Centralized Versus Decentralized Provision of Local Public Goods: a Political Economy Analysis

By Tim Besley, Stephen Coate. 2003

1,174 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/74c4286d6eb3eb83309b62e9a5f2a92714a62e93

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Barry R. Weingast
2. J. Faguet
3. Fábio Sanchez
4. Feng Xie
5. Rohini Pande
6. W. Oates
7. Ben Lockwood
8. Paul J. Gertler

In Political Science and International Relations

1. W. Oates
2. Barry R. Weingast
3. J. Faguet
4. Fábio Sanchez
5. Ben Lockwood
6. Rohini Pande
7. Paul J. Gertler
8. P. Bardhan

Citations in the corpus

• Modeling the Growth of Transportation Networks: A Comprehensive Review (2009, background): “The trade-off between centralized versus decentralized provision of general public goods has been a classic problem examined in public economics and political science (Oates 1972; Besley and Coate 2003).”
• The Time Variation in Risk Appetite and Uncertainty (2019, methodology): “Therefore, we can essentially use a linear projection to retrieve the estimates for Equation (14) and then use regular maximum likelihood to estimate the conditional variance process specified in Equations (15)– (16).”
• A Structural Model of Government Formation (2002, background): “…growing area of research in political economy, whose aim is to assess the political and economic consequences of political institutions (see, e.g., Besley and Coate (1997, 1998), Grossman and Helpman (1994), Myerson (1993), and Persson, Roland, and Tabellini (1997, 2000)).4 For the most part, the…”
• Decentralisation and Accountability in Infrastructure Delivery in Developing Countries (2006, neutral): “4 See Bardhan (2002), Besley and Coate (2003) , Bolton and Roland (1997), Laffont and Pouyet (2000), Lockwood (1998), Seabright (1996) and Tommasi and Weinschelbaum (1999).”
• Grassroots Democracy and Local Governance: Evidence from Rural China (2007, background): “On the other hand, the literature of fiscal decentralization has shown that decentralization may hinder the provision of public goods beyond a jurisdiction (e.g., Besley & Coate, 2000).”
• Does Decentralization Increase Government Responsiveness to Local Needs? Evidence from Bolivia (2002, neutral): “Besley and Coate (1999) provide a model in which this restriction is lifted.”
• THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC GOOD PROVISION: EVIDENCE FROM INDIAN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (2004, background): “Moreover, whether decentralized public good provision better represents the needs of the local population remains sensitive to assumptions about heterogeneity of preferences in the local population and extent of spillovers associated with different public goods (Besley and Coate 2003).”
• On the Endogenous Allocation of Decision Powers in Federal Structures (2005, positive): “Besley and Coate [5] assume that both regions share the costs according to an exogenous rule, whereas in our model the cost allocation is determined endogenously.”