Analyzing the Effects of Fiscal Decentralization and its Environmental Consequences in Iran Provinces

Subject Areas : Labor and Demographic Economics

Azad Khanzadi ¹ ( استادیار گروه اقتصاد دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه )
maryam heidarian ² ( Ph. D. Student of Public Sector Economics, Razi University )
Sara Moradi ³ ( کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه )

Received: 2018-07-16 Accepted : 2018-07-16 Published : 2018-05-22

Keywords: Environmental pollution, Iranian Provinces, JEL Classification: C23, E62, H77, Q50. Keywords: Revenue Decentralization, Expenditure Decentralization,

Abstract :

Abstract This study analyzes fiscal decentralization policies and its environmental consequences, during the period 2005-2015. The results of GMM estimation show that revenue decentralization has negative and significant relationship with pollution. Also other variables results indicate positive relationship between industrialization and energy productivity with pollution. By increasing the relative density of population, pollution is reduced. The results of Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis also indicate rejection of this hypothesis. In addition, presence of multiplication of the neighboring matrix in dependent variable causes an increase in pollution in the provincial level and this indicates the spatial environmental effects in the country's provinces. It is suggested that local governments determine their own financial resources, in this case it can be targeted and based on new revenue resources such as green economy, it can define businesses that which they reduce pollution.  

References:

منابع

-       اکبری، نعمت­الله (1384). مفهوم فضا و چگونگی اندازه­گیری آن در مطالعات منطقه­ای. فصلنامه پژوهش‌های اقتصادی ایران، 7(23): 68-39.

-       دل­انگیزان، سهراب، خانزادی، آزاد، حیدریان، مریم (1395). اثر تغییر قیمت واقعی سوخت بر بهبود تکنولوژی و تولید گازهای گلخانه­ای در بخش حمل­ونقل جاده­ای ایران. فصلنامه مطالعات اقتصاد انرژی،  12(51): 246-215.

-       رحمانی­فضلی، هادی و عرب­مازار، عباس (1395)، تأثیر شکاف بودجه­ استانی بر شکاف درآمد منطقه­ای استان­های ایران با استفاده از مدل PVAR. فصلنامه مدلسازی اقتصادی، 10(2): 93-73.

-       فطرس، محمدحسن، معبودی، رضا (1390). رشد اقتصادی، مصرف انرژی و آلودگی هوا در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد محیط­زیست و انرژی، 1: 211-189.

-       فلاحی، فیروز، حکمتی­فرد، صمد (1392). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر میزان انتشار گاز دی­اکسیدکربن در استان­های کشور (رهیافت داده­های تابلویی). پژوهشنامه اقتصاد انرژی ایران، 6: 150-129.

-       گل­خندان، ابوالقاسم، محمدیان، منصور (1395). بررسی تأثیر تمرکززدایی مالی بر رشد اقتصادی کشورهای منتخب در حال توسعه: رهیافت دو مرحله­ای SGMM. سیاست­های مالی و اقتصادی، 13: 142-115.

-       لشکری­زاده، مریم، تاجداران، سیده نونا (1387)، تجزیه­وتحلیل تئوریکی منحنی زیست­محیطی کوزنتس. فصلنامه مدلسازی اقتصادی،2 (2): 149-131.

-     Alam, S., Fatima, A.,   Butt. (2007). Sustainable development in Pakistan in the Context of energy consumption demand and environmental degradation. Journal of Asian Economics, 18: 825 -837.

-     Farzanegan, M; Mennel, T, (2012). Fiscal decentralization and pollution: Institutions matter. Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics, 22: 1-22.

-     Fredriksson, Per G, Wollscheid Jim R. (2014). Environmental decentralization and political centralization. Ecological Economics, 107: 402-410.

-     Furniss, N. (1974). The political significance of decentralization. Journal of Politics, (36)4.

-     Gibson. C, Lehoucq. F. (2003). The local politics of decentralized environmental policy in Guatemala. Journal of Environment & Development, (12)1: 28-49.

-     He, Q. (2015). Fiscal decentralization and environmental pollution: Evidence from Chinese panel data. China Economic Review, 36: 86-100.

-     Joshi, M.L. (1997). Industrial recruitment policy and rural development: A case study of pulp and paper industry in Alabama. A dissertation submitted to the Graduate faculty of auburn university.

-     Kane, M. J. (1993). Promoting political rights to protect the environment. Yale Journal of International Law, 18: 389-411.

-     Laskowski. S, Richar. M and Blackman. A. (2005). Environmental decentralization in the United States. Discussion Paper, 42: 1-11.

-     List, J.A., Mason, C., (2001). Optimal institutional arrangements for pollution control: evidence from a differential game with asymmetric players. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 42: 277–296.

-     Litvack, J., Ahmad, J., Bird, R. M., (1998). Rethinking decentralization in developing countries. World Bank Sector Studies Series. World Bank: Washington DC.

-     Liu, Z., Qin, C.X., Zhang, Y.J., (2016). The energy-environment efficiency of road and railway sectors in China: evidence from the provincial level. Ecol. Indic. 69: 559–570.

-     Lkhagvadorj. A, (2007). Fiscal federalism and decentralization in Mongolia. Universitätsverlag Potsdam.

-     Lovo. S, (2015). The effect of environmental decentralization on polluting industries in India. Grantham Research Institute for Climate Change and the Environment. London School of Economics, 143: 1-40.

-     Meyer, M. and Persson, O. (1998). Nanotechnology – interdisciplinary, patterns of collaboration and differences in application. Scientometrics. 42: 195-205.

-     Muhereza. F, (2003). Commerce, kings and local government in Uganda: decentralizing natural resources to consolidate the central state. World Resources Institute.

-     Oates, W. E., (2002). A reconsideration of environmental federalism. In: List, J.A., Zeeuw, A.D. (Eds.). Recent Advances in Environmental Economics, Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar: 1- 32.

-     Oates, W. E., Schwab, R.M., (1988). Economic competition among jurisdictions: efficiency enhancing or distortion-inducing. Journal of Public Economics. 35: 333–354.

-     Oates, W. E., Schwab, R.M., (1991). The allocative and distributive implications of local fiscal competition. In: Kenyon, D., Kincaid, J. (Eds.) Competition among States and Local Governments. Urban Institute, Washington, DC: 127–145.

-     Oates, W. E., Schwab, R.M., (1996). The theory of regulatory federalism. In: Oates, W. (Ed.). The Economics of Environmental Regulation. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar: 319–331.

-     Panayotou, T. (2000). Economic growth and the environment. CID Working Paper, 56, Environment and Development Paper, 4.

-     Shim, J.H. (2006). The reform of energy Subsidies for the enhancement of marine sustainability, case study of South Korea. University of Delaware.

-     Sigman, H. (2007). Decentralization and environmental quality: an international analysis of water pollution. NBER Working Paper No. 13098.

-     Sigman, H., (2014). Decentralization and environmental quality: an international analysis of water pollution levels and variation. Land Econ. 90 (1): 114–130.

-     Stern, D. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8).

-     Wiedenhofer, D., Lenzen, M., Steinberger, J.K., (2013). Energy requirements of consumption: urban form, climatic and socio-economic factors, rebounds and their policy implications. Energy Policy 63: 696–707.

-     Zhan. K, Zhang. Z.Y, and Liang. Q.M, (2017).  An empirical analysis of the green paradox in China: From the perspective of fiscal decentralization. Energy Policy, 103: 203-211.

-     Zhang. K.z., Wang. J. and Cui. X.Y. (2011). Fiscal decentralization and environmental pollution: from the perspective of carbon emission. China Ind. Econ: 65-75.