IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v37y2020i2p260-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Context of Responsiveness: Resident Preferences, Water Scarcity, and Municipal Conservation Policy

Author

Listed:
  • David Switzer

Abstract

The extent to which municipal policy is determined by the preferences of residents is a topic of growing importance. Recent work on the subject has challenged conventional wisdom and found that municipal policy is often, but not always, responsive to the ideology of residents. This paper takes up an important potential implication of these findings, exploring how resident ideology may interact with issue severity in the adoption of municipal policy. Hypotheses suggest that resident preferences will have the greatest effect in the presence of high issue severity and that issue severity will have the largest impact when residents have ideological preferences in line with policy solutions. I test hypotheses using municipal water rates, with models showing that the effects of resident ideology and water scarcity interact with each other to influence water conservation policy. 自治区政策在多大程度上由居民偏好所决定，这是一个越来越重要的话题。近期有关该主题的研究挑战了传统看法，发现自治区政策时常对其居民的思想予以响应。本文从这些研究发现的一个潜在意义出发，探究在采纳自治区政策时居民思想可能如何与议题严重性产生相互影响。假设认为，居民偏好将在议题严重性较高时发挥最大效果，并且议题严重性将在居民思想偏好与政策解决措施相一致时发挥最大影响。我以自治区水费为例检验了假设，模型显示，居民思想和水资源匮乏二者产生相互作用，进而影响节水政策。 La medida en que la política municipal está determinada por las preferencias de los residentes es un tema de creciente importancia. El trabajo reciente sobre el tema ha desafiado la sabiduría convencional y ha encontrado que la política municipal a menudo, pero no siempre, responde a la ideología de sus residentes. Este documento aborda una importante implicación potencial de estos hallazgos, explorando cómo la ideología de los residentes puede interactuar con la gravedad del problema en la adopción de la política municipal. Las hipótesis sugieren que las preferencias de los residentes tendrán el mayor efecto en presencia de una alta gravedad del problema y que la gravedad del problema tendrá el mayor impacto cuando los residentes tengan preferencias ideológicas en línea con las soluciones políticas. Pruebo hipótesis utilizando tarifas de agua municipales, con modelos que muestran que los efectos de la ideología de los residentes y la escasez de agua interactúan entre sí para influir en la política de conservación del agua.

Suggested Citation

  • David Switzer, 2020. "The Context of Responsiveness: Resident Preferences, Water Scarcity, and Municipal Conservation Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(2), pages 260-279, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:2:p:260-279
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12377
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12377
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12377?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tausanovitch, Chris & Warshaw, Christopher, 2014. "Representation in Municipal Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 605-641, August.
    2. Gurung, Aditya & Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto, 2019. "Determinants of the water rate structure choice by Canadian municipalities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 89-101.
    3. Sara Hughes & Daniel Miller Runfola & Benjamin Cormier, 2018. "Issue Proximity and Policy Response in Local Governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 35(2), pages 192-212, March.
    4. Sammy Zahran & Samuel D Brody & Arnold Vedlitz & Himanshu Grover & Caitlyn Miller, 2008. "Vulnerability and Capacity: Explaining Local Commitment to Climate-Change Policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(3), pages 544-562, June.
    5. Vigdor, Jacob L, 2004. "Other People's Taxes: Nonresident Voters and Statewide Limitation of Local Government," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(2), pages 453-476, October.
    6. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    7. Megan Mullin, 2008. "The Conditional Effect of Specialized Governance on Public Policy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 125-141, January.
    8. Mark Lubell & Richard C. Feiock & Edgar E. Ramirez De La Cruz, 2009. "Local Institutions and the Politics of Urban Growth," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 649-665, July.
    9. Christopher Boyer & Damian Adams & Tatiana Borisova & Christopher Clark, 2012. "Factors Driving Water Utility Rate Structure Choice: Evidence from Four Southern U.S. States," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(10), pages 2747-2760, August.
    10. Gamm, Gerald & Kousser, Thad, 2013. "No Strength in Numbers: The Failure of Big-City Bills in American State Legislatures, 1880–2000," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(4), pages 663-678, November.
    11. Hopkins, Daniel J., 2010. "Politicized Places: Explaining Where and When Immigrants Provoke Local Opposition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(1), pages 40-60, February.
    12. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(5), pages 416-416.
    13. Aaron Deslatte & Richard C Feiock, 2019. "The Collaboration Riskscape: Fragmentation, Problem Types and Preference Divergence in Urban Sustainability," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 49(2), pages 352-377.
    14. Hainmueller, Jens & Mummolo, Jonathan & Xu, Yiqing, 2019. "How Much Should We Trust Estimates from Multiplicative Interaction Models? Simple Tools to Improve Empirical Practice," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 163-192, April.
    15. Sears, David O. & Lau, Richard R. & Tyler, Tom R. & Allen, Harris M., 1980. "Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 670-684, September.
    16. Jordi Honey-Rosés & Claudio Pareja, 2019. "Metrics and Methods for Comparing Water Utility Rate Structures," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-31, April.
    17. Elisabeth R Gerber & Daniel J Hopkins, 2011. "When Mayors Matter: Estimating the Impact of Mayoral Partisanship on City Policy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 326-339, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helmke-Long, Laura & Carley, Sanya & Konisky, David M., 2022. "Municipal government adaptive capacity programs for vulnerable populations during the U.S. energy transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Helmke-Long, Laura & Carley, Sanya & Konisky, David M., 2022. "Municipal government adaptive capacity programs for vulnerable populations during the U.S. energy transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. M. Allaire & A. Dinar, 2022. "What Drives Water Utility Selection of Pricing Methods? Evidence from California," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(1), pages 153-169, January.
    3. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Viladecans-Marsal, Elisabet, 2013. "Do political parties matter for local land use policies?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 42-56.
    4. Gouvêa, Raphael & Girardi, Daniele, 2021. "Partisanship and local fiscal policy: Evidence from Brazilian cities," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    5. Lange, Martin & Schmidt, Alexander, 2023. "High-profile crime and perceived public safety: Evidence from Cologne's new year's eve in 2015," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-068, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Makarin, Alexey & Piqué, Ricardo & Aragón, Fernando, 2020. "National or sub-national parties: Does party geographic scope matter?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    7. Elena Kantorowicz‐Reznichenko & Jarosław Kantorowicz & Keren Weinshall, 2022. "Ideological bias in constitutional judgments: Experimental analysis and potential solutions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 716-757, September.
    8. Solé-Ollé, Albert & Viladecans-Marsal, Elisabet, 2013. "Do political parties matter for local land use policies?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 42-56.
    9. Heidi Jane Smith & Isabel Melguizo, 2019. "Over indebted Subnational Mexico: Does political polarization affect debt policy decisions?," Working Paper Series Sobre México 2019001, Sobre México. Temas en economía.
    10. Lewis, Blane D. & Nguyen, Hieu T.M. & Hendrawan, Adrianus, 2020. "Political accountability and public service delivery in decentralized Indonesia: Incumbency advantage and the performance of second term mayors," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Schmutz, Benoît & Verdugo, Gregory, 2023. "Do elections affect immigration? Evidence from French municipalities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    12. Daniel Benjamin Bailey & Sung‐Wook Kwon & Nathaniel Wright, 2023. "Pay to protect: Examining the factors of the use of market‐based instruments for local water sustainability," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(2), pages 207-229, March.
    13. Mazumder, Soumyajit, 2019. "Becoming White: How Military Service Turned Immigrants into Americans," SocArXiv agjsm, Center for Open Science.
    14. Roberto Basile & Valerio Filoso, 2018. "The market value of political partisanship: Quasi‐experimental evidence from municipal elections," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(S1), pages 193-209, March.
    15. Le Anh Nguyen Long & Megan Foster & Gwen Arnold, 2019. "The impact of stakeholder engagement on local policy decision making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(4), pages 549-571, December.
    16. Lang, Corey & Prendergast, Patrick & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna, 2018. "How does municipal policy affect state and local actions? Evidence from land conservation spending," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 23-36.
    17. Landgrave, Michelangelo Geovanny, 2020. "How Do Legislators Value Constituent’s (Statistical) Lives? COVID-19, Partisanship, and Value of a Statistical Life Analysis," SocArXiv n93w2, Center for Open Science.
    18. Iris Hui & Gemma Smith & Caroline Kimmel, 2019. "Think globally, act locally: adoption of climate action plans in California," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 489-509, August.
    19. Richard C. Feiock & Soyoung Kim, 2021. "The Political Market and Sustainability Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-9, March.
    20. Bryan Caplan & Stephen Miller, 2012. "Positive versus normative economics: what’s the connection? Evidence from the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy and the General Social Survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 241-261, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:2:p:260-279. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.