Suchergebnisse

This paper examines a variety of explanations for why some active groups are better represented in local bureaucracies than other active groups. An examination of 1397 group-agency relationships in 55 cities resulted in some tentative evidence supporting the following propositions: (1) The organizational structures of groups-their permanency, their cohesion, and their size—do not explain the level of group representa tion in local bureaucracies. (2) The behavioral characteristics of groups—"the public-regardingness" of their demands, the "effectiveness" of their leadership, and the "conventionality" of their style-partially explain variations in group representation. (3) Organizations composed primarily of blacks and especially of low-status citizens tend to adopt some ineffective behaviors—making private-regarding demands, using ineffective leadership, and adopting unconventional styles-which result in reduced representation. (4) The extent to which blacks are underrepresented in local bureaucracies is not fully accounted for by behavioral variables. Part of the underrepresentation of black groups may be due to continuing overt discrimination.

It is frequently asserted by democratic theorists that policymakers should be highly responsive to citizen inputs. Because of its importance in normative theory, the concept of responsiveness has been the subject of many empirical investigations seeking to describe and explain the degree of responsiveness of American state and local governments. However, broad generalizations regarding the degree of responsiveness of these governments and general explanations specifying the social and political conditions enhancing responsiveness have not been forthcoming. A major reason for the lack of cumulative knowledge in this area is that the concept of responsiveness to citizen inputs has been treated in a casual and often ambiguous fashion.
Most scholars agree that responsiveness occurs when citizen concerns and activities, treated as input variables, are reflected in public policy, treated as output variables. A lack of responsiveness occurs when policymakers adopt and implement policies which are independent of, and contrary to, citizen concerns. However, the ambiguity of this definition is apparent if one considers the multiplicity of types of citizen inputs to which policymakers can potentially respond.

Responsiveness bias, the degree to which governments respond unequally to the public policy preferences of various community subpopulations, is a previously unstudied dimension of political inequality. An empirical examination of responsiveness bias in the 51 cities of the Permanent Community Sample, based on simulations of subcommunity preferences, reveals that responsiveness is usually biased to favor the advantaged, though a few communities favor the disadvantaged. Larger & wealthier cities, with well-organized interest groups having little minority representation, are likeliest to bias their policies to favor the advantaged. 8 Tables, Appendix. Modified HA.