Suchergebnisse

One important extension of the IAD framework has been to the study of local public economies. These are multi‐organizational, multi‐level arrangements defined as the set of governmental jurisdictions, public and nonprofit agencies, and private firms that interact in various patterns to provide and produce public goods and services within a specific locality or region. Commonly, the localities or regions studied from this perspective have been U.S. metropolitan areas, often defined as a central city and its surrounding or adjoining county. Localities can be delineated, however, on various terms, and in the IAD framework, it is the geo‐physical nature of a locality that, in substantial part, drives the analysis. One of the strengths of the approach is its capacity to explain local variations in public organization as a function of the geo‐physical diversity of localities, while at the same time developing empirical generalizations and normative principles that apply across diverse regions. What, for example, might the organization and governance of a complex metropolitan area have in common with the organization and governance of a complex protected area, such as the greater Yellowstone eco‐region or the Adirondack Park? Construing both sorts of regions as local public economies can enhance our overall understanding of public organization at the same time that it permits a more nuanced understanding of diverse localities. Such work contributes to the ongoing IAD project of "understanding institutional diversity."

New regionalism combines old wine in old bottles with new approaches to metropolitan problems, both new & long-standing, both real & imaginary. The authors relate findings & conclusions from two decades of research on local public economies to new regionalism, noting areas significant agreement as well as differences. Findings are summarized, & their implications for new regionalism are discussed, particularly with regard to "new localism" as a means to address the serious problems of America's larger cities. 40 References. Adapted from the source document.

FOR MANY OBSERVERS, A LARGE NUMBER OF GOVERNMENTS IN A METROPOLITAN AREA IS THOUGHT TO EQUATE TO "FRAGMENTATION," AND FRAGMENTATIONS, TO INEFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION AND POOR PERFORMANCE. OTHER OBSERVERS FIND A LARGE NUMBER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MEAN COMPETITION AND CONSEQUENT PRESSURES FOR EFFICIENCY. THE NUMBER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, HOWEVER, IS ONLY ONE DIMENSION OF THE STRUCTURE OF A METROPOLITAN AREA. THE AUTHORS IDENTIFY AND MEASURE KEY STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF "FRAGMENTED" METROPOLITAN AREAS, EMPLOYING A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO METROPOLITAN CITY-COUNTIES: ST. LOUIS CITY AND COUNTY, MISSOURI, AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY (PITTSBURGH), PENNSYLVANIA. THEY ARGUE THAT THESE AREAS, WITH THEIR MANY UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, "WORK" BY MEANS OF INTEGRATING STRUCTURES BUILT BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TOGETHER WITH COUNTY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS. COUNTIES, IN PARTICULAR, ARE A USEFUL FOCUS FOR STUDY OF METROPOLITAN RELATIONSHIPS BECAUSE THEY OFTEN PROVIDE THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAME WITHIN WHICH INTEGRATING STRUCTURES ARE BUILT.

Metropolitan governance in most metropolitan areas of the United States can best be understood by reference to the concept of a "local government constitution." A local government constitution is framed by choices made at two levels: 1) an enabling level composed of state constitutional and statutory provisions that local citizens and public officials may use to create and modify local governments, and 2) a chartering level that determines the specific charter of a local government through citizen action. The rules of a local government constitution include those of association, boundary adjustment, fiscal rules, and rules governing interjurisdictional arrangements. Citizens and their officials can and do use these constitutional rules to construct over time complex local public economies that tend to exhibit strong patterns of citizen governance. Recognition of these phenomena yields a different view of local governments from that of "creatures of the state," as articulated by Judge John Dillon in his 1868 decisions.