Measuring fiscal descentralization in Argentina and Denmark - Núm. 15-1, Junio 2019 - Ars Boni et Aequi - Libros y Revistas - VLEX 838830206

Measuring fiscal descentralization in Argentina and Denmark

AutorCristian Altavilla
CargoPh.D. in Law and Social Sciences (University of Córdoba, Argentina) with a Ph.D. Visiting in Political Science at Bologna University Italy. Assistant Professor of Subnational Constitutional Law, School of Law, National University of Córdoba and Siglo 21 University (UES21), Córdoba, Argentina. Director of the School of Law UES21 University, ...
Páginas30-51
ALTAVILLA, Cristián (2019): “Measuring fiscal descentralization in Argentina and Denmark”, Ars
Boni et Aequi, Año 15, N° 1, pp. 30-51.
30
Measuring fiscal descentralization in Argentina and Denmark
Midiendo la Descentralización fiscal en Argentina y Dinamarca
Cristian Altavilla*
Universidad Siglo 21
Córdoba, Argentina
ABSTRACT: Fiscal decentralization has been a worldwide trend in the last decades,
especially in Europe and in Latin America. This process, however, have not been
uniform in all countries, acquiring different forms in different countries and within a
same country over the years; those processes even involved not only federal states, but
also traditionally unitary states. Decentralization, then, is a concept that has broken the
theoretical boundaries between unitary states and federal states, transcending them.
Therefore, a comparative study not only between federal countries but also between
unitary countries is required. The aim of this paper is to compare the process of
decentralization in two countries with completely different institutional settings
(Argentina and Denmark) in order to measure the degree of fiscal decentralization
reached, to understand how this process has operated throughout the last decade and
which outcomes has been achieved in these two countries.
KEY WORDS: decentralization; fiscal federalism; subnational governments; local
autonomy; taxation.
RESUMEN: La descentralización fiscal ha sido una tendencia mundial en las últimas
décadas, especialmente en Europa y América Latina. Este proceso, sin embargo, no ha
sido uniforme en todos los países, adquiriendo diferentes formas en distintos países y
dentro de un mismo país a lo largo de los años; estos procesos incluso involucraron no
solo Estados federales, sino también Estados tradicionalmente unitarios. La
descentralización, entonces, es un co ncepto que ha roto las fronteras teóricas entre los
Estados unitarios y federales, trascendiéndolas. En consecuencia, un estudio
comparativo no solo entre Estados federales sino también entre Estado unitarios resulta
necesario. El objetivo de este trabajo es comparar el proceso de descentralización en dos
países con diseños institucionales completamente diferentes (Argentina y Dinamarca)
con la finalidad de medid el grado de descentralización fiscal alcanzado, para entender
cómo han operado estos procesos a través de la última década y qué resultados se han
alcanzado en estos dos países.
PALABRAS CLAVE: descentralización; federalismo fiscal; gobiernos subnacionales;
autonomía local; tributación.
INTRODUCTION
* Ph.D. in Law and Social Sciences (University of Córdoba, Argentina) with a Ph.D. Visiting in Political
Science at Bologna University Italy. Assistant Professor of Subnational Constitutional Law, School of
Law, National University of Córdoba and Siglo 21 University (UES21), Córdoba, Argentina. Director of
the School of Law UES21 University, Postdoctoral Researcher (CONICET, Argentina) and Postdoctoral
Fellow at Aarhus University, Denmark and Harvard University. e-mail: cristianaltavilla@hotmail.com
Artículo recibido el 12 de abril de 2018 y aceptado para publicación el 22 de mayo de 2018
Ars Boni et Aequi, Año 15, N° 1, pp. 30-51.
31
Decentralization of functions and competences from central governments to subnational
units (intermediate and/or local levels) has been a worldwide trend in the last decades.
This process, however, have not been uniform in all countries, acquiring different forms
in different countries and within a same country over the years. The most significant
thing it was the fact that decentralization has occurred in different institutional settings,
involving not only federal states, but also traditionally unitary states.
A comparative study not only between federal countries but also between unitary
countries is required. The underlying concept of decentralization appears. The different
processes of decentralization (political, administrative, fiscal, spatial, etc.) all around the
world, involving even traditionally unitary countries, makes it difficult to distinguish
between those decentralized-unitary countries from federal countries. Decentralization,
then, is a concept that has broken the theoretical boundaries between unitary states and
federal states, transcending them. And the question of how different are federal and
unitary constitutional arrangements in practice arises: “Even in unitary states central
governments are rarely as autonomous as the formal institutional set-up might indicate.
They depend on the resources of actors in their surroundings for political support,
information, expertise or implementation of policies. Formal institutions are
underpinned or supplanted by informal policy networks in which central government
actors interact with actors in their surroundings in order to formulate and implement
policies”1. In federal countries, in turn, may occur the opposite: In fact, it may be that
subnational units in federal systems more often underutilize their constitution-making
competency than they overutilize it.
Being aware that decentralization not necessarily raises the power of subnational
governments in all cases, as commonly thought2, and beyond normative considerations
regarding fiscal decentralization3, this paper is focused on the question regarding the
degree in which fiscal decentralization has occurred in countries with different
institutional settings. This rises the following research questions: ¿in which extent or
degree fiscal decentralization has occurred? ¿how fiscal decentralization has operated
and which outcomes has achieved in different institutional settings? ¿in which extent the
different process of fiscal decentralization increased the degree of fiscal autonomy of
subnational governments?
With these questions in mind, the paper intends to compare two different countries:
Argentina and Denmark. Subnational units in Argentina and Denmark operate within
different political, economic and legal frameworks. Denmark, like the rest of the
Scandinavian countries, has decentralized to such a degree that many scholars lumped it
together with the federal states, because their local governments absorb such high shares
of total public expenditure (Ter-Minassian 1997; Fossati and Panella 1999; Wellisch
2000 – quoted b y Swenden4). The comparison between these two cases will help us to
understand the similarities and differences between unitary and federal arrangements. I
have chosen the period 2000-2010 in order to test the current stage of decentralization in
the new millennium and because there is a significant gap in the current literature
regarding the last decade.
1 BLOM-HANSEN (1999) p. 238.
2 See FALLETI (2005).
3 See TIEBOUT (1956), OATES (1972) and TER-MINASSIAN (1997).
4 SWENDEN (2006) p. 17.

Para continuar leyendo

Solicita tu prueba

VLEX utiliza cookies de inicio de sesión para aportarte una mejor experiencia de navegación. Si haces click en 'Aceptar' o continúas navegando por esta web consideramos que aceptas nuestra política de cookies. ACEPTAR