Decentralized Cooperation and the Future of African Regional Development: What Public Policies to Bridge the Territorial Gap?

IF 2.1 2区 经济学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Jamaa Lamkies, Mohammed Kehel
{"title":"Decentralized Cooperation and the Future of African Regional Development: What Public Policies to Bridge the Territorial Gap?","authors":"Jamaa Lamkies,&nbsp;Mohammed Kehel","doi":"10.1111/1467-8268.70079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This paper examines whether decentralized cooperation (DC) is associated with lower territorial inequality in Africa and under what institutional conditions. We develop a conditional decentralization framework that distinguishes DC from fiscal decentralization and test it using a balanced panel of 38 African countries from 2000 to 2022. Two-way fixed-effects models are complemented by restricted two-step System GMM and spatial specifications. In the preferred fixed-effects model, a 1-percentage-point increase in DC intensity is associated with a 0.00142 decline in the regional Gini (0–1 scale), about 0.32% of the sample mean. The association becomes stronger as governance improves and is statistically distinguishable from zero above an estimated CPIA threshold of about 3.0. Spatial estimates are also consistent with positive cross-border spillovers. Robustness checks using alternative governance measures, subsamples, inequality measures, index weights, and placebo specifications support the direction of the findings. The results suggest that DC should be embedded in formal national frameworks, paired with governance safeguards and administrative capacity-building, and coordinated through cross-border municipal clusters where spillovers may arise. Because the DC proxy is based mainly on subnational official development assistance, the estimates should be read as directional rather than definitive causal magnitudes.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47363,"journal":{"name":"African Development Review-Revue Africaine De Developpement","volume":"38 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Development Review-Revue Africaine De Developpement","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8268.70079","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines whether decentralized cooperation (DC) is associated with lower territorial inequality in Africa and under what institutional conditions. We develop a conditional decentralization framework that distinguishes DC from fiscal decentralization and test it using a balanced panel of 38 African countries from 2000 to 2022. Two-way fixed-effects models are complemented by restricted two-step System GMM and spatial specifications. In the preferred fixed-effects model, a 1-percentage-point increase in DC intensity is associated with a 0.00142 decline in the regional Gini (0–1 scale), about 0.32% of the sample mean. The association becomes stronger as governance improves and is statistically distinguishable from zero above an estimated CPIA threshold of about 3.0. Spatial estimates are also consistent with positive cross-border spillovers. Robustness checks using alternative governance measures, subsamples, inequality measures, index weights, and placebo specifications support the direction of the findings. The results suggest that DC should be embedded in formal national frameworks, paired with governance safeguards and administrative capacity-building, and coordinated through cross-border municipal clusters where spillovers may arise. Because the DC proxy is based mainly on subnational official development assistance, the estimates should be read as directional rather than definitive causal magnitudes.

分权合作与非洲区域发展的未来:何种公共政策可以弥合地域差距?
本文考察了分权合作是否与非洲较低的领土不平等有关,以及在何种制度条件下。我们开发了一个有条件的分权框架,将DC与财政分权区分开来,并使用2000年至2022年38个非洲国家的平衡面板对其进行了测试。双向固定效应模型由受限的两步系统GMM和空间规格加以补充。在首选的固定效应模型中,直流强度每增加1个百分点,区域基尼系数(0-1等级)就会下降0.00142,约为样本平均值的0.32%。随着治理的改进,这种关联变得更强,并且在统计上与估计的CPIA阈值约为3.0以上的零区别开来。空间估计也与积极的跨境溢出一致。鲁棒性检查使用替代治理措施,子样本,不平等措施,指标权重,和安慰剂规范支持研究结果的方向。研究结果表明,可持续发展应纳入正式的国家框架,与治理保障和行政能力建设相结合,并通过可能产生溢出效应的跨境城市集群进行协调。由于DC指标主要基于次国家官方发展援助,因此这些估计应被解读为方向性而非决定性的因果量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
60
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书