Abstract

The management process of fiscal policy incorporates a wide analysis of various factors. The dynamic financial approach should be applied in deciding the level of centralization. The article offers the usage of the multicriteria method in selecting fiscal variables as a new instrument for financial evolution. In this article, the hypothesis of decentralization’s impact on economic growth is tested to show the growth opportunities. The implications of the fiscal decentralization index on economic growth across the Baltic States for 2005-2017 were examined using a panel data approach with dynamic effects. The Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) are often considered as a single region with similar economic profiles and common political and social values. They are closely related geographically and historically, particularly during the Soviet era. Although their post-Soviet development has been similar, there are significant differences in local administrative systems and government finances. After restoring independence, the three Baltic countries have been reorganizing their public institutions according to western standards. Each country has some differences in organizing the management of local governments. The study’s novelty is emphasized by supplementing the analysis with a fiscal decentralization index, including 24 fiscal decentralization indicators. The fiscal decentralization index ranges from 0.29 to 0.51. Lithuania (0,29) has the lowest fiscal decentralization index, the highest – Latvia (0.52) in the Baltic countries. The investigated model has revealed that the facts considered produce a statistically significant effect. Results showed a negative relationship between fiscal decentralization and economic growth in the Baltic States from 2005 to 2017. It should not be forgotten that, in some cases, regions are not capable of implementing green and inclusive growth without the influence of the central government.

Keywords: fiscal decentralization, economic growth, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Baltic States, multiple-criteria decision-making.

JEL Classification: H7, H2, E6.

Cite as: Slavinskaite, N., Lapinskiene, G., Hlawiczka, R., & Vasa, L. (2022). Financial Innovation Management: Impact of Fiscal Decentralization on Economic Growth of the Baltic Countries. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 257-271. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2022.1-19

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

References

1. Ahmad, I. (2020). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth. Pakistan Journal of Applied Economics, 30(1), 95-121. [Google Scholar]
2. Akai, N., & Sakata, M. (2002). Fiscal decentralization contributes to economic growth: evidence from state-level cross-section data for the United States. Journal of urban economics, 52(1), 93-108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Akai, N., Nishimura, Y., & Sakata, M. (2007). Complementarity, fiscal decentralization and economic growth. Economics of Governance, 8(4), 339-362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Asatryan, Z., & Feld, L. P. (2015). Revisiting the link between growth and federalism: A Bayesian model averaging approach. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43(3), 772-781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Ashworth, J., Galli, E., & Padovano, F. (2013). Decentralization as a constraint to Leviathan: a panel cointegration analysis. Public Choice, 156(3), 491-516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Barro, R. J. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of political economy, 98(5, Part 2), S103-S125. [Google Scholar]
7. Baskaran, T., & Feld, L. P. (2013). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in OECD countries: is there a relationship?. Public finance review, 41(4), 421-445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Besley, T., & Coate, S. (2003). Centralized versus decentralized provision of local public goods: a political economy approach. Journal of public economics, 87(12), 2611-2637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Blochliger, H., & Egert, B. (2013) Decentralization and economic growth – Part 2: The impact on economic activity, productivity and investment. OECD Working Papers on Fiscal Federalism, (15), 1-25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Bova, M. E., Carcenac, N., & Guerguil, M. M. (2014). Fiscal Rules and the Procyclicality of Fiscal Policy in the Developing World. International Monetary Fund. [Google Scholar]
11. Brauers, W. K. M., Ginevičius, R., & Podviezko, A. (2014). Development of a methodology of evaluation of financial stability of commercial banks. Panoeconomicus, 61(3), 349-367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (1980). The power to tax: Analytic foundations of a fiscal constitution. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
13. Brueckner, J. K. (2006). Fiscal federalism and economic growth. Journal of Public Economics, 90(10-11), 2107-2120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Buser, W. (2011). The impact of fiscal decentralization on economics performance in high-income OECD nations: an institutional approach. Public Choice, 149(1), 31-48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Cantarero, D., & Gonzalez, P. P. (2009). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: Evidence from Spanish regions. Public Budgeting & Finance, 29(4), 24-44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L., Espasa, M., & Mora, T. (2008). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in Spain. Public Finance Review, 36(2), 194-218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Davoodi, H., & Zou, H. F. (1998). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: A cross-country study. Journal of Urban Economics, 43(2), 244-257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Desai, R. M., Freinkman, L., & Goldberg, I. (2003). Fiscal federalism and regional growth: Evidence from the Russian Federation in the 1990s. Available at SSRN 461861. [Google Scholar]
19. Ding, Y., McQuoid, A., & Karayalcin, C. (2019). Fiscal decentralization, fiscal reform, and economic growth in china. China Economic Review, 53, 152-167. [CrossRef]. [Google Scholar]
20. Dobrotă, G., Voda, A. D., & Dumitrașcu, D. D. (2021). The effects of fiscal policy shocks on the business environment. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 22(4), 1084-1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Dobrovolskienė, N. (2016). Finansinių išteklių paskirstymas projektų portfelyje atsižvelgiant į darnumo aspektus. Daktaro disertacija. Vilnius: Technika. 152 p. [Google Scholar]
22. Epifanić, V., Urošević, S., Dobrosavljević, A., Kokeza, G., & Radivojević, N. (2020). Multi-criteria ranking of organizational factors affecting the learning quality outcomes in elementary education in Serbia. Journal of Business Economics and Management. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. European Commission. (2014). National fiscal frameworks and database on numerical fiscal rules. Retrieved from [Link]
24. Farida, N., Suman, A., & Sakti, R. K. (2021). Fiscal Decentralization, Economic Growth and Regional Development Inequality in Eastern Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Applied Economics, 9(2), 1-9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Feld, L., Kirchgassner, G., & Schaltegger, C. (2004). Fiscal Federalism and Economic Performance: Evidence from Swiss Cantons, Marburg Working Paper on Economic. 20 p. [Google Scholar]
26. Filippetti, A., & Sacchi, A. (2016). Decentralization and economic growth reconsidered: The role of regional authority. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(8), 1793-1824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
27. Finžgar, M., & Brezovnik, B. (2019). Direct international comparison of EU member states fiscal decentralization systems with the Conceptual Index of Fiscal Decentralization (CIFD) in the Context of European Charter of Local Self-Government (ECLSG). Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 56(1). [Google Scholar]
28. Gemmell, N., Kneller, R., & Sanz, I. (2013). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: spending versus revenue decentralization. Economic Inquiry, 51(4), 1915-1931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Ginevičius, A. (2011). Rinkodaros ekonominio efektyvumo didinimas: Daktaro disertacijos santrauka. Vilnius: Technika. [Google Scholar]
30. Ginevičius, R., & Zubrecovas, V. (2009). Selection of the optimal real estate investment project based on multiple criteria evaluation using stochastic dimensions. Journal of business economics and management, 10(3), 261-270. [Google Scholar]
31. Ginevičius, R., Krivka, A., & Šimkūnaite, J. (2010). The model of forming competitive strategy of an enterprise under the conditions of an oligopolic market. Journal of business economics and management, 11(3), 367-395. [Google Scholar]
32. Ginevičius, R., Podvezko, V., & Bruzge, Š. (2008). Evaluating the effect of state aid to business by multicriteria methods. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 9(3), 167-180. [Google Scholar] []
33. Grisorio, M. J., & Prota, F. (2015). The short and the long-run relationship between fiscal decentralization and public expenditure composition in Italy. Economics Letters, 130, 113-116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
34. Groenendijk, N., & Jaansoo, A. (2016). Fiscal federalism in transition countries: the three Baltic states compared. Public Finance & Management, 16(3). [Google Scholar]
35. Hooghe, L., Marks, G., & Schakel, A. (2010). The rise of regional authority: A comparative study of 42 democracies. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
36. Iimi, A. (2005). Decentralization and economic growth revisited: an empirical note. Journal of Urban Economics, 57(3), 449-461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. Kendall, M. G., & Gibbons, J. D. (1970). Rank correlation methods 4th ed. Griffin, London. [Google Scholar]
38. King, G. J., Vanags, E., Vilka, I., & McNabb, D. E. (2004). Local government reforms in Latvia, 1990–2003: Transition to a democratic society. Public Administration, 82(4), 931-950. [Google Scholar]
39. Lapinskienė, G., Peleckis, K., & Radavičius, M. (2015). Economic development and greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union countries. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 16(6), 1109-1123. [Google Scholar] [Google Scholar]
40. Lapinskiene, G., Tvaronavičiene, M., & Vaitkus, P. (2014). Greenhouse gases emissions and economic growth evidence substantiating the presence of environmental Kuznets curve in the EU. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 65-78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Libby, R., & Blashfield, R. K. (1978). Performance of a composite as a function of the number of judges. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21(2), 121-129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Linnas, R. (2011). Attempts at Local Government Reform in Estonia. Kunnallistieteellinen aikakauskirja 2/11, 178-195. [Google Scholar]
43. Liu, Y., Martinez-Vazquez, J., & Wu, A. M. (2017). Fiscal decentralization, equalization, and intra-provincial inequality in China. International Tax and Public Finance, 24(2), 248-281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Lozano-Espitia, I., & Julio-Román, J. M. (2015). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: evidence from regional-level panel data for Colombia. Borradores de Economía; No. 865I. [Google Scholar]
45. Mäeltsemees, S. (2012). Local government in Estonia, in A. M., Moreno (ed) Local Government in the Member States of the European Union: A Comparative Legal Perspective, pp. 157-184, Madrid: INAP. [Google Scholar]
46. Martinez-Vazquez, J., & McNab, R. M. (2003). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth. World Development, 31(9), 1597-1616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Martinez-Vazquez, J., Lago-Penas, S., & Sacchi, A. (2015). The impact of fiscal decentralization: A survey. Societàitaliana di economiapubblica, 695. [Google Scholar]
48. Musgrave, R. A. (1959). The Theory of Public Finance. A Study in Public Economy. New York: McGraw Hill. 628 p. [Google Scholar]
49. Nguyen, L. P., & Anwar, S. (2011). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in Vietnam. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 16(1), 3-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
50. Oates, W. E. (1972). Fiscal Federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 256 p. [Google Scholar]
51. OECD. (2019) Making decentralization Work: a handbook for Policy-Markers. 204 p.
52. Olson, M. (1969). The principle of «fiscal equivalence»: the division of responsibilities among different levels of government. The American economic review, 59(2), 479-487. [Google Scholar]
53. Perez, P., & Cantarero, D. (2006). Descentralización Fiscal y el Crecimiento Económicoen las Regiones Españolas. Papeles de Trabajodel Instituto de Estudios Fiscales, 5–6. [Google Scholar]
54. Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2011). Is fiscal decentralization harmful for economic growth? Evidence from the OECD countries. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(4), 619-643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
55. Rodríguez-Pose, A., Tijmstra, S. A., & Bwire, A. (2009). Fiscal decentralization , efficiency, and growth. Environment and Planning A, 41(9), 2041-2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
56. Schakel, A., Danailova, A., Gein, I., & Hegewald, S. (2018). Final report on updating the Regional Authority Index (RAI) for forty-five countries (2010-2016). Retrieved from [Link]
57. Slavinskaitė, N. (2017). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in selected European countries. Journal of business economics and management, 18(4), 745-757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
58. Slavinskaite, N., Novotny, M., & Gedvilaitė, D. (2020). Evaluation of the fiscal decentralization: Case studies of European Union. Engineering Economics, 31(1), 84-92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
59. Song, X.; Zhou, Y.; Jia, W. (2019). How do Economic Openness and R&D Investment Affect Green Economic Growth?—Evidence from China. Resour. Conserv. Recycle., 146: 405–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
60. Stankevičienė, J., Mencaitė, E. (2012). The evaluation of bank performance using a multicriteria decision making model: a case study on Lithuanian commercial banks. Technological and economic development of economy, 18(1), 189-205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
61. Sun, Z., Chang, C. P., & Hao, Y. (2017). Fiscal decentralization and China’s provincial economic growth: a panel data analysis for China’s tax sharing system. Quality & Quantity, 51(5), 2267-2289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
62. Szarowská, I. (2014). Fiscal decentralization and economic development in selected unitary European countries. European Financial and Accounting Journal, 9(1), 22-40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
63. Thiessen, U. (2003). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in high‐income OECD countries. Fiscal Studies, 24(3), 237-274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
64. Thornton, J. (2007). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth reconsidered. Journal of urban economics, 61(1), 64-70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
65. Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of political economy, 64(5), 416-424. [Google Scholar]
66. Trasberg, V. (2009). Baltic local governments’ fiscal situation: Two decades of reform. Journal of Baltic Studies 40(2): 179-200. [Google Scholar]
67. Vanags, E., & Vilka, I. (2006). Local government in the Baltic states: Similar but different. Local Government Studies, 32(5), 623-637. [Google Scholar]
68. Vilka, I. (2004). Local Government Reforms and Regional Development in Latvia (Ph. D. Dissertation). Riga: University of Latvia, Faculty of Economics and Management.
69. Weingast, B. R. (2014). Second generation fiscal federalism: Political aspects of decentralization and economic development. World Development, 53, 14-25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
70. Wrobel, R. M. (2003). Local administration reform in Estonia: Alternatives from an economic point of view. Post-Communist Economies 15(2): 277-295. [Google Scholar]
71. Yang, Z. (2016). Tax reform, fiscal decentralization, and regional economic growth: new evidence from China. Econ Model 59: 520–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
72. Yushkov, A. (2015). Fiscal decentralization and regional economic growth: Theory, empirics, and the Russian experience, Russian Journal of Economics, 1 (4), 404-418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
73. Zhang, T., & Zou, H. F. (1998). Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China. Journal of public economics, 67(2), 221-240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]