Desarrollo, descentralizacion fiscal e innovacion institucional roberto villarreal

DESARROLLO, DESCENTRALIZACIÓN FISCAL E
INNOVACIÓN INSTITUCIONAL:
REFLEXIONES CONCEPTUALES DESDE UNA PERSPECTIVA INTERNACIONAL
Dr. Roberto Villarreal Gonda
Presentación en el foro
“GASTO FEDERALIZADO. EXPERIENCIAS INTERNACIONALES"
Palacio Legislativo Federal
San Lázaro, Distrito Federal
27 de Marzo de 2014

1. Revisión de conceptos fundamentales acerca del
desarrollo sostenible
2. Organización, recursos y rendición de cuentas del
Estado para propiciar y promover el desarrollo
sostenible
3. Conclusiones y consideraciones finales
CONTENIDO DE ESTA PRESENTACIÓN
2

QUE SE ENTIENDE POR DESARROLLO?
3
* Resolución 41/128 adoptada el 4 de diciembre de 1986. Véase: http://www2.ohchr.org/spanish/law/desarrollo.htm y
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/41/a41r128.htm
• Una definición particularmente relevante por su origen y efectos jurídicos
alrededor del mundo es la adoptada por la Asamblea General de la
Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU) en 1986, en la resolución sobre el
Derecho al Desarrollo, aceptado como un derecho humano inalienable*:
• “el desarrollo es un proceso integral económico, social, cultural y político, que tiende al
mejoramiento constante del bienestar de toda la población y de todos los individuos
sobre la base de su participación activa, libre y significativa en el desarrollo y en la
distribución justa de los beneficios que de él se derivan”
• Dicha resolución asimismo enfatiza que:
• “la persona humana es el sujeto central del proceso de desarrollo y toda política de
desarrollo debe por ello considerar al ser humano como participante y beneficiario
principal del desarrollo”
• Y con igual importancia establece que:
• “los Estados tienen el deber primordial de crear condiciones nacionales e internacionales
favorables para la realización del derecho al desarrollo”

• Rio+20
• “Reconocemos que la erradicación de la pobreza, la modificación de las
modalidades insostenibles y la promoción de modalidades de consumo y
producción sostenibles, y la protección y ordenación de la base de recursos
naturales del desarrollo económico y social son objetivos generales y requisitos
indispensables del desarrollo sostenible. Reafirmamos también que es
necesario lograr el desarrollo sostenible promoviendo un crecimiento sostenido,
inclusivo y equitativo, creando mayores oportunidades para todos, reduciendo
las desigualdades, mejorando los niveles de vida básicos, fomentando el
desarrollo social equitativo y la inclusión, y promoviendo la ordenación
integrada y sostenible de los recursos naturales y los ecosistemas, lo que
contribuye, entre otras cosas, al desarrollo económico, social y humano y
facilita al mismo tiempo la conservación, la regeneración, el restablecimiento y
la resiliencia de los ecosistemas frente a los problemas nuevos y en ciernes”
• “Reconocemos que la democracia, la buena gobernanza y el estado de derecho,
en los planos nacional e internacional, así como un entorno propicio, son
esenciales para el desarrollo sostenible, incluido el crecimiento económico
sostenido e inclusivo, el desarrollo social, la protección del medio ambiente y la
erradicación de la pobreza y el hambre. Reafirmamos que para lograr nuestros
objetivos de desarrollo sostenible necesitamos instituciones de todos los
niveles que sean eficaces, transparentes, responsables y democráticas”.
QUE ASPECTOS SE SUBRAYAN HOY EN DIA
RESPECTO AL DESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE?
Véanse los párrafos 4 y 10 del documento El Futuro que Deseamos adoptado por la Asamblea General de la ONU el 27 de julio de 2012:
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/66/288&Lang=S

GOVERNANZA
PUBLICA
5
CIUDADANOS GOBIERNO
COMUNIDADES
ASOCIACIONES
CIVICAS
ORGANIZACIONES
DE LA SOCIEDAD
CIVIL
GRUPOS
CIUDADANO
S
REDES
SOCIALES
COOPERATIVAS
SINDICATOS DE
TRABAJADORES
ASSOCIACIONES
PROFESIONALES
PARTIDOS
POLITICOS
CAMARAS
INDUSTRIALES
ORGANIZACIONES
CIVICAS PLURALES
MEDIOS
UNIVERSIDADES Y
THINK TANKS
EJECUTIVO, ADMINISTRACION
JUDICATURA
SECRETARIAS
AUDTORIA
SUPREMA
CONGRESO
BANCO
CENTRAL
PROCURADURIAS
ESPECIALIZADAS
(CONSUMIDORES,
DERECHOS
HUMANOS,
ANTICORRUPCION
, ETC)
OTROS
ORGANOS
ENTIDADES
PARA-
ESTATALES
(1) ACTORES (2) MATERIAS SUSTANTIVAS (3) INSTITUCIONES (4) CONDICIONES PROPICIAS
IMPUESTOS, CONTRIBUCIONES Y
OBLIGACIONES CIUDADANAS
BIENES PUBLICOS (ESTADO DE
DERECHO, SEGURIDAD PUBLICA,
DEFENSA, MEDIO AMBIENTE,
ESTABILIDAD FINANCIERA, ETC)
SERVICIOS PUBLICOS (BASICOS,
,SOCIALES, INFRAESTRUCTURA)
LIDERAZGO, MARCO LEGAL Y REGULATORIO,
EMPODERAMIENTO CIUDADANO, ACCESO A LA
INFORMACION PUBLICA, TRANSPARENCIA
INTERACCIONES CIUDADANOS-GOBIERNO
PARA IMPULSAR EL DESARROLLO

GOBERNANZA
• Sistema(s) de acuerdos
legales, contractuales y de
concertación para fomentar
– Comunicación
– Colaboración
– Coordinación
– Congruencia
– Consensos
• Entre los principales
actores públicos, sociales y
privados del desarrollo, en
un territorio determinado
• Para combinar de manera
efectiva y eficiente
– Información
– Inteligencia
– Intereses
– Inversiones
– Innovaciones
– Interdependencia
• Para asegurar procesos
dinámicos de
transformación de la
realidad con un sentido
humanista y de colectividad
MERCADO(S)
• Agregación de
transacciones competitivas
y de regulaciones para
favorecer
– Intercambio de
productos, insumos, factores
de producción y ciertos
derechos y obligaciones
• Entre individuos, empresas
privadas, administraciones
públicas y empresas de
servicios públicos
• Para propiciar
– Asignación eficiente de
recursos e inversiones
– Reducción de costos, gracias
a la especialización
productiva y al incremento de
la productividad, por la
competencia
– Innovación y diferenciación
de productos
• Para permitir a cada
individuo, alcanzar el máximo
nivel de bienestar, de acuerdo
con sus recursos y dotación de
factores productivos, en un
momento dado o en forma
PLANEACIÓN
• Sistema(s) de órdenes
vinculados a prioridades
preestablecidas por el Estado
con anterioridad, para propiciar
– Decisiones de inversión e
iniciativas productivas
– Distribución de esfuerzos y
de productos
• Entre entidades
públicas, sociales y privadas
en un territorio determinado
• Para articular de manera
efectiva sus
– Recursos
– Capacidades
– Restricciones
– Fortalezas
– Encadenamientos
• Con el propósito de alcanzar
objetivos determinados, en un
momento dado o
intertemporalmente
– Espaciales
– Productivos
– Distributivos
EUA (1950s)
CANADÁ (1987)
MÉXICO (2005)
CHINA (2005)
ALGUNOS MODELOS TIPICOS

• Para cumplir con las responsabilidades que le asignan los ciudadanos, el
Estado cuenta con un conjunto de órganos de gobierno, que se
interrelacionan de manera compleja
• Los principios y reglas para asegurar el ordenado funcionamiento de la
organización gubernamental en su conjunto, así como de sus distintos niveles
y sectores y de cada órgano particular, están contenidos en las leyes,
reglamentos y disposiciones administrativas respectivas
– Específicamente, las atribuciones y competencias de cada nivel de gobierno (nacional, sub-
nacional) conviene sean determinadas por sus respectivas capacidades comparativas
• Los recursos humanos, materiales, financieros y tecnológicos, así como los
programas operativos, los proyectos de inversión y de desarrollo de
capacidades para que dicho funcionamiento tenga las cualidades deseadas
por los ciudadanos se establecen periódicamente en las leyes de ingresos y
en los presupuestos públicos
• Las formas de organización gubernamental, los principios y reglas, los
recursos, y los programas y proyectos mencionados deben adaptarse a través
del tiempo de manera tal que el Estado mantenga en todo momento su
capacidad plena para propiciar y promover el desarrollo (sostenible)
• La responsabilidad de que esta adaptación se haga realidad y surta los
efectos deseados por los ciudadanos recae en:
– Los órganos específicamente encargados de ello dentro de la organización gubernamental
– Los ciudadanos, y
– Los representantes de los ciudadanos en los congresos respectivos 7
ORGANIZACIÓN, FUNCIONAMIENTO Y FINANCIAMIENTO
DEL ESTADO:
ASUNTOS DINÁMICOS DE GRAN IMPORTANCIA

8
ORGANIZACIÓN Y RENDICIÓN DE CUENTAS
DEL APARATO DE GOBIERNO
REND. CTAS. DEMOCRATICA
REND. CTAS. JERARQUICA
AUDITORIA INTERNA
AUDITORIA GUBER.
AUDITORIA SUPREMA
REND. CTAS. DIRECTA
A LOS CIUDADANOS
SECTOR PUBLICO O GOBIERNO SECTORES PRIVADO Y SOCIAL
JEFE
S1 SnS2 AUD E1 En
A
I
A
I
A
I
A
I
EJECUTIVO CIUDADANOS Y SIS ORGANIZACIONES EN
COMUNIDADES, LA SOCIEDAD CIVIL Y EL
SECTOR PRIVADO
PRES
DS
DS D
AUD
LEGISLATIVO
S
FEDERAL
ESTATAL
MUNICIPAL

• La descentralización de presupuestos de egresos
públicos, desde el gobierno nacional (federal) a los gobiernos
sub-nacionales (estatales y municipales) requiere entenderse
como una función de la promoción del desarrollo (sostenible)
por el Estado
– La descentralización de los gastos e inversiones públicos no es un fin en
si mismo, sino un medio para propiciar un mejor desarrollo: mas
ágil, mas incluyente, mas equitativo, mas en armonía con el medio
ambiente natural
• Se trata de cuestiones dinámicas de gran importancia que
deben resolverse a través del tiempo para la eficaz gestión del
desarrollo (sostenible)
9
CONCLUSIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES FINALES

• Desde una perspectiva comparativa internacional pueden distinguirse varios
casos típicos, que pueden denominarse como: mercados, gobernanza y
planeación
• Los roles de cada nivel de gobierno conviene sean determinados según sus
respectivas ventajas comparativas
– Gobierno nacional: normas e indicadores para facilitar comparabilidad y acceso a la
información de finanzas publicas; procedimientos redistributivos para la equidad y
cohesión nacionales; manejo de la demanda de bienes y servicios para el
mantenimiento de la estabilidad macroeconómica y financiera; provisión eficiente
de bienes públicos de carácter nacional; evaluación de la eficacia y eficiencia del
gasto e inversiones públicos por sus efectos sobre el desarrollo sostenible; etc.
– Gobiernos sub-nacionales: detección oportuna de necesidades y prioridades del
desarrollo local; definición de proyectos y programas adecuados para propiciar el
desarrollo local (considerando en su caso las oportunidades de mayor eficiencia
mediante acción conjunta con gobiernos de territorios vecinos); presupuestación
multianual, planeación financiera y recaudación eficiente de recursos financieros;
negociación con los ciudadanos y sus organizaciones en comunidades, sociedad
civil y sector privado; provisión de servicios públicos (básicos, sociales, de
infraestructura) satisfactorios para los ciudadanos y rendición de cuentas 10

• La descentralización de los presupuestos de egresos y
recursos públicos requiere impulsarse integrándola a
estrategias respecto a los impuestos y contribuciones
locales, visualizando la disponibilidad de recursos públicos en
su conjunto para la promoción del desarrollo local, y
adicionalmente deben tenerse en consideración el
mejoramiento simultaneo de las capacidades
institucionales, humanas y tecnológicas de los gobiernos
locales
• En este contexto, en muchos países se observan innovaciones
relacionadas, en los ámbitos de:
– Transparencia
– Rendición de cuentas
– Participación ciudadana
– Gobierno electrónico
– Cooperación horizontal entre gobiernos de territorios vecinos, y
– Esquemas con enfoque “whole of government” para promover el desarrollo
sostenible 11

• En diversos países se observa una tendencia hacia nuevos
esquemas e instituciones de gobernanza publica para mejorar
la coordinación intergubernamental, tanto vertical (entre
órdenes de gobierno) como horizontal (dentro de cada
orden), así como para incluir la participación de los
ciudadanos y sus organizaciones (de las comunidades, la
sociedad civil y el sector privado)
– En México, por ejemplo, el inicio en 2005 en el Senado de la Republica
de reformas a la Ley Nacional de Planeación
• El objetivo central es la adecuación de instituciones publicas
para la promoción del desarrollo (sostenible)
12

• La descentralización sirve al desarrollo por varias razones
importantes
– Políticas:
• Para propiciar un balance razonable de poderes dentro del sistema político
• Para inducir negociaciones para la atención adecuada de las necesidades de
desarrollo regionales y locales
• Y, por lo anterior, para reforzar la estabilidad política en el país
– Económicas:
• Para mejorar la detección de necesidades y prioridades del desarrollo en las
regiones y localidades, así como la definición adecuada de proyectos y programas
para la provisión de servicios públicos (básicos, sociales y e infraestructura). Esto
requiere aumentar las capacidades institucionales y de recursos humanos en los
gobiernos sub-nacionales.
• Para mejorar la asignación de recursos públicos y la eficacia del gasto y la
inversión gubernamentales para la promoción del desarrollo (sostenible)
– Sociales:
• Para empoderar a los ciudadanos en todas las regiones y localidades y elevar su
concientización sobre su responsabilidad para influir y vigilar la correcta utilización
de los recursos públicos por sus gobiernos
13
FIN DE LA PRESENTACION

En organismos internacionales tiene 7 años de experiencia internacional de altúo nivel en gestión
del desarrollo, politicas públicas, finanzas públicas y administracion pública
• 2009-2013: Jefe del area de gestión del desarrollo en la División de Administración Pública y Gestión del
Desarrollo, en el Departamento de Asuntos Económicos y Sociales, de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas
(ONU), Nueva York
• 2007-2008: Jefe del área de desarrollo territorial, en la División de Gobierno y Desarrollo Territorial, en la
Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE), Paris
• Desde estas posiciones ha asesorado a gobiernos nacionales y sub-nacionales en países de América Latina y
América del Norte, África del Norte y Subsahariana, Asia y Europa Occidental y Oriental
En México tiene 22 años de experiencia en los mismos asuntos, desde puestos de alta
responsabilidad en diferentes dependencias del gobierno federal
• 2006: Subsecretario de Desarrollo Regional y Urbano, SEDESOL, así como miembro de la Comisión Nacional de
Desarrollo Social, la Comisión Nacional de Vivienda y la Comisión Nacional de Regularización de la Tenencia de la
Tierra, y miembro de los Consejos de Administración de numerosas entidades públicas
• 2000-2005: Jefe de la Unidad de Políticas Publicas Regionales y Sociales, en la Presidencia de la República, así
como miembro de la Comisión Nacional de Infraestructura, la Comisión para el Desarrollo Rural Sustentable, la
Comisión Nacional del Agua, la Comisión Nacional Forestal y enlace con la Conferencia Nacional de
Gobernadores (CONAGO), y presidente de cinco fideicomisos públicos para el desarrollo regional a lo largo y
ancho del país
• 1994-1997: Jefe de la Unidad de Inversiones Públicas, y Jefe de la Unidad de Privatización, SHCP, así como
miembro de la Comisión Intersecretarial de Gasto Financiamiento y Secretario de la Comisión de Privatizaciones,
y miembro de los Consejos de Administración de entidades de la banca de desarrollo y las mayores empresas
paraestatales en energía, transportes y comunicaciones
• 1988-1994: Coordinador de Asesores del Secretario, Director General de Desarrollo Tecnológico e integrante de
la Unidad de Desregulación, asi como miembro de las Comisión de Inversión Extranjera, la Comisión de
Aranceles, la Junta de Gobierno del CONACYT y negociador del capitulo XVII del TLCAN
• 1986-1987 y 1979-1981, integrante de las oficinas de asesores de la Presidencia de la República 14
SEMBLANZA CURRICULAR DE
ROBERTO VILLARREAL

15
EL DESARROLO SOSTENIBLE:
UN PROCESO MULTIDIMENSIONAL Y
ALTAMENTE COMPLEJO
FUENTE: Villarreal, Roberto. “The Enterprise Architecture of Sustainable Development: An Analytical Framework”. En Pallab Saha, ed., A
Systemic Perspective on Managing Complexity with Enterprise Architecture. IGI-Global. 2013. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-4518-9.ch008.

16
EJEMPLO: NIVELES Y TENDENCIAS DE LA ESCOLARIDAD
EN LOS DIFERENTES ESTADOS DE LA REPÚBLICA MEXICANA
Fuente: CDSH con datos de INEGI, XI y XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda 1990 y 2000, y SEP
Escolaridad de la población de 15 años y más
por Entidad Federativa
(Número de años)
Promedio (2010): 8.8
Rango: 3.1
7.5 7.6
7.9 7.9 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.7 8.8 8.8 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 9.0 9.0
9.2 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6
9.8
10.0
10.6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Chis.
Oax.
Mich.
Gro.
Gto.
Zac.
Ver.
Hgo.
Yuc.
Pue.
SLP
Tab.
Dgo.
Nay.
Sin.
Cam.
Mor.
Jal.
Col.
BC
Chih.
Tlax.
Son.
Ags.
Tamps.
Méx.
BCS
Qro.
Q.R.
Coah.
N.L.
D.F.
2010 2000 1990
Rango: 4.1
Rango: 4.6

DECENTRALIZATION AND POPULAR PARTICIPATION IN
MEXICAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION:
SOME STYLIZED FACTS*
ROBERTO VILLARREAL
CHIEF, DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT BRANCH
AD HOC PRESENTATION FOR THE EXPERT GROUP MEETING
‘STRENGHTENING POPULAR PARTICIPATION AND GOOD GOVERNANCE IN AFRICA’
CO-ORGANIZED BY THE GOVERNANCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION DIVISION (UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR AFRICA)
AND THE UNITED NATIONS MILLENNIUM CAMPAIGN
ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA, 28-29 SEPTEMBER 2010
* CONTENTS AND VIEWS REFLECTED IN THIS PRESENTATION ARE SOLELY THE AUTHOR’S RESPONSIBILTY BASED ON EXISTING ANALYTICAL LITERATURE AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE
OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
UNITED NATIONS DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS
DIVISION FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. CHRONOLOGY
– HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS
– POST-REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD
3. TRENDS IN DECENTRALIZATION, POPULAR
PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
4. CONCLUSSIONS
19

INTRODUCTION
• The purpose of this presentation is to provide a succinct overview of the
evolution of decentralization, popular participation and accountability in
Mexico in the last 25 years, as these relate to public management of
development policies and programs
• The presentation highlights only some stylized facts
• Rather than presenting a comprehensive description of a rather complex
system of political, administrative and budgetary arrangements, this
presentation offers some insights into some key elements of the system,
from which relevant policy considerations and conclusions can be reached
• References on-line are included at the end, for those interested to go into
further details
20

CHRONOLOGY (1): HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS
1810-
1824
• INDEPENDENCE FROM SPAIN
•DEBATE OVER CENTRALIZED / FEDERAL ORGANIZATION OF THE STATE
• SINCE FIRST CONSTITUTION (1824): ADOPTION OF A FEDERATIVE REPUBLICAN MODEL (WITH SOVEREIGN STATES AND FEW
TERRITORIES DEPENDING FROM CENTRAL GOVERNMENT*)
1824-
1876
• ATTEMPTS TO DEVELOP THE NATION – STATE
• LACK OF AUTHENTIC DEMOCRACY
• POLITICALLY AND FINANCIALLY WEAK FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, OFTEN SUPPORTED BY MILITARY MEANS
• SPARSELY POPULATED TERRITORY WITH FEW LARGER CITIES IN THE GEOGRAPHICAL CENTER
• LIMITED INFRASTRUCTURE AND POORLY CONNECTED GEOGRAPHY
• REGIONAL FACTUAL POWERS IN SOME STRONG STATE GOVERNORSHIPS, SEVERAL COUPS D’ETAT
• ARISTOCRATIC SOCIETY INHERITED FROM COLONIAL PERIOD, INTERFERENCE FROM CATHOLIC CHURCH IN POLITICAL AFFAIRS
(UNTIL NEW CONSTITUTION IN 1856 SEPARATED STATE AND CHURCH)
• COUNTRY WAS INVADED SEVERAL TIMES BY SUPER-POWERS
• HALF OF THE COUNTRY’S ORIGINAL TERRITORY WAS TAKEN AWAY IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND BECAME PART OF THE USA
1876-
1910
• THREE-DECADES NATIONAL DICTATORSHIP
• SUPER-CENTRALIZATION OF GOVERNMENT (POLITICAL, FINANCIAL)
• SIMULATED FORMAL DEMOCRACY (PRESIDENT WAS RE-ELECTED 6 TIMES, STATE GOVERNORS APPOINTED BY HIM), SUPPRESION OF
FACTUAL REGIONAL POWERS
• RESTRICTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS FOR THE PEOPLE
• POLITICAL REPRESSION
• STRONG INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE (RAILROADS, PORTS, ELECTRICITY)
• MARKED CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH (INCLUDING LAND), HIGH INEQUALITY
1910-
1917
• REVOLUTION
• BEGAN AS DEMANDS FOR DEMOCRACY, FREE ELECTIONS AND PROHIBITION OF RE-ELECTION
• AS ARMED CONFLICT SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE TERRITORY, DIVERSE DEMANDS WERE ADDED INTO THE REVOLUTIONARY
AGENDA
• URBAN MIDDLE CLASSES: CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS (PRESS, ASSOCIATION AND STRIKE FREEDOMS)
• RURAL POPULATION (PEASANTRY): AGRARIAN REFORM
• NEW CONSTITUTION ADOPTED IN 1917 MAINTAINED FEDERAL REPUBLIC, POSITIVELY INCORPORATED THE REVOLUTIONARY
AGENDA AND IN A NOVEL MANNER INTRODUCED STATE OWNERSHIP OVER UNDER-GROUND NATURAL RESOURCES
21
* At present there are 32 States. Territories have been converted into States. The capital city is located in a Federal District with special status and legislation.

CHRONOLOGY (2): POST-REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD
1917-1929
• FIRST REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENTS
•SUCESIVE PRESIDENTS WERE REVOLUTIONARY GENERALS FROM SAME POLITICAL GROUP
• FACTUAL REGIONAL POWERES RE-APPEARED, REPEATED REGIONAL REVOLTS, POLITICAL ASSASINATIONS FROM CENTRAL ORDERS
• ATTEMPT FOR RE-ELECTION RESULTED IN ASSASINATION OF FORMER PRESIDENT AND THEN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
• MULTI-CONSTITUENCY OFFICIAL POLITICAL PARTY CREATED IN 1929 BY PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP AND OFFICIAL CALL FOR END OF FORCE
ACTIONS AND BEGINNING OF INSTITUTIONAL POLITICS
• CREATION OF KEY NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS: CENTRAL BANK, AGRARIAN AND WATER COMMISSIONS, MINISTRY OF PUBLIC EDUCATION AND
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
1929-2000
• INSTITUTIONAL CONTINUITY AND STABILITY, WITHOUT DEMOCRACY
• HEGEMONIC OFFICIAL PARTY, WITH LIMITED TIME-VARYING AND SOMETIMES REGIONAL OPPOSITION, LACK OF DEMOCRACY, REPEATED
FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS AT NATIONAL, STATE AND MUNICIPAL LEVELS; DISCRETIONARY USE OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS TO BUY VOTES
• RESTRICTIONS ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, AND CONTROLS OVER THE MEDIA, DEPENDING ON PRESIDENTIAL ‘STYLES’
• FACTUAL SUBORDINATION OF JUDICIARY AND LEGISLATIVE POWERS TO THE EXECUTIVE
• OVERWHELMING FEDERAL EXECUTIVE, GOVERNORS APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT (INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS WITH DIVERSE
STAKEHOLDERS)
• STRONG CORPORATIVIZATION OF CIVIL SOCIETY UP TO MID-NINETIES, INCORPORATING WORKERS, PEASANTS , URBAN PROFESSIONALS
AND THE YOUTH INTO MAJOR SECTORS WITHIN THE OFFICIAL PARTY
• SUCCESIVE POLITICAL REFORMS IN LATE SEVENTIES, EIGHTIES AND NINETIES (TO INTRODUCE GRADUALLY PLURALITY IN
CONGRESS, ELECTORAL INSTITUTIONS, EQUITABLE AND TRANSPARENT FINANCING OF POLITICAL PARTIES, FORMAL EQUITABLE AND
TRANSPARENT REGULATIONS ON USE OF MEDIA FOR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS)
• GRADUAL NEGOTIATED OPENING TO OPPOSITION IN MUNICIPAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS (BEGINNING EARLY NINETIES)
• STATE-LED DEVELOPMENT UP TO THE MID-EIGHTIES; AFTERWARDS, DEEP ECONOMIC REFORMS
(INTERNATIONALIZATION, PRIVATIZATION)
• RAISING LEVELS OF EDUCATION AND PER CAPITA INCOME, RAPID URBANIZATION (FROM 25% TO MORE THAN 80%) OF TOTAL
POPULATION
• HIGHLY CENTRALIZED PUBLIC FINANCES AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES (DECENTRALIZATION BEGINNING IN THE EIGHTIES, SEE NEXT SLIDE)
• INCREASING CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN ECONOMIC REFORMS AND POLITICAL SYSTEM (PARTICULARLY AFTER INTERNATIONAL OPENING
OF THE ECONOMY TO TRADE, DIRECT INVESTMENT AND FINANCIAL FLOWS), GENERATED SHADOW COST AGAINST ATTRACTING FOREIGN
INVESTMENT DUE TO DISCRETIONARY POLITICAL DECISIONS GROUNDED ON CONCENTRATED POLITICAL POWER AND INSUFFICIENT
INTITUTIONAL AND REGULATORY MEANS TO SECURE TRANSPARENCY AND LIMIT CORRUPTION
22

CHRONOLOGY (3): NEW DEMOCRACY
2000-2010
• BEGINING OF DEMOCRACY
• FIRST PRESIDENT FROM A DIFFERENT PARTY ELECTED IN 2000, SECOND PRESIDENT FROM THAT PARTY ELECTED IN 2006 (IN A
STRONGLY CONTESTED ELECTION)
• EXECUTIVE LED REFORMS TO CONSOLIDATE DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS
• TO WARRANTY TRANSPARENCY, AUTONOMY OF ELECTORAL INSTITUTIONS, ACCOUNTABILITY OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS, CITIZENS
ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT AFFAIRS
•GRADUAL DEEPENING OF DECENTRALIZATION (SEE FOLLOWING SLIDES)
• GROWING (ALTHOUGH VARYING) DIVERSITY OF PARTY AFFILIATION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS AT NATIONAL, STATE AND MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENTS, MOSAIC OF PARTY AFFILIATIONS OF ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN MOST PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, FEW REGIONAL
BASTIONS OF DETERMINED PARTIES
• INCREASING FREQUENCY OF DIVIDED GOVERNMENTS (EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE DOMINATED BY DIFFERENT PARTIES, AT
NATIONAL AND STATE LEVELS); GRADUAL DISAPPERARENCE OF ABSOLUTE MAJORITIES IN NATIONAL AND STATE LEGISLATURES
• CERTAIN POPULAR DISILLUSIONMENT WITH DEMOCRACY AND CHALLENGES OF POLITICAL REGRESSION
• DIVIDED GOVERNMENTS AND INSUFFICIENT CO-OPERATION AMONG PARTIES HAVE SLOWED ECONOMIC REFORMS
• COINCIDENT GLOBAL ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL CRISES IN THESE PERIOD HAVE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED INCOME
LEVELS, UNEMPLOYMENT, LIVING CONDITIONS, REVERTING EARLIER ACHIEVEMENTS IN POVERTY REDUCTION
• SOME HIGHLY VISIBLE ACTORS IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM HAVE PLACED PERSONAL INTERESTS BEFORE KEY DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
IN THE OVERALL POLITICAL AGENDA AND ADOPTED POPULIST DISCOURSES
• MANAGEMENT TEAMS OF THESE TWO PRESIDENT HAVE OFTEN BEEN PERCEIVED AS LACKING NECESSARY SKILLS AND
COORDINATION, NEW FORMS OF NEPOTISM SEEM TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE FEDEWRAL
GOVERNMENT
• PARTY OF THESE TWO PRESIDENTS HAS NOT FULFILLED POPULAR EXPECTATIONS IN TERMS OF REDUCING OR ELLIMINATING
CORRUPTION
• FEDERAL POLICIES ON PUBLIC SECURITY AND COMBAT OF DRUG CARTELS HAVE NOTORIOUSLY FAILED AND VIOLENCE HAS
SPREAD WIDELY AFFECTING ALL REGIONS OF THE COUNTRY AND ALL SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION
23

TRENDS IN DECENTRALIZATION, POPULAR
PARTICIPATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY (1)
• Decentralization, popular participation and accountability are all means, not
end in themselves. The end is to attain better development, that is, to
improve the living conditions and the enjoyment of rights and liberties for
all. Thus, these three means are framed in a general context of designing
adequate development strategies.
• In the case of Mexico, the entry point for national development strategies is
the National Development Plan, which must be designed, followed and
evaluated in every Presidential Administration, as established in the
Constitution and in the national Planning Law.
• Since 1983, the legal framework applicable in this matter establishes the
fundamental guiding principles
– All federal expenditures must follow well determined programs, to secure rationality and
orderly continuity of expenditures, and to provide adequate bases for auditing
– The National Development Plan must be elaborated by the Ministry of Finance, based on
an ample consultation to the population to establish development priorities and general
strategies. Thus, popular participation underlies the basic foundations of planning and
programming.
24

TRENDS… (2)
• As part of the system of public administration in the country,
delegation of federal programs has been applied for decades
(roads and highways, support to agriculture and industry,
energy, education and health services, environment, etc.)
– A delegate appointed by each ministry to each state managed the
corresponding federal programs in the respective state, often in
informal consultation or negotiation with state governor
– Said consultations often influenced the inter-state allocation of national
program budgets, and the selection within each state of the localities or
social-political groups to be benefited most from each program
– Delegates from different federal ministries in each state rarely
coordinated decisions regarding the different programs, this function
being in practice exerted by the governor and his state cabinet, and
implying multiple, complex and time-consuming negotiations
25

TRENDS… (3)
• Overall, the system of delegation doesn’t show maximum efficiency in
terms of public resources allocation throughout the country
– For administrative reasons
• The number of delegation offices in the country exceeded 300 and the
bureaucracy involved was considerable, implying:
– High administrative costs
– Slow decision making and implementation
– Noticeable constraints on overall coordination and, therefore, limited efficiency in the
allocation of public resources throughout the country
– For political reasons
• Federal ministers would sometimes personally abuse this system to
strengthen their networks of political supporters in states with different
sizes and characteristics of the electorate, aiming to influence their
future political careers
• As political party affiliations of federal and state public officials has
become more diverse after 2000, political negotiations between
ministers, delegates and governors have become more sensitive to
political considerations
26

TRENDS… (4)
• Fiscal decentralization started in the late eighties and followed
several stages and paths
A. Initially, tax reforms eliminated Sales Taxes previously applied and
collected by the states, substituting these by a Value Added Tax
applied and collected by the federal government
• Thus, a mechanism was created to redistribute federal tax income to the
states, based on determined formulae to take explicitly into consideration
inter-state disparities (population, per capita income, economic
structure, etc.)
– Occasionally, but not often, discussions arise as to whether applicable formulae are
optimal or need to be revisited; these discussions tend to be avoided because of the
extreme difficulties of reaching alternative equilibrium distributions and consensus
among all states and the federal government
• States receive their corresponding participation in the aggregate tax income
through an ad hoc fund, subject to auditing and transparency rules
• Each state can contract debt, according to certain laws and
regulations, warranting its service with future tax participations, which are
predictable to a limited extent as these are determined by fixed
formulae, although there remain macroeconomic uncertainties about
aggregate tax revenues
27

TRENDS… (5)
B. Later on, federal expenditures on determined education levels were
decentralized in the early nineties to state governments
• The motives were mostly political, although indirectly connected with
efficiency factors: the national teachers union had acquired excessive
power, creating difficulties for the federal government to influence the
quality and costs of federal public education programs. Thus, decentralizing
the corresponding federal education budget to the states, created more
favorable conditions for the overall public administration (federal cum
states) to enhance management of these programs
• A special mechanism to account for this decentralized public expenditure in
education was created, consisting in a determined section of the federal
budget which is determined according to specific rules, again based on
appropriate formulae
• Auditing of this section of the federal budget is performed in the same way
as for the general budget, first by the Federal Executive (through the Office
of Public Accounting, in the Ministry of Finance), and successively by the
Supreme Auditing Institution reporting directly to the Chamber of
Representatives in the Federal Congress.
• Mechanisms for social participation in the management of basic education
were initiated after year 2000, involving parents and teachers in every
school, although their scope is not predominantly on budgetary matters but
in overall performance at the school level 28

TRENDS… (6)
B. In parallel, federal expenditures on different types of public infrastructure
were also decentralized during the nineties, to state and municipal
governments
• The motives were different than in the case of decentralization of education
expenditures. Regarding decentralization of infrastructure expenditures:
– Decentralization to the states was mostly guided to increase efficiency in public investments (for
example, state roads and highways better reflect local conditions than federally decided local roads;
this is true both about new roads, as about maintenance of existing ones)
– Decentralization to municipal governments was circumscribed to social infrastructure, guided both
by similar efficiency reasons, as well as to strengthen local governments with the aim to consolidate
an authentic federalism
• These decentralized public expenditures are reflected in separate sections of the
federal and local public budgets, and audited in the same manner described
before for education expenditures:
– An ah hoc fund was created to secure accountability of public expenditures decentralized to
municipal governments for investment in social infrastructure
• Initially, the guiding principles for municipal governments to decide on social
infrastructure investments were not well defined, and resulted in inadequate local
investment decisions (typically, investments with marginal impact on overall social
development, or investments in geographical zones determined more by political
considerations than targeted to the poor)
– Corrective adjustments were introduced later on, as explained in the following slide
29

TRENDS… (7)
– To reduce the undesired initially poor results in the allocation of
public resources to municipal social infrastructure, it proved more
convenient to add later on incentives to enhance said
investments, rather than altering the established rules for
decentralizing these federal expenditures to municipalities
• A new federal program for poverty alleviation was created in 2003, which is
included in the social development section of the federal budget and audited
in the manners explained before
• This new program offers additional federal resources to municipal
governments, under more elaborated conditionality:
– the types of acceptable social investments are more precisely defined
– the specific geographical zones where these investments are to take place must be zones of
high incidence of poverty, as determined by the Federal Ministry for Social Development
– to receive these additional federal funds for municipal social infrastructure, municipalities
which voluntarily apply are required to complement these additional federal funds with an
equal amount of municipal resources, in a pari passu fashion. Thus, federal resources that
were originally granted without adequate conditionality, are attracted back by this
rule, enhancing their social impact.
– community participation was introduced after 2005 in the operation of the program, to
enhance determination and prioritization of local social investments with the views and
proposals of the population in the targeted poor zones 30

TRENDS… (7)
C. Furthermore, as a significant proportion of total federal income comes
from taxes and special duties applicable to the oil industry*, one more
ad hoc fund** was created in the late nineties, as a means to account
in the federal budget for the decentralization of government revenues
from the oil industry, from the federal governments to the states
• The total amount of resources decentralized to the states through
this other channel varies from year to year, as a result of changes in
international oil prices
• The amounts decentralized to each and every state are also
determined according to special formulae, to eliminate
discretionality
31
* As mentioned before, the Constitution of 1917 defined all natural resources in the underground as national property.
** Two other different funds are also connected to federal oil revenues, although with purposes different from
decentralization. One is devoted to provide certain stability for public finances in the context of uncertain oil prices. The
other serves as a reserve fund to finance extraordinary expenditures required in case of natural disasters.

TRENDS… (8)
D. As the overall system of decentralizing income and expenditures is
complex to certain extent, and unforeseen special circumstances need to
be looked at, complementary institutions have been created within the
Federal Government over the last 15 years, to enhance the performance
of the system
• Within the Ministry of Finance, a special Unit is in charge of coordinating the
aggregate fiscal relationship between the Federal Government and each and
every state, and thus must solve particular problems as they arise
• Within the Ministry of the Interior, a special Institute is entrusted with
responsibilities for capacity building in municipal governments
• Within the Ministry of Social Development, a special Institute looks after
building capacities in civil society, to improve its participation in public
development affairs, specially in matters connected with social development
(poverty, vulnerable groups, gender issues, etc.)
32

TRENDS… (9)
E. Finally, besides the professional auditing and social auditing
mechanisms mentioned in the preceding slides, a Federal
Law for Transparency and Access to Public Information was
adopted in 2004, thus permitting any interested person to
request information on decisions made by government
officials, budgetary and financial matters, performance of
public programs, etc.
• This law reinforces the possibilities for individuals and civil society
organizations to oversee the functioning of the Federal Government
in the widest possible sense
• Accountability is therefore strongly underlined, beyond the specific
avenues highlighted before
33

CONCLUSSIONS (1)
• Democracy is not a fundamental necessity for early stages
of development, but eventually it becomes indispensable
as the Nation-State evolves
– Education, urbanization and internationalization are key
processes in fostering demands for political openness and
democratization
– Equally important democratic foundations are found in the
effective enforcement of basic constitutional rights and
freedoms: expression, media, association, strike, etc.
– Democracy can not be sustained only on popular political
demands, but requires adequate institutions (well functioning
political parties, trustworthy electoral system, non-political
allocation of public budgets, etc.)
– Beyond its intrinsic merits in terms of political
philosophy, democracy and popular participation in
development management help improve coherence of
economic, social and political reforms and policies 34

CONCLUSSIONS (2)
• Decentralization serves different important purposes
– Political:
• To attain certain reasonable balance of powers in the political
system
• To induce negotiations for harmonizing diverse regional demands
• And, through these, to enhance political stability in the country
– Economic:
• To better identify investment needs and priorities in the diverse
parts of the country (investment in infrastructure and public
goods, investment in education and health, investment in the
natural environment, etc.)
• To improve the regional distribution and allocation of public funds
– Social:
• To empower regional populations and increase their awareness and
responsibility about the efficient utilization of public resources 35

CONCLUSSIONS (3)
• Fiscal decentralization of public resources
– Occurs through different channels
– Not all of these need to be developed simultaneously
– Thus, decentralization can proceed gradually
– A grand design seems impractical, as considerations
that need to be made are numerous and complex
– Errors can occur along the process and flexibility to
correct them must be assumed in planning
36

CONCLUSSIONS (4)
• Accountability over public resources
– Is always a fundamental issue, whatever the extent of
decentralization
– Must be established by Law to be orderly enforceable, but must also
be rooted in general political and social values to be effectively
pursued
– No single means suffices to warranty accountability, and several
ones need to be used complementing and reinforcing each other :
• Professional auditing
• Social or civic auditing
• In general, transparency
– May be best accomplished through diverse combinations of
means, best suited to each channel by which resources are
decentralized
• In the Mexican experience, initial steps have relied in auditing by official
professional bodies, and only later on has social auditing been introduced
gradually 37

• For more information and additional
details, see:
www.shcp.gob.mx (Ministry of Finance, Federal
Government of Mexico)
38
THANKS
END OF PRESENTATION

Desarrollo, descentralizacion fiscal e innovacion institucional roberto villarreal

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Desarrollo, descentralizacion fiscal e innovacion institucional roberto villarreal

Similaire à Desarrollo, descentralizacion fiscal e innovacion institucional roberto villarreal (20)

Plus de ROBERTO VILLARREAL

Plus de ROBERTO VILLARREAL (10)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Desarrollo, descentralizacion fiscal e innovacion institucional roberto villarreal