@phdthesis{Ehrke2011,
  author    = {Ehrke, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Zur Stabilisierung fragmentierter Staaten},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-155-4},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-53975},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {366},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Die internationale Staatengemeinschaft steht Sezessionsbestrebungen zur Aufspaltung bestehender Staaten gew{\"o}hnlich ablehnend gegen{\"u}ber. Gleichzeitig wendet sie in vielen L{\"a}ndern Instrumente der Entwicklungspolitik an und greift so auch in den dortigen politischen Prozess ein. Untersucht wird, inwiefern Entwicklungspolitik so gestaltet werden kann, dass sie nicht, quasi als Nebenwirkung, einer Sezessionsbewegung zum Durchbruch verhilft. Betrachtet wird dabei neben der gezielten F{\"o}rderung wirtschaftlichen Wachstums auch das Instrument der Dezentralisierung, das oft als Mittel zur „Beruhigung" separatistischer Bestrebungen vorgeschlagen wird. Zuvor jedoch wird aufgewiesen, dass eine Politik, die Sezessionen verhindern will, zumindest in vielen F{\"a}llen auch moralphilosophisch schl{\"u}ssig begr{\"u}ndet werden kann. Den Abschluss der Arbeit bilden drei Fallstudien zu Sezessionen auf dem Gebiet der ehemaligen Sowjetunion.},
  language  = {de}
}
@techreport{Petersen2008,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Petersen, Hans-Georg},
  title     = {Integration, decentralization, taxation, and revenue sharing},
  series = {Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeitr{\"a}ge},
  journal   = {Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeitr{\"a}ge},
  number    = {57},
  issn      = {1864-1431},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-27367},
  pages     = {41},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {The paper tries to shed some light on the problems of centralization and decentralization within an economic union and the federal member states. Integration and decentralization are not opposite policy strategies but both meaningful if the single public goods and services supplies are analyzed in more detail. Both strategies doubtlessly have advantages, which can be realized if the manifold possibilities are combined in an efficient approach of good governance. Best practice approaches in inter- or supra-national integration, fiscal federalism and taxation do exist and have to be successfully implemented. Obviously such a modern fiscal policy has to be accompanied by an appropriate monetary policy, which in an economic union has to be carried out by an independent central bank as one of the necessary countervailing powers in a democratic setting. A modern fiscal policy strategy efficiently controls budget deficits, which naturally have to be limited to finance reliable public investments. Such strategy has to be safeguarded through modern methods of budgeting and fiscal planning. Modern public management with a clear code of conduct for the government officials ensures corruption free administration.},
  language  = {de}
}
@book{Gamsachurdia2007,
  author    = {Gamsachurdia, Giwi},
  title     = {Steuerverteilung und Finanzausgleich},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-18784},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {This paper analyzes fundamental shortcomings in the Georgian legal bases in both the constitution and the tax code with regard to a sustainable fiscal policy. It shows that the lack of experience with sharing political powers and competences among the administrative levels create centralizing tendencies, which are in sharp contrast to more recent laws on local selfgovernment. Having set the legal background of today's administrative structure in Georgia, the paper continues to describe the country's budget composition in terms of tax revenues and expenses since the year 2000. Following a brief discussion of the Georgian systems of transfers to subordinate administrative entities the paper concludes by naming essential reform steps that need to be taken towards the development of a functioning fiscal policy on all levels.},
  language  = {de}
}
@book{Ehrke2007,
  author    = {Ehrke, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Zentralisieren durch Dezentralisierung? : Die Reform der Kommunalfinanzen in Georgien},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-18515},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {Under the influence of orientation towards European integration, Georgia has introduced a variety of new laws with the apparent aim to decentralize legislative and executive powers. This paper shows that the Georgian efforts of decentralization remain superficial, mainly because they are not backed by additional fiscal competences at the municipality level. Following an initial description of the pre-reform situation as of 2006 and based upon a detailed account of the structural changes since 2007, the author gives insight into the conflicts which arise from the lack of institutional congruency. Neither the extraordinary status of the capital Tbilisi nor the seeming autonomy of the Rebublic of Adjara are likely to sway the renegade territories of Abchasia and Ossetia towards a reintegration under Georgian centralized rule as it continues to exist today. Likewise, the success of the proposed and discussed fiscal equalization scheme depends on whether the President and his ruling party are willing to delegate powers to the subodinate jurisdictions.},
  language  = {de}
}