IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v48y1986i3p255-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fragmentation and the growth of local government

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Schneider

Abstract

An assumption of the post-World War II metropolitan reform movement was that fragmentation of metropolitan regions into multiple local governments was wasteful and inefficient, increasing the cost and size of government. More recently, ‘polycentrists’ have argued that the competition between multiple governments in metropolitan regions can in factreduce the growth in government by providing a competitive check on the excessive demands of local bureaucrats for more resources. In this article, I explore the effects of fragmentation on growth in the size of suburban municipal government budgets and in the number of services offered. Competition inherent in more fragmented metropolitan regions is shown to slow the expansion in local government expenditures and service levels. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1986

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Schneider, 1986. "Fragmentation and the growth of local government," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 255-263, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:48:y:1986:i:3:p:255-263
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00051622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00051622
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00051622?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miller, Gary J. & Moe, Terry M., 1983. "Bureaucrats, Legislators, and the Size of Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(2), pages 297-322, June.
    2. Thomas Dilorenzo, 1981. "The expenditure effects of restricting competition in local public service industries: The case of special districts," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 569-578, January.
    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. Lars Feld, 2014. "James Buchanan’s theory of federalism: from fiscal equity to the ideal political order," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 231-252, September.
    2. Becker, Gary S & Mulligan, Casey B, 2003. "Deadweight Costs and the Size of Government," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 293-340, October.
    3. Juan Luis Gómez-Reino & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2021. "Evidence on Economies of Scale in Local Public Service Provision: A Meta-Analysis," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper2116, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    4. Agustín León-Moreta, 2019. "Functional responsibilities of municipal government: Metropolitan disparities and instruments of intergovernmental management," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(12), pages 2585-2607, September.
    5. Peter Boettke & Christopher Coyne & Peter Leeson, 2011. "Quasimarket failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 209-224, October.
    6. Zhu, Z. & Krug, B., 2005. "Is China a Leviathan?," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2004-103-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    7. Dean Stansel, 2006. "Interjurisdictional Competition and Local Government Spending in U.S. Metropolitan Areas," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(2), pages 173-194, March.
    8. Elinor Ostrom, 2005. "Unlocking Public Entrepreneurship and Public Economies," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2005-01, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Jeffrey Zax, 1988. "The Effects of Jurisdiction Types and Numbers on Local Public Finance," NBER Chapters, in: Fiscal Federalism: Quantitative Studies, pages 79-106, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Keith Dowding & Peter John & Stephen Biggs, 1994. "Tiebout : A Survey of the Empirical Literature," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 31(4-5), pages 767-797, May.
    11. Zhu, Z. & Krug, B., 2005. "Is China a Leviathan?," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-087-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    12. Yonsu Kim & Jae Hong Kim, 2022. "What drives variations in public health and social services expenditures? the association between political fragmentation and local expenditure patterns," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(5), pages 781-789, July.
    13. Juan Luis Gómez-Reino & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2013. "An international perspective on the determinants of local government fragmentation," Chapters, in: Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez (ed.), The Challenge of Local Government Size, chapter 2, pages 8-54, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Lars P. Feld & Gebhard Kirchgässner & Christoph A. Schaltegger, 2010. "Decentralized Taxation and the Size of Government: Evidence from Swiss State and Local Governments," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(1), pages 27-48, July.
    15. Mark Schneider, 1989. "Intercity competition and the size of the local public work force," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 253-265, December.
    16. Joshua C. Hall & Justin M. Ross, 2010. "Tiebout Competition, Yardstick Competition, and Tax Instrument Choice: Evidence from Ohio School Districts," Public Finance Review, , vol. 38(6), pages 710-737, November.
    17. Dean Stansel, 2012. "Competition, knowledge, and local government," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 25(3), pages 243-253, September.
    18. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12262 is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Clark C. Gibson, 2009. "Balancing Regionalism and Localism: How Institutions and Incentives Shape American Transportation Policy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 633-648, July.
    2. Fox, Glenn, 1985. "Social Rates Of Return To Public Investment In Agricultural Research And The Underinvestment Hypothesis: An Agnostic View," Staff Papers 14054, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    3. Mark Schneider & Byung Ji, 1987. "The flypaper effect and competition in the local market for public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 27-39, January.
    4. Samarth Vaidya, 2004. "Bureaucratic Provision: Influencing vs. Lying," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 251, Econometric Society.
    5. Bernardo Guimaraes & Bruno Meyerhof Salama, 2023. "Permitting Prohibitions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 241-271.
    6. Miltos Makris, 2003. "Administrative Bureaus with Standard Operating Procedures," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 03/062, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    7. Maoz Rosenthal, 2012. "Agenda control in an unstable multiparty parliamentary democracy: evidence from the Israeli public sector," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 22-44, March.
    8. Dieter Schmidtchen & Bernard Steunenberg, "undated". "European Policymaking: An Agency-Theoretic Analysis of the Issue," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2002-1-1040, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    9. Boland, Matthew & Godsell, David, 2021. "Bureaucratic discretion and contracting outcomes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Aleksandar Vasilev, 2013. "On the cost of rent-seeking by government bureaucrats in a Real-Business-Cycle framework," Working Papers 2013_20, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    11. Cheryl L. Eavey & Gary J. Miller, 1995. "Subcommittee Agenda Control," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(2), pages 125-156, April.
    12. Poterba, James M., 1995. "Capital budgets, borrowing rules, and state capital spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 165-187, February.
    13. David Willison, 1987. "Agency audits and congressional oversight: The impact of state tax burdens on GAO audit requests," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 277-281, August.
    14. Guimaraesy, Bernardo & Meyerhof Salama, Bruno, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86146, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Robert Blewett, 1984. "Off-budget activities of local government: Comment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 205-211, January.
    16. Juan Luis Gómez-Reino & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2021. "Evidence on economies of scale in local public service provision: a meta-analysis," Working Papers. Collection A: Public economics, governance and decentralization 2103, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    17. Miltiadis Makris, 2006. "Political authority, expertise and government bureaucracies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 267-284, June.
    18. Samarth Vaidya, 2009. "Influencing The Public And Efficiency In Bureaucratic Provision," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 259-274, May.
    19. Christopher Li, 2021. "Indirect accountability of political appointees," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 383-396, July.
    20. Hamilton, Alexander, 2013. "Small is beautiful, at least in high-income democracies: the distribution of policy-making responsibility, electoral accountability, and incentives for rent extraction," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6305, The World Bank.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:48:y:1986:i:3:p:255-263. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.