IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v61y1989i2p127-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Niskanen effects in the California Community Colleges

Author

Listed:
  • Shirley Kress

Abstract

The regression results of this paper show that bureaucrats act to maximize both their outputs and their discretionary budgets as predicted by Niskanen for demand constrained conditions. But the evidence does not confirm the Niskanen hypothesis concerning chronic oversupply by bureaus. Further, the evidence here shows that the discretionary budgets of bureaus may not fall to zero as suggested by Niskanen. Instead, it would appear that, given severe budget constraint bureaus may not produce an excess supply of output and may cut costs in an effort to maintain a positive discretionary budget balance. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Suggested Citation

  • Shirley Kress, 1989. "Niskanen effects in the California Community Colleges," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 127-140, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:61:y:1989:i:2:p:127-140
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00115659
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00115659
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00115659?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. Carr-Hill, R. A. & Stern, N. H., 1973. "An econometric model of the supply and control of recorded offences in England and Wales," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 289-318.
    2. Niskanen, William A, 1975. "Bureaucrats and Politicians," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 617-643, December.
    3. Davies, David G, 1971. "The Efficiency of Public versus Private Firms, The Case of Australia's Two Airlines," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 149-165, April.
    4. Wagner, Richard E & Weber, Warren E, 1975. "Competition, Monopoly, and the Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 661-684, December.
    5. Clarkson, Kenneth W, 1972. "Some Implications of Property Rights in Hospital Management," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 363-384, October.
    6. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    7. Moene, Karl O., 1986. "Types of bureaucratic interaction," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 333-345, April.
    8. Howard R. Bowen, 1943. "The Interpretation of Voting in the Allocation of Economic Resources," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 58(1), pages 27-48.
    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. Kuo, Jenn-Shyong & Ho, Yi-Cheng, 2008. "The cost efficiency impact of the university operation fund on public universities in Taiwan," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 603-612, October.
    2. Fredrik W. Andersson & Henrik Jordahl & Anders Kärnä, 2024. "Ballooning bureaucracy? Stylized facts of growing administration in Swedish higher education," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 303-326, June.
    3. Paul A. Raschky, 2013. "The media and discretionary behaviour of bureaucrats," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(10), pages 945-948, July.
    4. Paul Raschky, 2007. "The overprotective parent - Bureaucratic agencies and natural hazard management," Working Papers 2007-03, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

    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. Partha Gangopadhyay & Shyam Nath, 2001. "Bargaining, Coalitions and Local Expenditure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(13), pages 2379-2391, December.
    2. John Bradbury & W. Crain, 2005. "Legislative district configurations and fiscal policy in American States," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 385-407, December.
    3. John Jackson, 2014. "Location, location, location: the Davis-Hinich model of electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 197-218, April.
    4. D.P. Doessel & Abbas Valadkhani, 2002. "Public Finance and The Size of Government: A Literature Review and Econometric Results for Fiji," School of Economics and Finance Discussion Papers and Working Papers Series 108, School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology.
    5. Schläpfer, F. & Mann, S., 2013. "Eine erweiterte Gesamtrechnung der multifunktionalen Schweizer Landwirtschaft," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48, March.
    6. Cooter, Robert D., 1997. "Commodifying Liability," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt9pq4m8ts, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    7. Pierre Andre & Sandrine Mesplé-Somps, 2010. "Politics and the geographic allocation of public funds in a semi-democracy. The case of Ghana, 1996 - 2004," Working Papers halshs-00962698, HAL.
    8. Christian Bjørnskov & Axel Dreher & Justina Fischer, 2008. "Cross-country determinants of life satisfaction: exploring different determinants across groups in society," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 119-173, January.
    9. Samarth Vaidya, 2004. "Bureaucratic Provision: Influencing vs. Lying," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 251, Econometric Society.
    10. Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2009. "Is the Median Voter Decisive? Evidence of 'Ends Against the Middle' From Referenda Voting Patterns," Working papers 2009-02, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised May 2010.
    11. Doessel, Darrel & Valadkhani, Abbas, 2003. "The Demand for Current Public Expenditure in Fiji: Theory and Empirical Results," MPRA Paper 50392, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. David L. Sollars & Bruce L. Benson & David W. Rasmussen, 1994. "Drug Enforcement and the Deterrence of Property Crime Among Local Jurisdictions," Public Finance Review, , vol. 22(1), pages 22-45, January.
    13. Tanner, Thomas Cole, 1994. "The spatial theory of elections: an analysis of voters' predictive dimensions and recovery of the underlying issue space," ISU General Staff Papers 1994010108000018174, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Walter E. Block, 2017. "Radical Privatization: Oceans, Roads,Heavenly Bodies," Romanian Economic Business Review, Romanian-American University, vol. 12(2), pages 41-56, June.
    15. Steven Craig & Robert P. Inman, 1986. "Education, Welfare and the "New" Federalism: State Budgeting in a Federalist Public Economy," NBER Chapters, in: Studies in State and Local Public Finance, pages 187-228, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Thomas DiLorenzo, 1982. "Utility profits, fiscal illusion, and local public expenditures," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 243-252, January.
    17. Geys, Benny & Vermeir, Jan, 2008. "The political cost of taxation: new evidence from German popularity ratings [Besteuerung und Popularität von Politikern: Neue Ergebnisse für die Deutsche Bundesregierung 1978-2003]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2008-06, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    18. John G. Head, 1977. "Public Goods:The Polar Case Reconsidered," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 53(2), pages 227-238, June.
    19. Blankart, Charles B., 1978. "Bureaucratic problems of public choice: Why do public goods still remain public?," Discussion Papers, Series I 111, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    20. Randall Holcombe, 1989. "The median voter model in public choice theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 115-125, May.

    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:61:y:1989:i:2:p:127-140. 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.