Fiscal Decentralization is the devolution of fiscal assignments to lower governments for high growth and better delivery of public services. The current study covering the period from 1972 to 2009 is an attempt to find out the impacts of fiscal decentralization on public services deliveries in Pakistan. Public services are proxy by Gross enrollment at primary school level while fiscal decentralization by fiscal transfer and expenditure sides of devolution. Using time series data, it is found that the individual impacts of fiscal transfer are although insignificant but still support the theoretical proposition regarding fiscal decentralization and public services relationship while delegation of expenditure responsibilities helps in improving the gross enrollment at primary school level. Furthermore the study evident that complete delegation of fiscal responsibilities to lower governments enhance enrollment ratio in Pakistan.
Alderman, H. (1998). “Social Assistance in Albania: Decentralization and Targeted Transfers”. LSMS Working Paper no. 134, World Bank, Washington D.C.
Azfar, O. and J. Livingston (2002). “Federalist Disciplines or Local Capture? An Empirical Analysis of Decentralization in Uganda.” IRIS, University of Maryland.
Azfar, O., S. Kahkonen, and P. Meagher (2001). “Conditions for Effective Decentralised Governance: A Synthesis of Research Findings.” IRIS working paper # 256, University of Maryland.
Azfar, O., S. Kahkonen, J. Livingston, P. Meagher, and D. Rutherford (2000). “Making Decentralization Work: An Empirical Investigation of Governance and Public Services in Uganda.” IRIS, University of Maryland.
Azfar, O.,T. Gurgur, S. Kahkonen, A. Lanyi, and P. Meagher (2000). “Decentralization and Governance: An empirical investigation of public service delivery in the Philippines.” IRIS, University of Maryland.
Bardhan, P. and D. Mookherjee, 1998, “Expenditure Decentralization and the Delivery of Public Services in Developing Countries”, CIDER Working Paper C98/104.
Eskeland, G. and D. Filmer (2002). “Autonomy, Participation, and Learning in Argentine Schools: Findings and Their Implications for Decentralization.” Policy Research Working Paper 2766. World Bank, Washington DC.
Eskeland, G. and D. Filmer, 2000, “Does Decentralization Improve Learning? Autonomy and Parental Participation in Argentine Schools”, mimeo, World Bank.
Estache, A. and S. Sinha (1995). “Does Decentralization Increase Spending on Public Infrastructure?” The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1457.
Faguet, J. and Paul G., 2001, “Does Decentralization Increase Government Responsiveness to Local Needs? Evidence from Bolivia”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2516.
Faguet, J. P. (1997). “Decentralization and Local Government Performance.” World Bank/FAO/GTZ paper for the Technical Consultation on Decentralization, Rome.
Faguet, J.P. (2001). “Does Decentralization Increase Responsiveness to Local Needs? Evidence from Bolivia.” Policy Research Working Paper #2516. World Bank, Washington DC.
Gurgur, T. and A. Shah (2002). “Localization and Corruption: Panacea or Pandora’s Box?” In Ehtisham Ahmad and Vito Tanzi,veditors, Managing Fiscal Decentralization, pp. 46–67. Routledge Press, London and New York.
Galasso, E. and M. Ravallion (2001). “Decentralised Targeting of an Anti-Poverty Program.” Development Research Group Working Paper. World Bank, Washington D.C.
Galasso, E. and M. Ravallion (1998). “Reaching Poor Areas in a Federal System.” Policy Research Working Paper #1901. World Bank, Washington DC.
Habibi, N., C. Huang, D. Miranda, V. Murillo, G. Ranis, M. Sarkar, and F. Stewart (2001). “Decentralization in Argentina.” Economic Growth Center Discussion Paper 825, Yale University.
Huther, J. and A. Shah (1998). “Applying a Simple Measure of Good Governance to the Debate on Fiscal Decentralization.” Policy Research Working Paper Number 1894. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Isham, J. and S. Kähkönen (1999). “What Determines the Effectiveness of Community-based Water Projects? Evidence from Central Java, Indonesia on Demand Responsiveness, Service Rules, and Social Capital.” University of Maryland.
Khaleghian, P (2003). “Decentralization and Public Services: The Case of Immunization.” Policy Research Working Paper 2989. World Bank, Washington, DC.
King, E. and B. Ozler (1998). “What’s Decentralization Got To Do With Learning? The Case of Nicaragua’s School Autonomy Reform. Development,” Research Group Working Paper, World Bank, Washington D.C.
Lieberman, S.S., (2002), “Decentralization and Health in the Philippines and Indonesia: An Interim Report”, East Asia Human Development.
Litvack, J. and J. Seddon (1999), “Decentralization Briefing Notes”, World Bank Institute.
Narayan, P. K. (2005), “The savings and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests,” Applied Economics, 37, 1979-1990.
Narayan, P.K., Narayan, S., (2005), “Estimating income and price elasticities of imports for Fiji in a cointegration framework,” Economic Modelling, 22, 423–438.
Oates, W. (1977). “The Political Economy of Fiscal Federalism”, Lexington Books, Toronto 1977.
Oates, W. (1999). “An essay on fiscal federalism”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXXVII (September 1999), pp. 1120-1149.
Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y. and R. J. Smith, (2001), “Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of long run relationships”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16, 289-326.
Pesaran, M.H. and Shin, Y. (1999), “An autoregressive distributed-led modeling approach to cointegration analysis.” In Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century. The Ragnar Frisch Centennial Symposium, ed. Steinar Strom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pakistan. Ministry of Education & MSU. GOP. (2003). Technical Group Meeting on Devolution and Decentralization: Implications for the Education Sector. Islamabad.
Pakistan. Ministry of Education, Education For All Wing. (2002). Facts and Figures: Islamabad.
Pakistan. Ministry of Education. (2003). Education Sector Reforms: Action Plan 2001-2005. Islamabad.
Pakistan. Ministry of Education. (2001). Education Sector Reforms: Action Plan 2001-2004. Islamabad.
Pakistan. Ministry of Education. (2003). National Plan of Action on Education for All (2001-2015): Islamabad.
Qian, Y. and Weingast (1997). “Federalism as a commitment to preserving market incentives”, Journal of Economic perspectives, Vol II, No. 4: 83-92.
Saeed, M. (2007). “Education System of Pakistan and the UK: Comparisons in Context to Inter provincial and Inter-countries Reflections.” Bulletin of Education & Research, 29 (2), 43-57.
Shah, A (1998). “Balance, Accountability and responsiveness – Lessons About Decentralization.” Policy Research Working Paper No. 2021, December, World Bank, Washington, DC
Shah, A (1998). “Fiscal Federalism and Macroeconomic Governance – For Better or For Worse?” Policy Research Working Paper No. 2005, November, World Bank, Washington, DC
Shah, A. (1994). “The Reform of Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations in Developing and Emerging Market Economies.” World Bank, Washington, DC.
Shah, D.(2003). “Decentralization of educational system in Pakistan”, Presented at UNESCO Seminar on Decentralization Policies and Strategies in Education held at Buenos Aires, Argentina from 30th June to 3rd July, 2003
Shah, D. (2003). “Decentralization in the education system of Pakistan: Policies and strategies.” Paper presented in UNESCO Seminar on Decentralization Policies and Strategies in Education, Buenos Aires, Argentina (p.20-21).
Shami, P.A. & Hussain, K.S. (2006). “Development of education in Pakistan.” Islamabad. Academy of Educational Planning and Management, Ministry of Education (p.11-13 & 61)
West, L. and C. Wong (1995). “Fiscal Decentralization and Growth Regional Disparities in Rural China: Some Evidence in the Provision of Social Services.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 11(4): 70 – 84.
Winkler, D. “Decentralization in Education: An Economic Perspective.” Washington, DC: World Bank, 1989.
Winkler, D. “The Design and Administration of Intergovernmental Transfers: Fiscal Decentralization in Latin America.” World Bank Discussion Paper 235. Washington, DC: World Bank, 1994.
Winkler, D. and Gershberg, Alec. “Education Decentralization in Latin America: The Effects on the Quality of Schooling.” Human Development Department LCSHD Paper Series No. 59. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2000.
Winkler, D. and T. Rounds (1996). “Municipal and Private Sector Response to Decentralization and School Choice.” Economics of Education Review. 15 (4): 365–376.
Zafar, F. (2003) “Fiscal Devolution in Education. Case Study Reflecting Initial Responses.” Islamabad: Ministry of Education.