Person:
Yilmaz, Serdar

Global Practice on Governance, The World Bank
Profile Picture
Author Name Variants
Fields of Specialization
Decentralization, Local government finance, Local economic development, Municipal finance, Fiscal federalism, Public finance
Degrees
Departments
Global Practice on Governance, The World Bank
Externally Hosted Work
Contact Information
Last updated January 31, 2023
Biography
Dr. Serdar Yilmaz is a local economic development specialist with expertise in public finance, regional development and local government finance with extensive experience in developing and transition countries around the world. Working in the various departments of the World Bank, Dr. Yilmaz has contributed to policy reforms in over fifteen developing and transition countries around the world, including Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Egypt, Ethiopia, Republic of Georgia, Ghana, Iran, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tanzania, Turkey and Yemen. Dr. Yilmaz has authored and contributed to numerous books, book chapters, articles, and reports on intergovernmental finance (fiscal decentralization), public expenditure management, and poverty reduction. In addition to his academic research and expertise in the management and provision of technical assistance, Dr. Yilmaz has considerable experience in the development and delivery of academic courses and professional training programs in the areas of economic development, municipal finance and fiscal federalism.
Citations 67 Scopus

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Decentralization or Fiscal Autonomy? What Does Really Matter? Effects on Growth and Public Sector Size in European Transition Countries
    (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2004-03) Meloche, Jean-Philippe ; Vaillancourt, Francois ; Yilmaz, Serdar
    This paper examines the importance of fiscal autonomy in the analysis of decentralization. Using new data published by the OECD (2001 and 2002), it reproduces several indicators and proposes new measures of decentralization that take into consideration su-bnational governments' autonomy over their revenues. Two models are reproduced: Davoodi and Zou (1998) on decentralization and economic growth, and Oates (1985), on decentralization and public sector size. Some evidence suggests that fiscal autonomy positively affects economic growth. Also, it seems to affect the size of the state, but evidence on this relation is limited. Despite some statistical weaknesses, there are sufficient indications to argue that sub-national governments' fiscal autonomy should be a major concern when measuring decentralization.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    On the Measurement and Impact of Fiscal Decentralization
    (World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2002-03) Ebel, Robert D. ; Yilmaz, Serdar
    The typical post-Bretton Woods era development approach that emphasized central government-led development efforts has changed dramatically, and local governments have clearly emerged as players in development policy. The thinking about what is important to achieve in development objectives is changing as fiscal decentralization reforms are being pursued by many countries around the world. In this context, a number of studies have attempted to quantify the impact of decentralization by relating some measure of it to economic outcomes of fiscal stability, economic growth, and public sector size. But decentralization is surprisingly difficult to measure. Nearly all cases examining the relationship between decentralization and macroeconomic performance have relied on the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) of the International Monetary Fund. However, despite its merits, GFS falls short in providing a full picture of fiscal decentralization. For some countries, however, there is data that more accurately captures fiscal responsibilities among different types of governments.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Subnational Data Requirements for Fiscal Decentralization : Case Studies from Central Eastern Europe
    (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2003) Yilmaz, Serdar ; Hegedus, Jozsef ; Bell, Michael E. ; Yilmaz, Serdar ; Hegedus, Jozsef ; Bell, Michael E.
    Poverty is an outcome of interaction between economic, social, and political forces. The World Bank has emphasized poverty reduction in its programs and operational activities. With the launching of initiatives such as the poverty reduction strategy papers and the Comprehensive Development Framework, it has made considerable progress in integrating antipoverty programs into other lending operations. As mentioned in the World Development Report 2000/2001, Attacking Poverty (World Bank 2001b), poverty has many dimensions. It is not defined only by income, but also has political and sectoral (access to services) dimensions. Today, in most countries subnational governments are responsible for the delivery of services that affect these dimensions of poverty. Because subnational governments control increasingly higher shares of total public resources, their competence in designing public policies and delivering public services becomes crucial in influencing the level of poverty. Indeed, the literature on fiscal decentralization presents evidence that local services, especially health and education, are highly correlated with the incidence of poverty (Bird and Rodriguez 1999). In this context, the need for subnational demographic, social, economic, and fiscal data is becoming more evident at a time when subnational governments are involved in national and global objectives of poverty reduction. Statistical capacity building at the subnational level aims to help statistical offices and subnational governments produce the basic microdata necessary not only for monitoring progress in poverty reduction, but also for ex ante policy formulation by subnational governments.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Decentralization, Economic Development, and Growth in Turkish Provinces
    (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008-09) Tosun, Mehmet Serkan ; Yilmaz, Serdar
    There have been important developments in the decentralization of the government structure in Turkey since the early 1980s. This paper examines economic development and growth in Turkish provinces. Although there is a rich literature on the economic effects of government decentralization from both developed and developing countries, these effects have not been examined widely in the context of Turkish local governments. The authors first describe changes since the early 1980s and recent reform efforts. They then provide an empirical analysis of the effects of decentralization in Turkish provinces using cross-sectional and panel data approaches. The panel dataset consists of 67 provinces from 1976 to 2001. The analysis examines whether variations in local decentralization across these provinces and across time have had a significant impact on economic development and growth in those provinces. The findings suggest a weak negative economic effect of decentralization through a number of municipalities per capita. However, the findings do not show any significant impact from the creation of new provinces by separation from the existing ones.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    How to Note : A Framework for the Assessment of Fiscal Decentralization System
    (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010-02) Yilmaz, Serdar ; Aslam, Ghazia ; Gurkan, Asli
    Fiscal decentralization provides the link between incentives for better performance of the local government and the elected support from the citizens and is, therefore, essential for an effective system of decentralization. The purpose of this note is to elucidate components of a well-designed fiscal decentralized system and is aimed to assist task teams and stakeholders to evaluate fiscal decentralization effort in any given country. There are two main components of fiscal decentralization system: a) discretion of the local government to make decision on fiscal matters (including revenue assignment for local goods, revenue generation, transfer of funds through a well-designed transfer system, and utilization of funds); and b) accountability including mechanisms that hold local government officials to other elected and non-elected officials and social accountability that allows direct monitoring of the local government officials by the citizens.