Abstract
The purpose of this study is to provide a detailed description of the spatial distribution of tax revenues, non-tax revenues and capital expenditures of the Communes in the Republic of Benin, to analyze the spatial interactions between the Commons and to deduce from them Communes with a strong neighborhood of spatial interaction.The methodological approach consisted in using a database, in the construction of an adjacency matrix that made it possible to conceptualize and take into account the neighborhood links. The degree of spatial dependence is captured from the global and local spatial indices of Moran.The main findings of the study indicate that the tax revenues and capital expenditures of the Commons are characterized by a random distribution. On the other hand, non-tax revenue is spatially self-correlated. However, local spatial analyzes reveal that some municipalities seem to be concentrating above average levels of tax revenue and investment spending in their neighborhoods. In addition, the analyzes revealed that the influence of the urbanization rate on the level of tax revenue, non-tax revenue and investment expenditure is barely perceptible. It is therefore necessary to review a better orientation of local development policies.
Highlights
One of the decisions of the February 1990 conference of the forces of the Nation is the adoption of Decentralization as a system of local governance
The purpose of this study is to provide a detailed description of the spatial distribution of tax revenues, non-tax revenues and capital expenditures of the Communes in the Republic of Benin, to analyze the spatial interactions between the Commons and to deduce from them Communes with a strong neighborhood of spatial interaction
The test for assessing the overall autocorrelation performed by the Moran index led to the non-rejection of the null hypothesis of no spatial autocorrelation tax revenues and investment spending
Summary
One of the decisions of the February 1990 conference of the forces of the Nation is the adoption of Decentralization as a system of local governance. After more than two decade of experimentation with decentralization, it is clear that local communities are struggling to play the role of impulse and development at the base they deserve. The incidence of income poverty stood at 40.2% in 2015 against 36.2% in 2011 and 33.3% in 2007, which represents a worsening of 4 points between 2011 and 2015 against a decline by 2.9 points compared to 2007 (EMICOV,2015). The same report reveals the existence of large regional disparities in monetary poverty in 2015. Are municipalities with similar economic development indicators in the same neighborhood? Are municipalities with a low level of economic development usually rural? Are municipalities with similar economic development indicators in the same neighborhood? are municipalities with a low level of economic development usually rural?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
