A comparative study on Spanish regions’ investment capacity in a budgetary discipline anticipated scenario, by means of multicriteria Promethee method

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