytsky
Cooperative Trade and Economic Institute, 29000, Khmelnytsky, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.
org/0000-0002-0038-8557
** Doctor of Law Sciences, Professor at the Department of Constitutional, Administrative and Financial
Law, Leonid Yuzkov Khmelnytskyi University of Management and Law, 29000, Khmelnytsky, Ukraine.
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5901-9115
*** PhD of Political Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Fundamental Jurisprudence and
Constitutional Law, Academic and Research Institute of Law, Sumy State University, 40007, Sumy,
Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7010-556X
**** Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Professor at the Department of Public Management and
Administration, Educational and Scientic Institute of Management, Mariupol State University,
03037, Kyiv, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9870-0889
***** PhD of Law Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Public and Legal Disciplines, Faculty
of Economics and Law, Mariupol State University, 03037, Kyiv, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https:// orcid.
org/0000-0002-9628-7426
129
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
Prácticas de descentralización scal en
los países en desarrollo
Resumen
El objetivo del artículo fue identicar y describir el estado actual de la
descentralización scal en Ucrania, Armenia y Georgia y los problemas
y logros de las comunidades territoriales. La observación y el análisis
comparativo fueron las principales herramientas utilizadas. El estudio
mostró que la descentralización scal efectiva de las comunidades
territoriales requiere la implementación de la experiencia relevante de
los países en desarrollo que han logrado resultados signicativos. La
descentralización scal, la transferencia de impuestos y facultades de gasto
a los niveles inferiores de gobierno se ha convertido en una estrategia
importante para la gobernanza moderna en los países en desarrollo. La
descentralización scal se ve facilitada por una combinación de la lucha
de los ciudadanos por participar activamente en el proceso de gestión y la
insatisfacción con los resultados de la economía centralmente planicada.
Se concluye que una descentralización adecuada fortalece los órganos de
autogobierno local y obliga a los estados a ser más responsables ante sus
ciudadanos. En este sentido, como modelo digno de estudio se señaló
además la idoneidad y las perspectivas del enfoque de descentralización
scal de Suecia.
Palabras clave: descentralización; administración scal; distribución
de competencias; potencial scal; índice de
Descentralización
Introduction
The long-term economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has
disrupted traditional nancial ows in many countries. Ali et al. (2022)
state that this trend indicated an urgent need to intensify the mobilization
of domestic resources and improve the national tax administration.
Strengthening and using the full potential of domestic taxation is one of the
most important sources of development nancing and should therefore be
a policy priority for modern governments. The above transformations are
especially relevant in developing countries.
Many developing countries around the world are transferring
responsibility to lower levels of government, as decentralization is
considered vitally important for achieving sustainable economic growth
and development. Teremetskyi et al. (2021) indicate that the priority goal
in this context is to promote bottom-up regional development by giving
130
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
subnational governments more freedom in identifying programmes that
match the public interest, as well as local and regional development goals.
Digdowiseiso (2022) maintains that dierent institutional conditions for
scal decentralization can signicantly contribute to growth in developing
countries. Dierent types of scal authorities have a signicant impact on
income distribution and ethnic inequality. As Digdowiseiso (2022) writes,
it depends on the level of institutions and defence spending by certain
developing countries.
In recent decades, the introduction of decentralization systems in many
developing countries, especially in Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, has
been largely motivated by policy features and cooperation or integration
into the EU. Kohut and Kovacs-Rump (2021) emphasize that more ecient
mobilization of domestic resources and eective scal administration
systems through scal decentralization reforms can oer a way to
strengthening public budgets and increasing the role of taxation as a source
of nancing for eective development.
Fiscal decentralization involves the distribution of taxation and
spending powers between the central government and local governments.
In other words, scal decentralization gives local self-government bodies
considerable autonomy in terms of revenues and expenditures, including
the power to collect taxes and fees. This can increase the scal space of
local self-government bodies and improve service delivery as well as the
well-being of the population. A broader denition includes the nancial
perspective, where not just the right to collect taxes, but economic resources
allocated to the regional level are decentralized. Countries need to meet
several key institutional preconditions for scal decentralization to be
eective. Obeng (2021) attributes the following preconditions there:
1) a stable political environment;
2) eective autonomous subnational governments;
3) institutional capacity at regional/state and local levels of government;
4) government accountability;
5) eective democratic electoral infrastructure at all levels of government;
6) the ability to increase income at the local level to the appropriate level.
The geographical proximity of local self-government bodies to their
electors, direct beneciaries of public services, makes local self-government
bodies to allocate scal resources eciently.
It is important to conduct a qualitative legal analysis of real scal
decentralization reforms in a situation where economic theory proposes
competing hypotheses. At the same time, any empirical analysis faces
131
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
signicant challenges. First, the transfer of scal authority to local
governments is often gradual. It impossible to separate the eect of scal
decentralization from the inuence of other trends without a sharp increase
in scal autonomy. Second, scal reforms are usually a large-scale policy
that aects all local self-government bodies at the same time. Therefore,
the analysis should be based for the most part on comparisons between
countries, with due regard to the proper control over all signicant factors
of transformation. So, relevant research in developing countries should be
the focus.
In view of the foregoing, the aim of the article is a comparative analysis
of the realities of implementing the scal decentralization concepts in
developing countries. The aim involved the following research objectives:
1) generalize the main features of eective implementation of scal
decentralization in the countries under research;
2) compare statistics on the implementation of scal decentralization
in dierent jurisdictions and identify the country with the highest
eciency rate;
3) identify promising directions of further improvement of the scal
decentralization practices tested in the developed countries.
1. Literature Review
The choice of research topic correlates with modern vectors of academic
research conducted by theorists in dierent countries. The work of
Teremetskyi et al. (2021) was the background for this study. The grounds
for dening the concept of “scal decentralization” were summarized in the
research, thus forming the author’s perception of this denition.
The work of Digdowiseiso (2022) also had an impact on the author’s
position on the research topic. The work of researcher allowed outlining the
vector of research on the transformation of strategies and policies of many
countries aimed at strengthening the capacity of local communities in the
course of scal decentralization. In turn, the article by Ali et al. (2022)
helped the author to realize the need to further introduce mechanisms
for achieving scal capacity in developing countries. The study took into
account the work of Obeng (2021) in the eld of addressing the problems
and practical diculties that arise in the course of scal decentralization,
democracy and the size of government.
The work of Abuselidze (2021) on the analysis of the main components
of intergovernmental relations and their regulation in the context of
decentralization of scal policy and Rotulo et al. (2020) on the peculiarities
132
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
of the budget deserve special attention. federalism and scal decentralization
in health care. The research of Ter-Minassian (2020), the results of which
was used in the article, emphasizes the importance of intergovernmental
scal cooperation and subnational revenue autonomy. This work helped to
trace the transformation of the main features of the innovative approach
to decentralization processes, which consist of scal, administrative and
political components.
This study also allowed for the relevant vectors, such as innovation
(novelty), objectivity, subjectivity, purposefulness, demand, implementation
in practice, the eectiveness of local communities, which were outlined by
Yang et al. (2020) and Zhu et al. (2022). The achievements of Erlingsson
(2021) on the analysis of the results of decentralization and the development
of multilevel trust of territorial communities were also taken into account.
Active research on this issue conrms that the scal decentralization
contributes to the strengthening of local communities in order to ensure
prosperity. Therefore, it is urgent to conduct research on new research
criteria.
2. Methods
Given the chosen research topic has many aspects and given the large
volume of empirical material, the authors clearly structured and phased the
research (Figure 1). The structure of the research was based on comparative
studies of the positive practice of the selected developing countries and on
the grouping of the data obtained.
133
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
Figure 1. The research designs
Source: Authors development
The study involved a combination of parametric and non-parametric
approaches underlying the author’s view of scal decentralization and the
eectiveness of the competencies of local self-government bodies. Various
methodological tools were used in the article. The practical method of
observation was the main method of research. This method was conductive
for achieving the aim and fullling the objectives of the study, establishing
the guiding principles of scal decentralization in the cross-border context,
and focusing on the appropriateness of transformation in developing
countries through the principles and programmes used in Sweden.
The comparative method was also important in writing the article,
which allowed not only to compare the main statistical indicators of scal
decentralization in the studied countries, but also to propose the latest
conceptual changes based on best practices. This method also further
substantiated the appropriateness of assimilating scal decentralization
practices of Sweden into the legal eld of the studied countries as soon as
possible.
134
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
General decentralization programmes were considered in the article as
a system that involves the competencies of dierent levels of government
and local business related to the relationship of exchange on the allocation
of scal, nancial, material, administrative and other resources in their
various combinations. This approach allowed considering the activities
of states in the eld of decentralization through the prism of declared
international principles and systemic internal environment of states.
The empirical content of the processes of transformation of intrasystemic
scal relations of power interactions in the selected states was based on the
historical genetic method. It allowed describing the essential characteristics
of scal decentralization policy, reveal the causal links in the development
of decentralization and subsequent budgetary transformations, as well as
in the formation of the discourse of state bodies on economic cooperation
between the central government and the regions. Besides, this method
also allowed creating an empirical background for further evaluation of
the performance of government and scal decentralization as such on
the example of the dynamics of development of states and their economic
indicators.
The comparative historical research was used to determine the essential
characteristics of government participation in the implementation of scal
decentralization policies and programmes at dierent stages. This method
was used to identify the positive features and critical dierences in the
practice of implementing the principles of scal decentralization in the
studied countries.
The statistical method was indispensable at various stages of the
study. It was used to analyse the dynamics of various aspects of scal
decentralization programmes at the national and subnational levels, as
well as to study a signicant body of data characterizing the results of the
actions of the selected states.
A signicant array of data was thoroughly studied in the research,
including forty-eight references in the text of the article.
3. Results
Fiscal decentralization as part of the transfer of powers has been
implemented by many developed countries in order to nd the appropriate
balance between central government control and decentralized governance.
The nancial potential of local self-government bodies is based on the ability
to attract available and potential nancial resources from the relevant
area to nance economic, social and environmental needs. The rational
and eective directions of their distribution and use are established. This
135
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
generates a balance between public services and the needs and preferences
of local communities and citizens, increasing the responsibility of local
authorities for the relevant functions and the eciency of the public sector
as a whole through the introduction of elements of competition.
The positive vector of regional decentralization is increasing the self-
suciency of communities, creating a background for the development of
civil society. Disadvantages of decentralization include complicated process
of implementing strategic government programmes and giving priority
to regional political elites. The eectiveness of nancial decentralization
is inuenced by a number of economic, socio-political and institutional
factors, including constitutional provisions that reect the history of
decentralization in each country; balance of power between dierent levels
of government; structure and practice of intergovernmental relations;
and the degree of regional economic, ethnic and social inequalities that
can and often cause conicts of opinion and hinder constructive dialogue.
Local authorities must perform decentralized functions eectively, have a
sucient level of revenue, and have the power to decide on expenditures.
And any decentralization programme must cover the most important
elements of public spending, namely scal sustainability, ecient allocation
of resources, operational eciency and transparency.
The state scal decentralization programme should include the gradual
activation of functions for local and regional authorities in line with capacity
building and legal reform. It is also necessary to optimize the full budget
cycle and include decentralization in sector ministries, agencies and state-
owned enterprises.
Eective decentralization requires further adaptation of institutional
mechanisms for intergovernmental coordination, planning, budgeting,
nancial reporting and implementation. Such arrangements may include
both specic rules (for example, in the development of scal transfers) and
provisions for regular intergovernmental meetings and periodic reviews of
intergovernmental arrangements (See Figure 2).
136 Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
Figure 2. Forms of scal decentralization (summarized by the
authors based on the results of empirical material studied)
The OECD (2019) has developed ten guidelines on decentralization that
apply to all types of countries and which currently remain the leading tools
for the eective implementation of decentralization concepts (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Guiding principles of priority actions of states on the
way to the implementation of scal decentralization (according
to the OECD (2019)
137
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
According to the UN Human Development Index (HDI), a country with
less than 0.80 points is considered to be developing. Ukraine ranks 74th in
the world with a score of 0.779 (Human Development Reports, 2022). The
examples of the development of countries in this context are: Armenia —
81st with a score of 0.776, Georgia — 61st with a score of 0.812. For 2022,
the World Bank classies countries and territories with Gross National
Income (GNI) per capita of $ 12,696 or higher as high-income countries. The
countries with the values below this number will be considered developing
countries. For example, Ukraine’s GNI is $ 3,570, Armenia’s — $ 4,220,
and Georgia’s — $ 4,270 (World Bank, 2020). The main goal of developing
countries is to restore economic growth while maintaining a full system of
social guarantees to ensure public goods.
Ukraine, like most developing countries, is pursuing a process of
further decentralization that includes political, administrative and scal
components. Local budgets of Ukraine act as a nancial plan for the creation
and use of nancial resources necessary to ensure the functions and powers
of local self-government bodies (Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2022b).
Fiscal decentralization in Ukraine is directly dependent on administrative
and political decentralization and is a politically necessary reform for
Ukraine. The Budget Code of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2022a)
stipulates that the principle of subsidiarity is the background for the budget
system of Ukraine. This principle consists in the distribution of types of
expenditures between the state budget and local budgets, as well as between
local budgets in such a way as to bring the provision of public services as
close as possible to their direct consumer.
Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 333-r (Verkhovna
Rada of Ukraine, 2014) provides that implementation of the basics
of nancial decentralization has become a key task in the economic
and administrative system of Ukraine. Ukraine has the National
Decentralization Project, which includes 25 Programmes. The programme
supporting decentralization reform in Ukraine — U-LEAD with Europe:
Local Empowerment, Accountability and Development Programme — is
the leading one (Decentralisation. International Cooperation, 2016). The
amount of assistance to Ukraine under this Programme from 01.01.2016
to 31.12.2023 will be EUR 152.3 million. The amalgamated communities
have acquired the powers and resources that cities of regional signicance
have, in particular — the transfer of 60% of the personal income tax to the
local budgets of ATCs (amalgamated territorial communities) under their
own powers.
Besides, revenues from taxes remain entirely at the local levels: single
tax, prot tax on enterprises and communal nancial institutions property
tax (real estate, land, transport). The implementation of the concept of
nancial provision of local self-government was to ensure the strengthening
138
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
and balance of local budgets through the redistribution of revenue and
spending powers between dierent levels of government and the application
of new methodological approaches to budgeting. Such approaches include,
in particular: redistribution of expansive determination of local budget
revenues; transition to the organization of medium-term nancial planning
at the local level; use of results-oriented budgeting methods, and increasing
eciency of local budget expenditures.
The nancial decentralization process has entailed a number of changes.
The main direction was ensuring the fullment of revenue and expenditure
obligations of local budgets. Balancing local budgets by providing constant
sources of income; development of mechanisms to eliminate and prevent the
occurrence of unfunded expenditures; nancing of state powers transferred
to the local level required the implementation. Particular attention was
paid to the formalization of the procedure for providing material assistance
to communities from local and central budgets.
According to IMF (2020), the 2020 tax revenues to GDP ratio in Ukraine
was as follows: the central government — 25.61%, local governments —
6.32%. For 9 months of 2021, the general fund of local budgets of Ukraine
received UAH 247 billion 948 million 700 thousand excluding inter-
budgetary transfers (Government Portal, 2021). The increase in revenues
to the general fund amounted to 20.1% or + UAH 41 billion 442 million
600 thousand compared to the corresponding period of 2020. The personal
income tax revenues for January-September 2021 amounted to UAH 150
billion 489 million. The increase in PIT revenues is 19.5% or + UAH 24
billion 550 million 600 thousand compared to the corresponding period of
2020. There were 16 regions that had higher personal income tax growth
rates than the average in Ukraine.
Ternopil region had a growth of over 25%. Dnipropetrovsk, Kirovohrad,
Poltava and Vinnytsia regions had the lowest growth rates. Revenues from
land fees amounted to UAH 26 billion 620 million 200 thousand, the
growth of revenues is 14.9%, or UAH 3 billion 455 million 300 thousand
compared to January-September 2020. Actual revenues from real estate
tax for 9 months of 2021 amounted to UAH 5 billion 838 million 600
thousand, the growth of revenues is 38.3% or UAH 1 billion 616 million 900
thousand UAH compared to the corresponding period of 2020. Revenues
from the single tax amounted to UAH 32 billion 400 thousand, the increase
in revenues is 21.1% or UAH 5 billion 574 million 800 thousand compared
to January-September 2020. In accordance with the budget legislation, the
Government also provided intergovernmental transfers to local budgets in
the amount of UAH 120 billion 872 million 800 thousand for 9 months of
2021, which is 95.3% of the planned appropriations for January-September
2021, in particular: the basic subsidy amounted to UAH 11 billion 777
million 300 thousand or 100% to the scheduled appropriations; educational
139
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
subvention amounted to UAH 72 billion 837 million 700 thousand or 99.5%
to the schedule.
The task of radical restructuring of Ukraine’s budget system to meet the
new requirements is urgent. Non-subsidized communities have problems
with the revenues and are unable to cover the expenditures, which creates
problems with the nancing of the public sector. The lack of sucient
sources of funding at the state and regional levels still entails inecient
management of local nances. Ukraine has also a problem of imperfect
relations between the state and local budgets, there are no administrative
supervision bodies over the activities of local self-government bodies at the
level of public authorities.
In Armenia, as a unitary, partially decentralized country, self-
government operates only at the municipal level (Legislation of the CIS
Countries, 2002). Property and land taxes are 100% accumulated in the
municipal budget. The local budget annually receives income tax and
dierent fees. However, the tax revenues to GDP ratio in 2020 was as
follows: the central government — 26.21%, local governments — 0.50%
(International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2020). Municipal budget revenues
include taxes, non-tax revenues and subsidies. Tax revenues include land
tax (95%), property tax (95%), income tax (15%), deductions and fees from
various types of taxes to the state budget. Non-tax revenues include rents,
nes, local fees, etc.
Transfers consist of subsidies and transfers from other sources.
According to the legislation, municipalities receive subsidies, budget
loans and loans from the state budget (Legislation of the CIS Countries,
1997). The municipality is allocated a subsidy to verify the revenues
and expenditures of its budgets. The procedure for receiving grants and
subsidies is regulated by the Law on Accounting (Legislation of the CIS
Countries, 2019). According to this law, the allocation of subsidies is based
on the population and the budget allocations rate. Armenia’s budget system
is a set of two-tier budgets. The state and local budgets are based on a single
nancial and monetary policy and government taxation policy. The scal
decentralization policy is reected in the Law on the State Budget. The
government needs the scal decentralization strategy.
The economic and nancial background of self-governing units of
another state — Georgia — is governed by basic laws: the Code of Local Self-
Government of Georgia (Legislative Bulletin of Georgia, 2022a), the Budget
Code of Georgia (Legislative Bulletin of Georgia, 2021), the Tax Code of
Georgia (Legislative Bulletin of Georgia, 2022b), Law on Georgia on Grants
No. 331 (Legislative Bulletin of Georgia, 2020), and Law of Georgia on Local
Assemblies No. 1401 (Legislative Bulletin of Georgia, 1999). On December
31, 2019, the Government of Georgia adopted the Decentralization Strategy
for 2020-2025. The principle of the Decentralization Strategy is the state’s
140
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
commitment to support nancially weakened self-governing associations
through a fair distribution of funds.
The aim of this strategy is to increase the powers of self-government
bodies, scal decentralization and improvement of the local government.
Based on the action plan in the eld of decentralization strategy, it is
planned to revise local taxes, distribute taxes on a utility license by local
self-government bodies, determine the types of property to be provided
to municipalities, as well as rules and conditions for their provision. The
subsidy for equalization of scal capacity is allocated from the state budget
for the purpose of nancial support of local self-government bodies for
performance of their duties.
In Georgia, the rights and responsibilities of each level of revenue and
expenditure mobilization are not clearly dened. This can also be stated
regarding the distribution of taxes between the centre and the budgets of the
regions, as well as issues of economic subsidies etc. This is reected in the
volume of mobilization of tax revenues only at the level of budgets and its
ratio to GDP in 2020: the central government — 22.45%, local governments
— 0.89% (IMF, 2020). The lack of local budget funds in Georgia, which
is supplemented by regulatory revenues, is the result of minimizing the
quality of local tax authorities.
In this regard, it is also necessary to take into account the problems
of economic development: the general decline in production; limited
economic resources in rural areas; transfer of social facilities to local
administrations; uncertainty in the status of branches of enterprises and
organizations located in the districts; restriction of the rights to natural
resources of local self-government bodies. Sectoral legislation is still not in
line with the government decentralization principles, while the progress on
revision and harmonization of legislation is very slow. There is also a need
to further develop the legal environment to promote and stimulate inter-
municipal cooperation.
The indicator of decentralization of revenues, which is the ratio of
local budgets and their revenues to the state budget, shows that Ukraine
has the best situation with this indicator. From 2014 to 2018, the ratio of
local budgets and their revenues to state budget revenues in Ukraine varied
from 22.5% to 28.9%. In Georgia, this level ranges between 8% and 12%,
in Armenia — between 3% and 5% (CORLEAP, 2020). In Ukraine, which
shows the best results on this indicator, the level of centralized spending
varies between 49% and 58%, in Georgia — 19-22%, in Armenia this gure
was about 7-8%.
Improvements resulting from a successful budget decentralization
programme can only be achieved through high quality governance in
decentralized agencies of national and subnational governments. In OECD
141
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
countries, regional governments have, on average, complete discretion
over 70% of their tax revenues (OECD, 2022). Another 15% of their income
comes from general taxes, which require the consent of governments to the
distribution rate. On the contrary, local governments have, on average, full
or almost complete autonomy over 13% of their revenues only. However,
local authorities retain discretion with certain limitations on additional 62%
of tax revenues. According to the OECD report (OECD, 2018), subnational
governments in OECD countries account for 40% of government spending,
corresponding to 16% of GDP, and this share has increased in recent
decades for most countries. Expenditure obligations of subnational
governments have changed over the past 25 years, in particular as a result
of decentralization processes that have transferred responsibilities to the
subnational level in sectors such as education, health, social protection,
economic development, urban and spatial planning.
Sweden — a unitary country with a high share of local government
spending — is an example of such changes. The state structure of Sweden
is highly decentralized and includes two subnational levels: 21 counties
and 290 municipalities. Welfare is generally high in the regions of Sweden,
which are among the 20% of the largest OECD regions in terms of civic
participation (OECD, 2020). According to the UN Human Development
Index, Sweden ranks 7th in the world with a score of 0.945 (Human
Development Reports, 2022). Sweden’s GNI is $ 54,050 (World Bank,
2020).
It can be stated that the provision of services is crucial for subnational
governments, as the bulk of their spending is on education, general public
services and social protection. The Constitution of Sweden explicitly
recognizes the local self-government principle. The Law of Sweden on
Local Self-Government No. Ds 2004:31 (Government Oces of Sweden,
2015) denes the scope of local autonomy, establishes specic powers and
lists the sources of income for local entities. Local budget revenues come
from tax revenues (about two-thirds of the total), total transfers from the
central government (about 15% for municipalities and 9% for districts),
targeted government transfers (3-4%), and user fees and rents (about 6%
for municipalities and 3% for counties).
Local authorities have the right to collect personal income taxes to meet
their nancial obligations and are free to decide on the level of their taxes.
At the aggregate level, the state tax rate is about 20% and the district tax
rate is about 10%. In general, 50% of Sweden’s public spending is shared
by the central government and 50% — by municipalities and counties.
The scal equalization system is governed by the central government. The
redistribution of resources between dierent subnational governments
relies on dierent tax bases and expenditure rates.
142
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
According to the European Committee of the Regions (2022b), the
revenue autonomy at the local level is higher in Sweden than the EU
average (67% vs. 53% in 2018), resulting in lower dependence on central
government transfers than in the EU (32% vs. 47% in 2018). Local own
revenues accounted for 33% of total government revenues in 2017, which is
higher than the EU average (13%). The aggregate ratio, which reects aspects
of scal decentralization of both revenues and expenditures, suggests that
Swedish subnational governments have a degree of scal decentralization
(66% in 2017) that is well above the EU average (17% in 2017). The
indicator, which measures the level of tax autonomy, also indicates the high
scal autonomy of local governments in Sweden, with 98% of total local
tax revenues being under the full control of local authorities (European
Committee of the Regions, 2022b).
Local budgets are prepared according to a conservative approach aimed
at a surplus of 2-3%. Expenditures in districts and municipalities are
most concentrated, and higher than the EU average, in healthcare (27%
of total local expenditures), social protection (27%) and education (22%).
Other relevant areas of expenditure are general public services (11%) and
economic issues (6%). The ratio of tax revenues to GDP in 2020 in Sweden
was as follows: the general government — 39.90%, local self-government
bodies — 13.03% (IMF, 2020).
Today, the Decentralization Index (European Committee of the Regions,
2022a) is widely used in the 27 EU Member States, which is an interactive tool
for various aspects of decentralization (political, administrative and scal).
According to the Index, high scal decentralization is 35-100%. Average
decentralization: expenditure ratio — 27-34%. Low decentralization: the
expenditure ratio is 20-26%. Very low decentralization: cost ratio — 0-19%.
Overall decentralization ranges from 1 to 3 points and is 2.4 points in
Sweden. Assessment of decentralization by parameters: administrative —
2.3 at the local level and 1.1 at the regional level; scal — 3; political — 1.8.
Expenditure ratio, that is the relative share of total subnational expenditures
against total government expenditures is 46%. Sweden has created stable
local revenues with a local income tax and tax equalization system.
Comparing the achievements of scal decentralization in terms of tax
revenues in GDP from local authorities in Sweden and such countries as
Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, it can be stated that this reform has not yet
achieved nal results in these countries, although Ukraine has made more
progress in implementing this strategy (Figure 4).
143
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
Figure 4. The amount of local government revenues in % of
national income in Sweden, Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia for
2017 - 2021 (according to the generalized data of the European
Committee of the Regions (2022a).
SKL International (2021) states that in 2021 the government of Sweden
has committed itself to supporting the Ukrainian government in its eorts
to implement a decentralization reform. The Support to Decentralization
in Ukraine Project will help the local self-government sector to take on
more powers and responsibilities. Advisory, analytical and coordinating
support will be provided to create a general and more reliable empirical
background for the development of scal policy in the transformed system
of decentralized governance, which is being developed.
4. Discussion
According to Vincent (2022), decentralized decision-making makes it
possible to positively correlate with economic growth through more ecient
provision of public services and their targeting, reduction of production costs
and prices, as well as creating more eective incentives for all participants
in economic activity. Abuselidze (2021) emphasized that tax autonomy of
local self-government is a relative concept, which is determined by whether
the governing bodies have a sucient amount of their own income and
144
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
whether they have the right to dispose of it independently in accordance
with their functions. According to the researcher, this does not mean that
they are completely isolated from each other. On the contrary, the centre
and the municipalities have common interests for the benet of society and
relevant coordinated strategic actions in economic and political priorities.
Hanif et al. (2020) indicates that the positive impact of scal
decentralization on economic growth is weakened if the country is corrupt
and has weak institutions and/or suers from political instability. According
to researchers, a relatively corruption-free country with sound institutions
and a stable political environment could make more use of the benets of
scal decentralization to accelerate economic growth.
Rotulo et al. (2020) proved that the creation of local pools reduces the
eect of cross-subsidization and protection against nancial risks guaranteed
by the national pool, turning scal decentralization into regressive choices.
Researchers conclude that this not only aggravates interregional inequality,
but can also pave the way for tough policies, such as healthcare: service
quality declines with limited access to public resources, prompting patients
in poorer regions to seek help from other regions.
Ter-Minassian (2020) state that eective scal decentralization models
must be adapted to the context of individual countries. Policymakers and
experts in each area of vertical and horizontal cooperation should take part
in sectoral discussions. There is also a potentially useful role for cooperation
between the relevant units of each subnational level of government.
According to Digdowiseiso (2022), the negative impact of scal
decentralization on economic growth should not be interpreted as
supporting centralized systems of public administration. The eectiveness
of scal decentralization in relation to growth should be assessed from the
perspective of institutions (Digdowiseiso, 2022).
Erlingsson (2022) recommended that a research programme needs to be
developed in Sweden that will systematically analyse the ways in which the
political system distributes responsibilities between levels of government
and how this aects trust and satisfaction at the local, regional and central
levels.
The central government should pay attention to the heterogeneity
of the impact of scal decentralization on cities with dierent strategic
backgrounds and levels of innovation (Yang et al., 2020), and the fact that
the scal decentralization system plays an important role in improving
green development (Zhu et al., 2022). It is necessary to conduct a constant
(annual) analysis of standard deviation and other indicators that describe
the eectiveness in order to better understand how eective the system of
horizontal equalization of budget revenues of territories is.
145
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
Teremetskyi et al. (2021) emphasized that it is necessary to develop
an adequate political and institutional environment, improve the quality
of governance, close ties between local governments and the population
and the formation of eective channels of communication. According
to researchers, special attention should be paid to strengthening the
responsibility of local self-government bodies to society and the ght
against corruption.
The main directions of strengthening the nancial independence of local
self-government should be realized primarily through a clear denition of
the structure and powers of central and local executive bodies. Kohut and
Kovacs-Rump (2021) identied that a feature of tax reform in Ukraine
should be the transition from the scal principle of tax policy to the
development of a new model that would provide the necessary amount of
budget revenues to support the functioning of the state, adhering to the
principle of social justice of distributing tax burden in the state.
Conclusions
Eective scal decentralization mechanisms can help governments at
dierent levels to identify and mitigate the adverse external eects of their
policies, avoid or reduce tax competition, and make better use of the scale
eect in the provision of certain public services. This policy helps to reduce
the risk of spreading infectious diseases, improve the safety of citizens
during the pandemic, the quality of the environment, as well as promote
consensus on political reforms.
Government operational and scal decentralization is a way to improved
local decision-making, infrastructure development and service delivery, but
many countries are struggling to benet from decentralization, delegation
and transfer of powers. Challenges include accountability, capacity,
coordination, freedom of action, technology and variability.
The scope of policy in developing countries should be redistributed
between the centre and local self-government bodies. The centre should
determine the appropriate legislative framework within which local self-
government will be free to make decisions, especially when solving socio-
economic problems.
Fiscal decentralization requires:
• strengthening the role of local taxes in the formation of the revenues
of local budgets;
• nding and implementing reserves for the formation of own
revenues of local governments;
146 Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
• promptly reporting on the implementation of nancial policy and
choosing forms of scal support for local governments to accumulate
their own scal capacity and increase self-ecacy;
• presenting new approaches to the budget process to the general
public in order to prevent public resistance to scal decentralization.
Encouraging local authorities to increase their own budgets, reduce
regional tensions, and create proper access for investment development
should be the focus.
The representatives of the Tax Service and the Treasury should be
involved in the analysis of factors promoting cooperation in improving the
management of revenues and expenditures, while ministers or secretaries
of nance responsible for national and subnational public nances should
be involved in the discussion of scal policy reforms.
The clearly determined steps to implement scal decentralization
in Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia will help build local political and
institutional capacity. The range of responsibilities of local authorities in
Sweden directly aects the lives of most citizens. So, there is a potential
for the implementation of relevant experience in the practice of scal
decentralization in developing countries. This will be a promising vector of
further research for the authors.
Bibliographic References
ABUSELIDZE, George. 2021. “The intergovernmental relations and their
regulation in the context of decentralization of scal policy” In: E3S Web
of Conferences. Vol. 280, Paper 02010.
ALI, Merima; SHIFA, Abdulaziz; SHIMELES, Abebe; WOLDEYES, Firew.
2022. “Building scal capacity in developing countries: Evidence on
the role of information technology.” In: National Tax Journal. Vol. 74.
Available online. In: https://www.cmi.no/publications/7793-building-
fiscal-capacity-in-developing-countries-evidence-on-the-role-of-
information-technology. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
CORLEAP. 2020. Principles of scal decentralization and nancial autonomy
of local and regional authorities in the Eastern Partnership countries.
COR-2020-01263-00-00-INFO-TRA (RU). Available online. In:
https://cor.europa.eu/en/our-work/Documents/CORLEAP/
Political%20Reports/Fiscal%20Decentralisation%20Policies%20
and%20Financial%20Autonomy%20%20of%20Local%20and%20
Regional%20Authorities%20in%20the%20EaP%20Countries%20(-
Anar%20Ibrahimov,%20Azerbaijan,%202021)/CORLEAP%20
147
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
Report%20on%20Fiscal%20Decentralisation_RU.pdf. Consultation
date: 08/12/2021.
DECENTRALISATION. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION. (U-LEAD with
Europe). 2016. Program “Support to Decentralization Reform in Ukraine
/ U-LEAD with Europe: Program for Ukraine on Local Empowerment,
Accountability and Development”. Available online. In: https://donors.
decentralization.gov.ua/project/u-lead. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
DIGDOWISEISO, Kumba. 2022. “Is scal decentralization growth enhancing?
A cross-country study in developing countries over the period 1990–
2014” In: Economies. Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 1-17.
ERLINGSSON, Gissur Ó. 2021. “A stranger thing? Sweden as the upside down
of multilevel trust” In: Journal of Trust Research. Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 22-41.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS. 2022a. Decentralization Index.
Available online. In: https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/
Pages/Decentralization-Index.aspx?countryName=sweden#.
Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS. 2022b. Division of Powers.
Sweden Fiscal Powers. Available online. In: https://portal.cor.europa.
eu/divisionpowers/Pages/Sweden-Fiscal-Powers.aspx. Consultation
date: 08/12/2021.
GOVERNMENT OFFICES OF SWEDEN. 2015. The Swedish Local Government
Act Ds 2004:31. Available online. In: https://www.government.se/legal-
documents/2004/09/ds-200431/. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
GOVERNMENT PORTAL. 2021. Revenues of local budgets for 9 months of
2021 increased by 20.1% compared to last year and amounted to almost
248 billion hryvnias. Available online. In: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/
news/dohodi-miscevih-byudzhetiv-za-9-misyaciv-2021-u-porivnyanni-
z-minulim-rokom-zrosli-na-201-i-stanovlyat-majzhe-248-mlrd-griven.
Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
HANIF, Imran; WALLACE, Sally; GAGO-DE-SANTOS, Pilar. 2020. “Economic
growth by means of scal decentralization: An Empirical study for federal
developing countries” In: SAGE Open. Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 23-35.
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS (UNDP). 2022. Global Human
Development Indicators. Available online. In: https://hdr.undp.org/en/
countries. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF). 2020. Detailed Revenue
Breakdown. Available online. In: https://data.imf.org/regular.
aspx?key=60991467. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
148
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
KOHUT, J; KOVACS-RUMP, H. 2021. “Financial decentralization in Ukraine
and its impact on local budgets: achievements and shortcomings” In:
Ecient economy. Vol. 9, pp. 399-416.
LEGISLATION OF THE CIS COUNTRIES. 1997. Law of the Republic of
Armenia dated July 21, 1997 No. ЗР-137 On the budgetary system of the
Republic of Armenia. Available online. In: https://base.spinform.ru/
show_doc.fwx?rgn=3052. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
LEGISLATION OF THE CIS COUNTRIES. 2002. Law of the Republic of
Armenia dated June 5, 2002 No. ЗР-337 On Local Self-Government.
Available online. In: https://base.spinform.ru/show_doc.fwx?rgn=2919.
Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
LEGISLATION OF THE CIS COUNTRIES. 2019. Law of the Republic of Armenia
dated December 20, 2019 No. ЗР-282 On Accounting. Available online.
In: https://base.spinform.ru/show_doc.fwx?rgn=122358. Consultation
date: 08/12/2021.
LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN OF GEORGIA. 1999. Law of Georgia dated
29/05/1998 No. 1401 On local fees. Available online. In: https://matsne.
gov.ge/ru/document/view/93778?publication=4#!. Consultation date:
08/12/2021.
LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN OF GEORGIA. 2020. Law of Georgia dated
28/06/1996 No. 331 On grants. Available online. In: https://matsne.
gov.ge/ru/document/view/31510?publication=29. Consultation date:
08/12/2021.
LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN OF GEORGIA. 2021. Budget Code of Georgia dated
18/12/2009 No. 2440. Available online. In: https://matsne.gov.ge/ru/
document/view/91006?publication=51. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN OF GEORGIA. 2022a. Code of Local Self-Government
of Georgia dated 05/02/2014 No. 1958-IIს. Available online. In:
https://matsne.gov.ge/ru/document/view/2244429?publication=61.
Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN OF GEORGIA. 2022b. Tax Code of Georgia dated
17/09/2010 No. 3591. Available online. In: https://matsne.gov.ge/
ru/document/view/1043717?publication=183. Consultation date:
04/04/2022.
OBENG, Samuel Kwabena. 2021. “Fiscal decentralization, democracy and
government size: Disentangling the complexities” In: Journal of
International Development. Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 975-1004.
149
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 128-150
OECD. 2018. OECD Regions and Cities at a Glance 2018. OECD Publishing.
Paris, France.
OECD. 2019. Making Decentralisation Work: A Handbook for Policy-Makers,
OECD Multi-level Governance Studies. OECD Publishing. Paris, France.
OECD. 2020. OECD Regions and Cities at a Glance 2020. OECD Publishing.
Paris, France.
OECD. 2022. Fiscal Federalism 2022: Making Decentralisation Work. Available
online. In: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/201c75b6-en/1/3/1/
index.html?itemId=/content/publication/201c75b6-en&_csp_=a8e0f3
3122f039d34aa442f4a032bf8a&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=bo
ok#section-d1e299. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
ROTULO, A; EPSTEIN, M; KONDILIS, E. 2020. “Fiscal federalism vs scal
decentralization in healthcare: a conceptual framework” In: Hippokratia.
Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 107-113.
SKL INTERNATIONAL. 2021. UKRAINE - Support to decentralization.
8 June. Available online. In: https://sklinternational.se/projects/
projekt/ukrainesupporttodecentralization.739.html. Consultation date:
08/12/2021.
TEREMETSKYI, V; SOLYANNIK, K; ZAKOMORNA, K; POPROSHAIEVA,
O; YAKOVCHUK, Y. 2021. “Fiscal decentralization of Ukraine: search
for new approaches for the development of local self-goverment” In:
Financial and Credit Activity Problems of Theory and Practice. Vol. 2,
No. 37, pp. 180-189.
TER-MINASSIAN, Teresa. 2020. Intergovernmental Fiscal Cooperation and
Subnational Revenue Autonomy. Inter-American Development Bank.
Available online. In: https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/
document/Intergovernmental_Fiscal_Cooperation_and_Subnational_
Revenue_Autonomy.pdf. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 2014. Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of
Ukraine of April 1, 2014 № 333-r On approval of the Concept of reforming
local self-government and territorial organization of power in Ukraine.
Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/333-2014-
%D1%80#n8. Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 2022a. Budget Code of Ukraine dated
08.07.2010 № 2456-VI. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.
ua/laws/show/2456-17#Text. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
150
Vitaliy Oluyko, Igor Samsin, Olha Stohova, Tatiana Filipenko y Anastasiia Filipenko
Fiscal decentralization practices in developing countries
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 2022b. Law of Ukraine of May
21, 1997 № 280/97-ВР On local self-government in Ukraine.
Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/280/97-
%D0%B2%D1%80#Text. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
VINCENT, Rose Camille. 2022. Essays in public economics: multi-layer tax
structure and Implications. HAL theses. Available online. In: https://tel.
archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-03506279. Consultation date: 04/04/2022.
WORLD BANK. 2020. GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$). Available
online. In: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD.
Consultation date: 08/12/2021.
YANG, Siying; LI, Zheng; LI, Jian. 2020. “Fiscal decentralization, preference for
government innovation and city innovation: Evidence from China” In:
Chinese Management Studies. Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 391-409.
ZHU, Yongming; ZHOU, Xiaoyu; LI, Junjie; WANG, Fan. 2022. “Technological
innovation, scal decentralization, green development eciency: Based
on spatial eect and moderating eect” In: Sustainability. Vol. 14, No. 7,
paper 4316.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en julio de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 73