Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Goals and forms of granting budgetary resources to the regions from the federal center on a gratuitous basis
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-11-108-126
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the theory, methodology and practice of providing the regions with resources from the federal budget on a gratuitous basis from the point of view of the development of their budgetary potential. The article identifies four methodological approaches (delegation, smoothing, point management and incentives) to the goal of providing interbudgetary transfers, their features, practical implementation, problems and effects from their use in Russia. The key indicators of the dynamics of the provision of interbudgetary transfers to Russian regions are investigated, the results of interregional budgetary equalization are shown. A matrix has been developed for the typology of interbudgetary transfers according to the key criteria for their provision and scenarios for the development of budgetary potential. It is concluded that in terms of economic development of territories, stimulation of the growth of budgetary potential is considered as a priority approach. A number of measures are proposed to improve the efficiency of the provision of budgetary resources on a gratuitous basis.
About the Author
M. A. Pechenskaya-Polishchuk
Vologda Research Center, RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maria A. Pechenskaya-Polishchuk
Vologda
References
1. Arlashkin I. Y., Gangan A. S., Deryugin A. N., Proka K. A. (2016). Provision of block transfers: The experience of the USA, Australia and Canada. Financial Journal, No. 1, pp. 41—49. (In Russian).
2. Afanasyev R. S., Bogdanov L. N., Gulidov R. V., Leonov S. N. (2019). “Model” budgets: Implications for the subjects of the Russian Federation. Spatial Economics, No. 1, pp. 132—156. (In Russian). https://doi.org/ 10.14530/se.2019.1.132-156
3. Bukhvald E. M. (2018). 20 years of the concept of improving interbudgetary relations: Old problems and new approaches. Bizness. Obrazovanie. Pravo, No. 4, pp. 54—61. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.25683/VOLBI.2018.45.431
4. Valentey S. D. (2009). Economics of federal relations and regional policy. Spatial Economics, No. 4, pp. 7—22. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.14530/se.2009.4.007-022
5. Golovanova N. V. (2018). Interbudgetary transfers: A variety of terms and Russian practice. Financial Journal, No. 2, pp. 24—35. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31107/2075-1990-2018-2-24-35
6. Deryugin A. N. (2016). Regional alignment: Are there incentives for development? Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 170—191. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2016-6-08
7. Zotova A. I., Kirichenko M. V. (2013). New in the mechanism of interbudgetary transfers. Finance and Credit, No. 35, pp. 14—20. (In Russian).
8. Igudin A. G. (2005). Actual problems of interbudgetary relations. Finance, No. 10, pp. 15—19. (In Russian).
9. Ilyin V. A., Povarova A. I. (2014). Problems of regional development as a reflection of the effectiveness of public administration. Economy of Region, No. 3, pp. 48—63. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17059/2014-3-4
10. Ilyin V. A., Povarova A. I. (2016). The effectiveness of public administration. 2000—2015. Contradictory outcomes are a natural result. Vologda: ISERT RAS. (In Russian).
11. Klistorin V. I., Novikova T. S., Suspitsyn S. A. (2000). Improvement of interbudgetary relations in the region. Novosibirsk: IEIE SB RAS Publishing house. (In Russian).
12. Lyubimtsev Y. I. (2000). Priorities for improving interbudgetary relations. Ekonomist, No. 6, pp. 21—33. (In Russian).
13. Minakir P. A. (2001). Systemic transformations in the economy. Vladivostok: Dalnauka. (In Russian).
14. Nazarov V., Mamedov A., Siluanov A., Zarubin A. (2012). Problems of interbudgetary relations in Russia. M.: Gaidar Institute Publ. (In Russian).
15. Pechenskaya M. A. (2018a). Topical issues of the formation of the budgetary potential of the territory: Factors, principles, structural elements. Problems of Territory’s Development, No. 6, pp. 149—161. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.15838/ptd.2018.6.98.10
16. Pechenskaya M. A. (2018b). Budget potential in the territory potential system: Theoretical and methodological aspects. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 61—73. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2018.5.59.4
17. Povarova A. I. (2012). The state and problems of budgetary provision of the subjects of the North-West of the Russian Federation: The final report on research. Vologda. (In Russian).
18. Pchelintsev O. S., Minchenko M. M. (2000). Trends in the development of financial federalism and the problem of transfers. Studies on Russian Economic Development, No. 3, pp. 89—97. (In Russian).
19. Pchelintsev O. S. (2004). Regional economy in the system of sustainable development. Moscow: Institute of Economic Forecasting, RAS. (In Russian).
20. Tatarkin A. I., Pykhova I. A. (2000). Territorial interbudgetary relations in the economy in transition (problems, solutions, recommendations). Ekaterinburg: Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian).
21. Khristenko V. B. (2002). Interbudgetary relations and regional finance management: Experience, problems, prospects. Moscow: Delo. (In Russian).
22. Yushkov A. O., Oding N. Y., Savulkin L. I. (2016). The role of subventions in Russian fiscal federalism. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 10, pp. 49—64. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2016-10-49-64
23. Bahl R. (2010). Conditional vs. unconditional grants: The case of developing countries. In: J. Kim, J. Lotz, N. J. Mau (eds.). General grants versus earmarked grants: Theory and practice. The Copenhagen Workshop 2009. Albertslund—Seul: The Korea Institute of Public Finance and the Danish Ministry of Interior and Health, pp. 126—148.
24. Bergvall D., Charbit C., Kraan D.-J., Merk O. (2006). Intergovernmental transfers and decentralised public spending. OECD Working Papers on Fiscal Federalism, No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k97b11z2hxw-en
25. Bird R., Smart M. (2002). Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: International lessons for developing countries. World Development, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 899—912. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00016-5
26. Boadway R., Shah A. (eds.) (2007). Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: Principles and practice. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6492-5
27. Bradford D., Oates W. (1971). Towards a predictive theory of intergovernmental grants. American Economic Review, Vol. 61, No. 2, pp. 440—448.
28. Da Silva M. O., Kurlyandskaya G., Andreeva E., Golovanova N. (2009). Intergovernmental reforms in the Russian Federation: One step forward, two steps back? Washington, DC: World Bank.
29. Fisher R. (2016). State and local public finance. Routledge, 2016.
30. Musgrave R. A. (1961). Approaches to a fiscal theory of political federalism. In: Public finances: Needs, sources and utilization. National Bureau of Economic Research. New York: Princeton University Press, pp. 97—134.
31. Oates W. E. (1999). An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 1120—1149. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.37.3.1120
32. Weingast B. R. (1995). The economic role of political institutions: Market-preserving federalism and economic development. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 3—31.
33. Yilmaz S., Bindebir S. (2003). Intergovernmental transfers: Concepts and policy issues. World Bank Institute and Korea Development Institute.
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Pechenskaya-Polishchuk M.A. Goals and forms of granting budgetary resources to the regions from the federal center on a gratuitous basis. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2021;(11):108-126. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-11-108-126
Views:
728
Email this article 
