econs o
Make You Publica ions Visible.
A Se ice o
zbwLeibniz-In o ma ionszen um
Wi scha
Leibniz In o ma ion Cen e
o Economics
Quijada, Ma ia Te esa A e alo; Nuño, Ma ia Me cedes Cas o; Yñiguez, Rocio
Con e ence Pape
A compa a i e s udy on Spanish egions’ in es men capaci y in a
budge a y discipline an icipa ed scena io, by means o mul ic i e ia
P ome hee me hod
44 h Cong ess o he Eu opean Regional Science Associa ion: "Regions and Fiscal
Fede alism", 25 h - 29 h Augus 2004, Po o, Po ugal
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Eu opean Regional Science Associa ion (ERSA)
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Quijada, Ma ia Te esa A e alo; Nuño, Ma ia Me cedes Cas o; Yñiguez,
Rocio (2004) : A compa a i e s udy on Spanish egions’ in es men capaci y in a budge a y
discipline an icipa ed scena io, by means o mul ic i e ia P ome hee me hod, 44 h Cong ess
o he Eu opean Regional Science Associa ion: "Regions and Fiscal Fede alism", 25 h - 29 h
Augus 2004, Po o, Po ugal, Eu opean Regional Science Associa ion (ERSA), Lou ain-la-
Neu e
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h p://hdl.handle.ne /10419/117057
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you
pe sonal and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial
pu poses, o exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem
publicly a ailable on he in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise
use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open
Con en Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you
may exe cise u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed
licence.
www.econs o .eu
1
44TH EUROPEAN CONGRESS OF THE EUROPEAN REGIONAL SCIENCE
Numbe : 227.
“A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SPANISH REGIONS’ INVESTMENT CAPACITY
IN A BUDGETARY DISCIPLINE ANTICIPATED SCENARIO, BY MEANS OF
MULTICRITERIA PROMETHEE METHOD”.
Au ho s:
ARÉVALO QUIJADA, M. T.: Uni e si y o Se ille and Fundación cen A:. Spain.
CASTRO NUÑO, M. M.: Uni e si y o Se ille and Fundación cen A:. Spain.
YÑIGUEZ OVANDO R.: Uni e si y o Se ille. Spain.
ABSTRACT
The p inciple o he budge a y discipline, compulso y o he Spanish egions by
he Law 18/2001, Decembe 12 h [Gene al Law o Budge a y S abili y] and he O ganic
Law 5/2001, Decembe 13 h, complemen a y o he o me one, es ablished in he ame
o he Eu opean Ag eemen o S abili y and G ow h, can gene a e con lic ing si ua ions
wi h hose Spanish egions which in es men capaci y depends on ex e nal bo owing.
This pape deals wi h he co esponding ela i e posi ion o he di e en egions,
acco ding o i s in es men capaci y, using o ha pu pose a simula ion exe cise, in
which we ad ance he budge a y s abili y cons ain o he pe iod 1997-2000.
In his pape , he public inancial ac i i y is ea ed, o each egion, h ough
di e en public e enue and expendi u e a ios pe capi a. This si ua ion leads o
conside a mul ic i e ia P ome hee me hod as he ap op ia e one o ob ain a global
anking o all o hem.
In he opinion o Al-Shemme i, Al-Kloub and Rea man (1997), his me hod is
he mos adequa e one because o he ollowing ad an ages: public au ho i ies, as
decision ake s, can unde s and easily he esul s, ega dless he knowledge hey may
ha e abou i ; he me hod uses unde s andable economic pa ame e s; he me hod a oids
dis o ing scale e ec s among di e en al e na i es and, as well, makes possible he
de ia ion e alua ion be ween al e na i es and, inally, allows o sensibili y analysis.
2
1. INTRODUCTION
The S abili y and G ow h Pac which was app o ed a he mee ing o he
Eu opean Union Council held in Ams e dam in June 1997, indica es igh ing public
de ici as he p imo dial economic policy objec i e o he s a es signing he pac .
This commi men o ms pa o he Spanish in e nal legal sys em, h ough he
enac men o Law 18/2001, da ed 12 h Decembe 2001, on Gene al Budge a y S abili y
and i s complemen a y O ganic Law, ex ending he scope o he s abili y objec i e o
he Te i o ial Adminis a ion sec o .
Due o he ac ha he Public Sec o canno incu public de ici , i mus pe o m
budge a y adjus men s by ei he inc easing axes (which is no a pa icula ly easible
op ion gi en he conside able exis ing ax p essu e and he unpopula na u e o his
measu e), o by educing expenses, p e e ably capi al expenses, since hese a e mo e
lexible o educe han cu en expenses1.
As a esul o he abo e, i seems likely he e will be a con lic be ween he
budge a y s abili y objec i e imposed by inancial o hodoxy and in es men po en ial
in Public Adminis a ion, ep esen ed by capi al expenses.
The p esen s udy has been conduc ed on he budge a y s abili y – in es men
capaci y binomial o he 17 Au onomous Communi ies (CCAA) and he Au onomous
Ci ies o Ceu a and Melilla (CDAA), based on he assump ion o p epa ing o he ze o
de ici condi ion du ing a 4-yea pe iod (1997-2000), using he mul i-c i e ia P ome hee
me hod in o de o p o ide in o ma ion on he ela i e si ua ion o each o hese egions
wi hin he scena io desc ibed.
To achie e he pu pose indica ed abo e, he s udy has been di ided in o he
ollowing sec ions: in oduc ion, me hodology, empi ical analysis, conclusions,
appendix including a ne lows diag am and sensi i i y analysis and e e ences.
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Desc ip ion o a iables2.
- PERSONNEL EXPENSES (PEX): Sala ies paid by he Public Sec o o ci il se an s
and pe sonnel ec ui ed.
- CURRENT EXPENSES IN GOODS AND SERVICES (CEX): Expenses a ising om
exe cising cu en ac i i ies in he Public Sec o .
1 De Haan e al (1996).
2 Agg ega e alues: 1997-2000.
3
- FINANCIAL EXPENSES (FEX): C edi s which a e necessa y o sa is y he inancial
bu den o public liabili ies.
- CURRENT TRANSFERS MADE (CTM): Non-compensa ed paymen s made o he
pu pose o inancing cu en ansac ions.
- REAL INVESTMENT (RINV): Expenses used o c ea e o acqui e capi al asse s.
- CAPITAL TRANSFERS MADE (KTM): Non-compensa ed paymen s made o he
pu pose o inancing capi al ansac ions.
- DIRECT TAXATION (DITAX): Basically income and capi al gains ax.
- INDIRECT TAXATION (INTAX): Basically sales ax.
- FEES, PUBLIC PRICES AND OTHER INCOME (FPP): Mone a y compensa ion and
income a ising basically om he sale o public goods and se ices.
- CURRENT TRANSFERS RECEIVED (CTR): Non-compensa ed esou ces ecei ed
by he Public Sec o o inancing cu en ansac ions.
- CAPITAL INCOME (KI): Income a ising om public es a e o capi al income.
-DIVESTING OF EFFEECTIVE INVESTMENTS (DEINV): Income a ising om he
sale o public capi al asse s.
- CAPITAL TRANSFERS RECEIVED (KTR): Non-compensa ed esou ces ecei ed
by he Public Sec o o inancing capi al ansac ions.
-GROSS SAVINGS (GS): Cu en (Income – Expenses).
- CAPITAL BALANCE (KS): Capi al (Income – Expenses).
- NON-FINANCIAL DEFICIT OR SURPLUS (DEF/SURP): GS + KS.
- CAPITAL EXPENSES FINANCED BY NET INDEBTEDNESS (KE ind): Capi al
ansac ions inanced h ough he educ ion o asse s o he inc ease o inancial
liabili ies.
- FINANCIAL SAVINGS (FS): Less inancial expenses a ising om budge a y
balancing es ic ions.
-REDUCTION IN CAPITAL EXPENSES UNDER BUDGETARY STABILITY
(∇KEbs ): Reduc ion in capi al ansac ions esul ing om non-incu ence o deb .
The budge a y s abili y al e na i es a e:
¾ Inc easing axes, and/o ,
4
¾ Reducing public expense, as de ended by González-Pá amo3. Basically, capi al
expenses a e hose mos a ec ed by cu s, due o easons o poli ical isibili y4
and because hey a e mo e lexible5, comp omising he p oduc i e capaci y o
he economic sys em.
In compa ing he si ua ion in which Spanish egions would ind hemsel es
wi hin his hypo he ical scena io, we a e aising he issue o pu ing in o some kind o
o de a se ies o al e na i es (CCAA, CDAA) in he ace o mul iple c i e ia (Public
Accoun ing a ios as de ined in pa ag aph 2.3).
2.2. The P ome hee me hod: a mul ic i e ia decision sys em.
As we ha e said, in his wo k he public inancial ac i i y is ea ed, o each
egion, h ough di e en public e enue and expendi u e a ios. This si ua ion leads o
conside a mul ic i e ia P ome hee me hod as he app op ia ed one o ob ain a global
anking o all o hem. In he opinion o Al-Shemme i, Al-Kloub and Pea man6, his
me hod is he mos adequa e one because o he ollowing ad an ages: public
au ho i ies, as decision ake s, can unde s and easily he esul s, ega dless he
knowledge hey may ha e abou i ; he me hod uses unde s andable economic
pa ame e s; he me hod a oids dis o ing scale e ec s among di e en al e na i es and,
as well, makes possible he de ia ion e alua ion be ween al e na i es and, inally,
allows o sensibili y analysis.
Ac ually, o decide in a mul ic i e ia en i onmen is di icul , because indeed
mos decision p oblems ha a ise in ou daily li e in ol e di e en o en con lic ing
objec i es ha we y o sa is y simul aneously. In p ac ice, his a emp is illuso y and
we ha e o conside bes comp omise solu ions.
So in gene al, we conside mul ic i e ia decision p oblems o he ollowing ype:
A is a se o n possible decisions o al e na i es ( ini e se : Au onomous
Communi ies and he Au onomous Ci ies o Ceu a and Melilla) which a e e alua ed
3 González-Pá amo J. M. (2001).
4 Oxley, H. and Ma ín, M. (1991)
5 De Haan e al (1996).
6 Al-Shemme i, T., Al-Kloub, B. and Pea man, A., (1997).
{}
MaagagagagOPTIMIZAT kj
∈
/)(),...,(),...,(),( 21

5
h ough k c i e ia g1, g2.., gk. The basic da a o such a p oblem can be p esen ed in a
e alua ion ma ix ha i gi es he dominance ela ion, based on a unanimi y p inciple,
can be de ined as ollows:
Aba ∈),( a domina es b i .,...2,1,)()( khbgag hh
=
∀
≥ (wi h a leas one >).
The non-domina ed al e na i es a e called e icien (o Pa e o op imal) solu ions.
In p ac ice, he dominance ela ion is o en e y poo and he numbe o e icien
solu ions can be a he la ge. Indeed, i is clea ha such da a do no gene ally induce a
comple e anking on he se A o al e na i es. The p oblem is no ma hema ically well
s a ed and he no ion o op imal solu ion does no exis . Howe e he p oblem is mos
o en economically well s a ed as i exp esses he di e en and possibly con lic ing
objec i es o he decision make . In o de o p o ide he decision make wi h a good
assis ance a pa icula mul ic i e ia me hodology mus be conside a e, called
PROMETHEE (means: P e e ence Ranking O ganiza ion Me hod o En ichemen
E alua ions).
The P ome hee me hod (and i s isual associa ed isual modelling: The GAIA
plane), ake in o accoun all he necessa y equisi es o he mos mul ic i e ia models:
¾ The ampli ude o he de ia ions be ween he e alua ions o he al e na i es a e
aken in o accoun : dj (a,b) = gj (a) – gj (b).
¾ As he c i e ia a e gene ally exp essed in di e en uni s, he scaling e ec s a e
comple ely elimina ed.
¾ When compa ing a couple o al e na i es (a,b), he mul ic i e ia decision aid
me hod, come o one o his conclusions:
- a is p e e ed o b o b is p e e ed o a.
- a and b a e indi e en .
- a and b a e incompa able ( his ci cums ance, allows he me hod o
a oid o decide when insu icien in o ma ion is a ailable)7.
¾ All he pa ame e s ha e economical signi icance.
¾ We can ob ain di e en esul s depending on he addi ional in o ma ion by he
decision make .
¾ This me hod analyzes he con lic ing aspec s be ween he c i e ia. I is e y
impo an o ha e he oppo uni y o speak o he decision make , o app ecia e
7 Incompa abili y be ween wo al e na i es appea s when one al e na i e is good on some c i e ia and bad
on o he s, while he opposi e holds o he o he al e na i e.
6
his/he p e e ences, and o ha e a clea in e p e a ion o he weigh s o he
c i e ia.
Then his equisi e se , he P ome hee me hod, in o de o conside he
de ia ions and he scales o he c i e ia, associa es a gene alized c i e ion o each
c i e ion g(.). Fo his objec i e, we de ine a p e e ence unc ion, which is ob ained
gi ing he deg ee o p e e ence be ween al e na i es o he decision make . The
gene alized c i e ion associa ed, is de ined by he ollowing pai :
{gj(.), Pj(.,.)}, whe e Pj (a,b) = P j {d j (a,b)} Mba
∈
∀
,
1),(0
≤
≤
baPj
To acili a e he associa ion he gene alized c i e ion o each c i e ion, in he
classic li e a u e8, he e a e six ypical gene alized c i e ia ha a e p oposed o he
decision make . The choice is made in e ac i ely by he decision make and he analys
acco ding o hei p e e ence deg ees.
When a gene alized c i e ion has been associa ed o each c i e ion, we de ine,
wi h all he c i e ia, a mul ic i e ia p e e ence index o a o e b, like his9:
),( ba
π
= ∑
=
n
ijj baPw
1
),( , wi h ⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜
⎝
⎛=
∑
=
n
ij
w
1
1,
Whe e: wj > 0 (j = 1,2,...,k), a e weigh s associa ed o each c i e ion, acco ding
o i s ela i e impo ance.
I we conside how each al e na i e a, is acing he n-1 o he ones, we can de ine
he wo ollowing ou anking lows:
1. The posi i e ou anking low: exp esses how much each one is ou anking all he
o he s. The bes al e na i e has he highe posi i e low, because i ep esen s i s
dominance powe .
()
∑∈
+−
=Ab ba
n
a,
1
1
)(
πφ
2. The nega i e ou anking low: exp esses how much each al e na i e is ou anked
by all he o he s. The bes al e na i e has he smalle nega i e low, so
ep esen s i s weakness.
8 B ans, J. P., (1984) (1986), B ans, J. P., and Vincke, P. H. (1985).
9 ),( ba
π
exp esses how and which deg ee a is p e e ed o b, and ),( ab
π
how b is p e e ed o a, o e
all he c i e ia.
7
()
∑∈
−−
=Ab ab
n
a,
1
1
)(
πφ
F om he in o ma ion abou hese posi i e and nega i e lows, we can deduce
wo na u al ankings o he al e na i es:
1. The PROMETHEE I PARTIAL RANKING:
I is ob ained om he pai wise compa isons and in e sec ions:
a is p e e ed o b ⇔
a and b a e indi e en
⇔
)()()()( baandba −−++
=
=
φ
φ
φ
φ
a and b a e incompa able
⇔
o he wise
2. The PROMETHEE II COMPLETE RANKING:
I is he balance be ween he posi i e and nega i e ou anking lows. The highe
ne low is he be e al e na i e.
)()()( aaa −+
−
=
φ
φ
φ
The comple e anking is de ined by:
a is p e e ed o b
⇔
)()( ba
φ
φ
>
a and b a e indi e en
⇔
)()( ba
φ
φ
=
Le us no ice he e emain no incompa abili y bu he esul ing in o ma ion is
mo e dispu able, because, a conside able pa o he in o ma ion is los by
conside ing he di e ence.
As we ha e said, he P ome hee me hod allows ob aining an impo an pa wi h
g aphical in o ma ion abou he con lic ing cha ac e o he c i e ia and he impac o
he weigh s o he c i e ia on he inal esul s. This is called GAIA isual modelling
me hod (Geome ical Analysis o In e ac i e Assis ance), and p o ides such
in o ma ion. I complemen s he a he app oach o he P ome hee p ocedu e wi h a
desc ip i e and g aphically o ien ed analysis.
The se o al e na i es should be ep esen ed by n poin s in he k-dimensional
space, bu as he numbe o c i e ia is usually g ea e han wo, i is impossible o ha e a
)()()()( baandba −−++ <>
φφφφ
)()()()( baandba −−++ <
=
φ
φ
φ
φ
)()()()( baandba −−++ =>
φ
φ
φ
φ
8
clea ision o hese poin s. So, i is possible o de ine a plane in o de o ob ain a wo
dimensional ep esen a ion o he al e na i es. The GAIA plane is de ined by ec o s
which ep esen he c i e ia in acco ding by weigh s.
As ew in o ma ion as possible ge los by p ojec ion, so a measu e o he
quan i y o in o ma ion being p ese ed, is gi en by
δ
pa ame e (i ep esen s a
pe cen age o he o al in o ma ion abou he p oblem).
Abou he GAIA plane in e p e a ion, le us conside he p ojec ions o he uni
ec o s (o all he c i e ia) on he plane. These axes ha e di e en leng hs and posi ions
ha mean a di e en ia ion powe o he c i e ia. The leng h o his ec o s, is a measu e
o how much he c i e ion gj di e en ia es he al e na i es ( he longe ec o belongs o
he mo e c i e ion di e en ia es he al e na i es). When wo c i e ia exp essing he same
p e e ences, hei ec o s a e o ien ed app oxima ely in he same di ec ion; while
con lic ing c i e ia a e ep esen ed by axes ha ing opposi e di ec ions.
The p ojec ion on he plane o he di e en c i e ia in acco ding o he assessed
weigh s, allows a clea isualisa ion o he solu ion wi h he uni ec o called The
P ome hee decision axis:
π
.I
π
is sho , he P ome hee decision axis has no s ong
decision powe , so he uni ec o is nea ly o hogonal o he GAIA plane10. When his
ec o is long, he decision make is in i ed o selec he al e na i es ha a e as a as
possible in i s di ec ion.
Mo eo e , each al e na i e has a p ojec ion in he GAIA plane, oo. I is
ep esen ed by a poin ha i i is loca ed in he di ec ion o a pa icula c i e ion axis, is
gene ally a good al e na i e on his c i e ion. When he dis ance be ween wo p ojec ed
al e na i es is small, is because hey bo h a e simila al e na i es o he decision make .
The bes al e na i es a e loca ed in he di ec ion o he P ome hee decision axis
π
.
The P ome hee and GAIA me hods ha e been implemen ed on pe sonal
compu e s, wi h se e al decision suppo sys ems. In his pape , we use he DECISION
LAB 2000 p og am. This so wa e allows ob aining a sensibili y analysis abou he
esul s. A sensibili y analysis is qui e ecommended be o e inalising he decision,
because a modi ica ion o he assessed weigh s o he c i e ia can modi y se iously he
conclusions.
2.3. C i e ia.
We ha e es ablished h ee di e en economic g oups in pe capi a e ms:
10 In his case, he c i e ia a e con lic ing and a good comp omise should be selec ed nea he o igin.
15
MELILLA 0,3000 16 0,7000 16 0,4000 4
P epa ed by he au ho s.
TABLE 8
Ex emadu a and Ceu a a e no compa able, since hei pa ial o de s al e na e
wi h each o he . Mad id and he Communi y o Valencia a e he wo s -posi ioned, due
o he conside able e o made by bo h egions in in es men and hei g ea e sac i ice
in achie ing budge a y s abili y
Na a a is in i s place (due o he ac ha i is ully au onomous in inancial
e ms), oge he wi h Andalucia.
4. CONCLUSIONS
The GAIA igu e shows he esul s o he analysis made in he p e ious
pa ag aph.
The ec o s o c i e ia R15, R17 and R19 a e o e lapping, and hus ha e he
same disc imina o y e ec on he al e na i es. R6, R12 and R13 a e mo e con lic i e,
since he angle o med by hei ec o s is he wides .

16
Axis
π
con i ms he ac ha he Communi y o Valencia is he wo s -
posi ioned ( u hes away in he opposi e di ec ion) and Na a a is he bes (as i is
u hes away bu in he same di ec ion).
APPENDIX
The low igu es showing he analyses made and he sensi i i y es s o each
one a e shown below, o he pu pose o checking he eliabili y and s abili y o he
solu ions.
SENSIVITY TEST FOR EXPENSE RATIOS
RATIOS STABILITY INTERVAL
Max. (%) Weigh (%) Min.(%)
R1 8,24 7,14 5,80
R2 15,15 14,29 13,64
R3 7,65 7,14 4,88
R4 15,37 14,29 13,25
R5 29,41 28,57 28,10
R6 29,58 28,57 27,08
SENSIVITY TEST FOR INCOME RATIOS
RATIOS STABILITY INTERVAL
Max. (%) Weigh (%) Min.(%)
R7 10,53 10,00 9,40
R8 10,69 10,00 9,09
R9 10,99 10,00 9,17
R10 11,21 10,00 9,65
R11 10,89 10,00 8,99
R12 26,34 25,00 24,24
R13 25,62 25,00 23,81
SENSIVITY TEST FOR BUDGETARY STABILITY RATIOS
RATIOS STABILITY INTERVAL
Max. (%) Weigh (%) Min.(%)
R14 14,50 12,50 11,71
R15 15,66 12,50 11,11
R16 13,48 12,50 9,90
R17 27,27 25,00 20,00
R18 13,27 12,50 10,64
R19 28,00 25,00 18,92
SENSIVITY TEST FOR RATIO SAMPLES
RATIOS STABILITY INTERVAL
Max. (%) Weigh (%) Min.(%)
R5 16,56 16,00 15,69
R6 16,33 16,00 15,74
17
R12 16,28 16,00 14,86
R13 16,37 16,00 15,63
R15 4,35 4,00 3,57
R17 16,42 16,00 15,63
R19 16,48 16,00 15,63
The solu ions p esen ed a e s able, since he weigh ings assigned a e a he
in e media e poin o he s abili y in e al.
REFERENCES
- ALCAIDE INCHUSTI, J. y ALCAIDE GUINDO, P. (2003). “A ance de las
magni udes económicas españolas en 2002 y se ie p o isional del balance económico
egional. Años 1995 a 2002”, Cuade nos de In o mación económica, nº 173, pp. 1-58.
- AL-SHEMMERI, T; AL-KLOMB, B.; PEARMAN, A: (1997). “Model choice in
mul ic i e ia decision aid”, Eu opean Jou nal o Ope a ional Resea ch, 97, pp. 550-560.
- ARÉVALO QUIJADA, M .T., GÓMEZ DOMÍNGUEZ, D., VÁZQUEZ CUETO,
M.J. y ZAPATA REINA, A: (2002): “Un es udio de las Cajas de Aho os Andaluzas
median e el mé odo mul ic i e io P ome hee”. Es udios de Economía Aplicada. Vol. 20-
I, pp. 5-27.
- BRANS, J.P.; MARESCHAL, B.; VINCKE, Ph.: (1984). “PROMETHEE: a new
amily o ou anking me hods in mul ic i e ia analysis”. Ope a ional Resea ch 84, B ans
J.P. Ed. No h-Holland, pp. 408-421.
- BRANS, J.P.; VINKE, Ph.: (1985). “A p e e ence anking o ganiza ion me hod, he
PROMETHEE me hod”. Managemen Science, ol. 31, pp. 647-656.
- BRANS, J.P.; MARESCHAL, B.; VINCKE, Ph.: (1986). “How o selec and how ank
p oyec s: he PROMETHEE me hod”. Eu opean Jou nal o Ope a ional Resea ch, ol.
24, pp. 228-238.
- DE HAAN e al (1996): “Go e nmen capi al o ma ion: Explaining he decline “,
Re iew o wo ld Economics, 132, pp. 55-74.
- GONZÁLEZ-PÁRAMO, J. M., (2.001): Cos es y bene icios de la disciplina iscal: la
LGEP en pe spec i a, Ins i u o de Es udios Fiscales, Mad id.
- GORDO, L. y HERNÁNDEZ DE COS, P. (2000): “El sis ema de inanciación
au onómica igen e pa a el pe iodo 1997-2001”, Documen o de T abajo, nº 0003,
Banco de España.
- h p://www.es adie .minhac.es.
- h p://www.mineco.es/ eso o.
18
- LAGO PEÑAS, S., (2.001): “La dinámica de los gas os de capi al de las Comunidades
Au ónomas: un análisis de sus de e minan es”, Hacienda Pública Española, nº 157-2,
pp. 65-82.
- LÓPEZ LABORDA, J. y VALLÉS JIMÉNEZ, J. (2002): “E olución del
endeudamien o au onómico en e 1.985 y 1.997”, Papeles de T abajo, Ins i u o de
Es udios Fiscales, nº 2, Mad id.
- MINISTERIO DE HACIENDA: Liquidación de p esupues os de las Comunidades y
Ciudades Au ónomas. Eje cicios 1.997-2.000. Sec e a ia de Es ado de P esupues os y
Gas os, Mad id.
- MINISTERIO DE HACIENDA: P esupues os de las Comunidades y Ciudades
Au ónomas. Eje cicios 1.997-2.000. Sec e a ía de Es ado de P esupues os y Gas os,
Mad id.
- MONASTERIO ESCUDERO, C. (1996): “Los lími es al endeudamien o de los
gobie nos subcen ales. Teo ía y e idencia pa a el caso español”, Papeles de Economía
Española, nº 67, pp. 265-285.
- ONRUBIA, J., (2.001): “De es abilidad e ins i uciones p esupues a ias: necesidades y
e o mas en España”, Economis as, Colegio de Mad id, nº 87, Ex a.
- OXLEY, H. y MARTÍN, M. (1991): “Con olling go e nmen spending and de ici s:
T ends in he 80s and p ospec s o he 90s”, OECD Economic S udies, nº17, pp.145-
189.
- SEVILLA SEGURA, J. V., (2.001): Las cla es de la inanciación au onómica. Ed.
C í ica. Ba celona.
19
20
FIGURE OF EXPENSES OUTRANKING FLOWS
FIGURE OF INCOME OUTRANKING FLOWS
FIGURE OF BUDGETARY STABILITY OUTRANKING FLOWS
FIGURE OF A RATIO SAMPLES OTURANKING FLOWS

21