ISO 9001:2015

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, MODERN MANAGEMENT, APPLIED SCIENCE & SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJEMMASSS) [ Vol. 8 | No. 1 (II) | January - March, 2026 ]

Fiscal Decentralisation and Income Inequality: An Empirical Analysis

Ms. Poonam Bamel

Income inequality has increased in many countries over recent decades, renewing interest in institutional and fiscal arrangements that may help reduce distributional disparities. Among these, fiscal decentralisation—broadly referring to how fiscal responsibilities are distributed across levels of government—has attracted growing policy attention. However, empirical evidence on its relationship with income inequality remains limited, particularly in cross-country settings where institutional heterogeneity and data limitations pose significant challenges. This paper examines the association between expenditure decentralisation and income inequality using a balanced panel of 59 countries over the period 1996–2019. In this study, fiscal decentralisation is proxiedby the share of subnational government expenditure in total public expenditure, while income inequality is measuredusing the Gini coefficient. To account for the slow-moving nature of fiscal and distributional variables and to mitigate short-term fluctuations and data gaps, key income and expenditure variables are constructed as five-year lagged averages. The empirical analysis employs panel data techniques, with model selection guided by the Hausman specification test. The baseline estimates are obtained using a random- effects generalized least squares (GLS) framework, controlling for per capita income, trade openness, government size, and regional fixed effects. The results consistently indicate a negative and statistically significant association between expenditure decentralisation and income inequality across alternative model specifications. Higher per capita income and larger government size are also associated with lower inequality, while greater trade openness is weakly associated with higher inequality. Decomposition of the goodness-of-fit measures reveals that the explanatory power of the model is driven primarily by cross-country variation rather than within-country changes over time, highlighting the importance of long-run structural and institutional differences across countries. While the analysis does not establish a causal relationship, the findings suggest that greater decentralisation of public expenditure responsibilities is systematically associated with lower income inequality in the long run. The results underscore the potential relevance of decentralised fiscal structures in shaping distributional outcomes and contribute to the ongoing debate on the equity implications of fiscal decentralisation in a global context.

Bamel, P. (2026). Fiscal Decentralisation and Income Inequality: An Empirical Analysis. International Journal of Education, Modern Management, Applied Science & Social Science, 08(01(II)), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.62823/IJEMMASSS/8.1(II).8677
  1. Akai, N., & Sakata, M. (2005). 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.
  2. Azfar, O., & Livingston, J. (2002). Federalist disciplines or local capture? An empirical analysis of decentralization in Uganda. Journal of Development Studies, 38(6), 1–27.
  3. Bahl, R., & Nath, S. (1986). Public expenditure decentralization in developing countries. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 4(4), 405–418.
  4. Bardhan, P. (2002). Decentralization of governance and development. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(4), 185–205.
  5. Bird, R. M., & Vaillancourt, F. (Eds.). (1998).Fiscal decentralization in developing countries. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Cavusoglu, T., & Dincer, O. (2015). Does Decentralization Reduce Income Inequality? Only in Rich States. Southern Economic Journal, 82(1), 285–306. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44114330
  7. Faguet, J.P. (2004). Does decentralization increase government responsiveness to local needs? Evidence from Bolivia. Journal of Public Economics, 88(3–4), 867–893.
  8. Himanshu (2015). ‘Inequality in India’. Seminar, 672: 30–35.
  9. Lessmann, C. (2012). Regional inequality and decentralization: An empirical analysis. Environment and Planning A, 44(6), 1363–1388.
  10. Milanovic, B. (2016).Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. Harvard University Press.
  11. Musgrave, R. A. (1959).The theory of public finance: A study in public economy. McGraw-Hill.
  12. Oates, W. E. (1972).Fiscal federalism. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  13. Padovano, F. (2007). Fiscal decentralization and government performance: Evidence from OECD countries. Public Choice, 131(1–2), 101–126.
  14. Pal, P., & Ghosh, J. (2007). Inequality in India: A survey of recent trends. In K. S. Jomo (Ed.), Flat world, big gaps: Economic liberalization, globalization, poverty and inequality. Zed Books.
  15. Piketty, T. (2014).Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
  16. Prud’homme, R. (1995). The dangers of decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10(2), 201–220.
  17. Rao, M. G. (2017).Fiscal federalism in India: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Rao, M. G., & Singh, N. (2005).Political economy of federalism in India. Oxford University Press.
  19. Ravallion, M. (1998). Does aggregation hide the harmful effects of inequality on growth? Economics Letters, 61(1), 73–77.
  20. Rodden, J. (2004). Comparative federalism and decentralization: On meaning and measurement. Comparative Politics, 36(4), 481–500.
  21. Rodríguez-Pose, A., &Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A cross-country analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(5), 619–644.
  22. Solt, F. (2016). The standardized world income inequality database. Social Science Quarterly, 97(5), 1267–1281. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12295
  23. Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), 416–424.
  24. Vo, D. H. (2009). The economics of fiscal decentralization. Journal of Economic Surveys, 23(4), 657–679.
  25. Vo, D. H. (2010). The economics of fiscal decentralisation: A review of theoretical and empirical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24(4), 657–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2009.00600.x
  26. Weingast, B. R. (2009). Second generation fiscal federalism: The implications of fiscal incentives. Journal of Urban Economics, 65(3), 279–293.
  27. West, L. A., & Wong, C. P. W. (1995). Fiscal decentralization and growing regional disparities in rural China: Some evidence in the provision of social services. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 11(4), 70–84.
  28. World Bank. (1997).World development report 1997: The state in a changing world. Oxford University Press.

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.62823/IJEMMASSS/8.1(II).8677

DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.62823/IJEMMASSS/8.1(II).8677


Download Full Paper:

Download