Estimating the Costs and Benefits of Local Government Reorganisation: A Case of Korea
AbstractIt appears that few empirical studies have been conducted which are aimed at estimating not only the costs but also the benefits surrounding local government reorganisation, either in academia or in government, and most reports on the issue seem to focus primarily on costs. In order to examine local issues such as reorganisation, however, in which many interested parties are controversially involved, both costs and benefits should be estimated objectively and disseminated in as many ways as possible before a referendum is conducted. This paper intends to bridge the gap between current levels of analysis and what is required for an accurate appraisal to be made of local government reorganisation. In it, we introduce the result of a research project conducted in relation to a local authority reorganisation plan implemented in Korea. The initiative seeks to create a unitary local authority replacing one first-tier and four second-tier local authorities within the first tier, in the hope of reducing the cost of providing services and also of making local authorities more competitive. This paper describes the research strategy employed to estimate the costs and benefits associated with local government reorganisation, and then we introduce the results of the analysis. The research process being described here gives us information about what should be included in the categories of costs and benefits, and what methodologies can be applied in estimating these. Finally the analysis shows how much the benefits and costs resulting from reorganisation will be.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa06p206.
Date of creation: Aug 2006
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria
Web page: http://www.ersa.org
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003.
"Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation,"
Economic Issues Journal Articles,
Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
- Peter Martinsson, 2002. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp200205t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2002.
- Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Working Papers in Economics 52, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
- Carey, Malachy & Srinivasan, Ashok & Strauss, Robert P., 1996. "Optimal consolidation of municipalities: An analysis of alternative designs," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 103-119, June.
- Pearce, David, 1998. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 84-100, Winter.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.