Finanssiriskit Suomen kunnissa

TamPub

Kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.author Laesterä, Eero -
dc.date.accessioned 2012-12-03T12:07:12Z
dc.date.available 2012-12-03T12:07:12Z
dc.date.issued 2010 -
dc.identifier.isbn 978-951-44-7961-8 -
dc.identifier.uri http://tampub.uta.fi/handle/10024/66574
dc.description.abstract Vaarantavatko finanssiriskit kuntien itsehallinnon? Tutkimuksessa selvitettiin kuntien finanssiriskien lajit, niiden suuruuteen vaikuttavat tekijät, riskinsietokyvyn ja finanssiriskien suuruus ja laskettiin, riskinsietokyvyn muutos, jos finanssiriskit realisoituisivat yhdellä kertaa täysimääräisesti. Keskeisin käsite on riski. Sen yleisen tason määrityksen mukaan tavoiteltu, oletettu tai toivottu tila tai kehitys toteutuu eri tavalla kuin tavoiteltiin, toivottiin tai oletettiin. Riskien näkökulmasta keskitytään nonprofit-organisaatio kuntaan. Organisaatiomallin ja valtion ja kunnan päämies-agenttisopimuksen vuoksi kunnan pitäisi olla riskiasenteeltaan vain vähän riskiin hakeutuva. Tutkimuksessa erotettiin staattinen finanssiriskiasema (riskinsietokyky) ja varsinaiset dynaamiset finanssiriskit. Riskinsietokyvyn määrittävät ali- tai ylijäämä, maksuvalmius ja velkaantuneisuus. Sitä muuttaa tulojen ja menojen epätasapaino, varoihin ja velkoihin kuuluvien tulojen ja menojen epätasapaino ja niiden arvonmuutokset ja esimerkiksi takausriskin toteutumisesta johtuva uusi velka tai rahavarojen muutos. Lisäksi riskinsietokykyyn vaikuttaa käyttöomaisuuden arvioidusta tai suunnitellusta tarpeesta poikkeava tarve. Jos finanssiriski toteutuessaan heikentää riskinsietokykyä, voidaan puhua yleisesti riskin toteutumisesta tai riskin toteutumisesta negatiivisesti. Kun riskinsietokyky heikkenee riittävästi, vaarantuu toimijan tulevaisuus. Sekä riskinsietokyky että dynaamiset finanssiriskitekijät mitattiin osatekijöistänsä koostuvan summamuuttujan avulla. Näiden kahden summa osoitti, kuinka paljon riskinsietokyky muuttuisi dynaamisten finanssiriskien toteutuessa yhdellä kertaa täydellisesti. Tilastoaineistolla tutkittiin yksittäisten finanssiriskien suuruus vuosina 1997 2006 ja niiden korreloiminen tiettyjen taustamuuttujien kanssa. Korrelaatiot olivat suhteellisen pieniä, mutta joidenkin muuttujien osalle tuli olennaisia kertymiä joihinkin finanssiriskeihin. Eniten finanssiriskien kanssa korreloivat huoltosuhde, koulutustaso ja asukasluvun muutos. Myös väestön ikärakenne vaikutti kunnan finanssiriskeihin: eläkeikäisten osuuden ollessa suuri ja sen kasvaessa finanssiriskit kasvavat. Riskinsietokyvyn osatekijöistä pienin riskinsietokyky oli velkaantuneisuudessa. Tuloriskiin vaikuttivat eniten valtionosuudet, kunnan tulovero ja yhteisövero: nämä muodostavat jo keskenään suuren tuloriskin, noin 10 % kokonaistuloista. Menoriskit olivat noin kolmanneksen tuloriskeistä. Muista dynaamisista finanssiriskeistä suurin oli takausriski ja yksittäistapauksissa valuuttariski. Maakunnista riskinsietokyky oli pienin Kainuussa, Lapissa ja Etelä-Savossa, suurin Uudellamaalla, Pirkanmaalla ja Varsinais-Suomessa. Myös dynaamiset finanssiriskit noudattivat samantapaista maakuntajakoa. Kuntatyypeistä finanssiriskit olivat pieniä esikaupunkikunnissa, suurimpia alkutuotantokunnissa. Voimakkaasti kasvavissa esikaupunkikunnissa riskinsietokyky oli heikko. Riskinsietokyky ja dynaamiset finanssiriskit käyttäytyvät kuntakoon mukaan loogisesti: mitä suurempi kunta, sen parempi riskinsietokyky ja pienemmät dynaamiset finanssiriskit. Tämä osoittaa, että esimerkiksi PARAS-hankkeella olisi parempi pyrkiä asukasluvultaan suurempiin kuntiin eikä vain uusiin hallinnollisiin organisaatioihin. Useissa kunnissa oli pieni riskinsietokyky ja suuret dynaamiset riskit. Tässä joukossa on kriisikuntalistojen kuntia. Näihin kuntiin keskittyi niitä taustamuuttujia, joihin myös riskit keskittyivät. Kunnat myös vaikuttavat olevan väestöä luovuttavia, väestöpohjaltaan ikääntyviä kuntia, joissa tulevaisuuden odotukset ovat muutoinkin heikot. Tutkimuksesta on myös pääteltävissä, että valtion ja kuntien välisen rahoituspohjan on vakiinnuttava tai vastaavasti niiden tehtävänjakoa on muutettava. Tämä vaikuttaa asiallisesti ottaen kuntien itsehallintoon. On kyseenalaista, kuinka kauan tietyt tuloerät pystyvät kasvamaan niin nopeasti kuin mitä ne ovat lähimenneisyydessä kasvaneet. Kuntienkin pitää sopeuttaa palvelurakennettaan vastaamaan mahdollista rahoituspohjaa ja todellista muuttuvaa tarvetta. Niiden pitää muistaa riskiasenteensa ja harkita riskin kasvattamista esimerkiksi elinkeinopoliittisissa hankkeissa. fi
dc.description.abstract Financial risks in Finnish Municipalities The study researched the types of financial risk in municipalities and sought factors contributing to their magnitude, determined the risk-taking ability and size of financial risk, likewise calculated how great the risk-bearing capability would be if financial risks were to materialize in full and all at once. Municipalities and federations of municipalities were compared against each other. The study is qualitative up to the point of model development; when numerical data is added to the model we become concerned with quantitative research. The research method was a constructive approach and comparative research in which theories and methods developed through market environment research were compared to the operating environment of the public sector. The main concept in the study is risk. According to the definition of risk at a general level, the situation or development pursued, assumed and desired materializes in a manner different from that pursued, desired or assumed. In contrast to uncertainty, which is frequently set alongside risk, risk subsumes objectivity and always some probability. In contrast to speculative risk, pure risk is concerned with events in which there is no prospect of profit. The study focuses on the municipality, a non-profit organization, from the perspective of risk. The attitude of a municipality to risk should be one which runs an absolute minimum of risk. This is due to the actoragent agreement between central and local government. Risks are divided into accident and business risks. Against the negative materialization of the former protection can be sought through insurance, not against the latter. Funding and financial risks come under business risk. When a financial risk mate-rializes revenue or expenses mount up in a manner different from what was anticipated, or then the value of assets and debts develops in a manner different from what was pursued. The study draws a distinction between the static financial risk position (tolerance of risk) and actual dynamic financial risks. The ability to tolerate risk is defined as a static state, a position determined by deficit or surplus, liquidity or indebtedness. First of all tolerance of risk changes the imbalance of revenues and expenses pertaining to operations; secondly the imbalance of revenues and expenses pertaining to assets and debts; thirdly it is changed by changes in the values of assets and debts or, for example, by a new debt or change in monetary assets due to the materialization of surety risk. Tolerance of risk is further influ-enced by a need which differs from the estimated or planned need for fixed assets. If, as a result of the materialization of dynamic risks the tolerance of risks increases, the ability of the municipality to retain its independence as an actor providing services will improve. This can be taken to be a positive materialization of financial risk. If a materializing dynamic finance risks impairs tolerance of risk we are concerned in general with the materialization of risk or the materialization of risk in a negative way. When the tolerance of risk declines sufficiently, the future of the actor is in jeopardy. Risk management is an entity subsuming an approach to an assessment of the problem, identification of risks and assessment of the consequences, likewise manage-ment of risk either preventively or by elimination. Identification and assessment are inextricably linked to risk measurement. In order for risks to be measurable, they must first be operationalized; thereafter they can be compared against each other or investigated in relation to background variables. Risk measurement is closely connected to the concept of distribution. Financial risks are measured by VAR analysis and the CAPM method, also by the Monte Carl method, which is among the stochastic models. Methods based on distribution of risks have been developed to eliminate financial risks; these are based on portfolio theory. Risk-bearing objects are classified and placed in order by classification of risks (rating). Methods of bankruptcy research can also be brought to bear on municipality research. Tolerance of risk was measured in the work by means of a sum variable composed of its subfactors. Dynamic finance risks were also summed to the sum variable. The sum of these two demonstrated how much tolerance of risk would change if dynamic finance risks were to materialize in full all at once. Not all finance risks could be operationalized and measured (e.g. land risk, political risk etc.). Some of the measures include speculation in the parameters used (e.g. measuring interest risk, currency risk etc.). The study used real statistical data to examine how great the finance risks were dur-ing the period 1997-2006 and also how individual financial risks correlated with certain background variables. The correlations were consistently relatively low, but for some variables there were significant accumulations on several finance risks with these weak correlations. Among the background variables those correlating most with financial risks were service proportion, level of education and change in number of residents. Age structure of the population affected the formation of finance risk of a municipality: when the share of those over the age of 64 was great and as it increased so also did the financial risks increase. An increase in the share of the population of older age groups demonstrated a similar effect. Among the individual risk tolerance subfactors describing tolerance of risk, the lowest tolerance of risk was in indebtedness. The risks were assigned values on both sides of zero. Not even a major amount of loan is fatal if income funding is adequate. Revenue risk was also much affected by state subsidies, municipal income tax and business cycle based community tax. These formed by magnitude even alone an income risk composed of income structure risks whose distribution was large, some 10% of total revenue. Their simultaneous change to negative would mean from the perspective of finance the elimination from overall revenue of almost one percentage point of revenue. Expense risks were consistently about one third smaller than revenue risks. Greater variations were discernible in expense risks in personnel costs and procurement costs. In small municipalities especially, this is likely symptomatic of a shift from own service production to buying-in of services. It was apparent in cost structures as a whole that expenses did not react sufficiently to change in service need, but that revenues did so react. Among other dynamic finance risks the greatest was in surety. Currency risk was also great in individual cases. Regions, population groups and types of municipality were chosen as groups of municipalities for the study. Tolerance of risk was lowest in the municipality of Kainuu, in Lapland and southern Savo and greatest in Uusimaa, Pirkanmaa and South-west Finland. Dynamic finance risks also adhered to the same regional division. Contemplated by type of municipality, the risks are small particularly in suburban municipalities and in larger municipalities with primary production. Tolerance of risk in suburban municipalities with marked growth was low notably when scrutinized through liquidity and indebtedness the suburban municipalities were in a weak position. In municipalities with population growth the total revenue risk was greatest. Numerous municipalities were characterized by low tolerance of risk and large dynamic risks. Among these municipalities there a municipalities on the crisis list. In these there was a concentration of those background variables on which risks also concentrate. The problem is that these municipalities appear to be those which are losing population, whose population base is ageing and whose future expectations are otherwise low. en
dc.language.iso fi -
dc.publisher Tampere University Press -
dc.relation.isformatof 978-951-44-7960-1 -
dc.subject Riski -
dc.subject finanssiriski -
dc.subject riskienhallinta -
dc.subject kunta -
dc.subject kuntatalous -
dc.subject risk -
dc.subject financial risk -
dc.subject risk management -
dc.subject municipality -
dc.subject municipal finance -
dc.title Finanssiriskit Suomen kunnissa -
dc.type.ontasot fi=Väitöskirja | en=Doctoral dissertation| -
dc.identifier.urn urn:isbn:978-951-44-7961-8 -
dc.relation.numberinseries 1494 -
dc.seriesname Acta Universitatis Tamperensis -
dc.oldstats 1152 -
dc.seriesname.electronic Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis -
dc.relation.numberinserieselectronic 930 -
dc.publisher.electronic Tampere University Press -
dc.subject.study Kunnallistalous - Local Public Economics -
dc.date.dissertation 2010-01-29 -
dc.onsale 1 -
dc.faculty fi=Kauppa- ja hallintotieteiden tiedekunta | en=Faculty of Economics and Administration| -
dc.department fi=Taloustieteiden laitos | en=Department of Economics and Accounting| -

Viite kuuluu kokoelmiin:

Kuvailutiedot