IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/nareaj/159468.html

The Role Of Economic Analysis In Local Government Decision Making-A Public Choice Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • McDowell, George R.

Abstract

Conventional economic theory suggests that economists' contribution to local government is primarily with respect to the production function type of knowledge. A characterization of local government decision making exposes some limitations on applicability of economic analysis of that kind. Public choice perspectives to local government help to redefine an.d elaborate the role of economic analysis in instructing local government decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • McDowell, George R., 1980. "The Role Of Economic Analysis In Local Government Decision Making-A Public Choice Perspective," Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 9(01), pages 1-7, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nareaj:159468
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.159468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/159468/files/The%20rold.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.159468?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George R. McDowell, 1978. "An Analytical Framework for Extension Community Development Programming in Local Government," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(3), pages 416-424.
    2. Mueller, Dennis C, 1976. "Public Choice: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 395-433, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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. McDowell, George R., 1980. "The Role Of Economic Analysis In Local Government Decision Making-A Public Choice Perspective," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-7, April.
    2. Hardaker, J. B., 1982. "Fundamental Aspects Of Risk And Uncertainty In Agriculture," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 21(2), October.
    3. Tim Krieger & Daniel Nientiedt, 2025. "The renaissance of ordoliberalism in the 1970s and 1980s," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 408-423, December.
    4. Michele G. Giuranno & Manuela Mosca, 2018. "Political realism and models of the state: Antonio de Viti de Marco and the origins of public choice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 325-345, June.
    5. Earl Brubaker, 1977. "A two-stage hybrid mechanism for collective choice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 101-111, December.
    6. Krieger, Tim & Nientiedt, Daniel, 2022. "The renaissance of ordoliberalism in the 1970s and 1980s," Discussion Paper Series 2022-05, University of Freiburg, Wilfried Guth Endowed Chair for Constitutional Political Economy and Competition Policy.
    7. Darcy W. E. Allen & Chris Berg & Sinclair Davidson & Jason Potts, 2022. "On Coase and COVID-19," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 107-125, August.
    8. Bruno Frey, 1985. "State and prospect of public choice: A European view," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 141-161, January.
    9. Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Stephan & Alice Hallman & Nils Karlsson, 2016. "The “sugar rush” from innovation subsidies: a robust political economy perspective," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 729-756, November.
    10. Beatrice Cherrier & Jean-Baptiste Fleury, 2017. "Economists’ interest in collective decision after World War II: a history," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 23-44, July.
    11. van Velthoven, Ben & van Winden, Frans, 1985. "Towards a politico-economic theory of social security," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 263-289, March.
    12. F. Fatas-Villafranca, 2004. "Public Opinion Formation in Policy Issues. An evolutionary approach," Computing in Economics and Finance 2004 28, Society for Computational Economics.
    13. Saaty, Thomas L. & Shang, Jen S., 2007. "Group decision-making: Head-count versus intensity of preference," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 22-37, March.
    14. Rory Truex & Tina Søreide, 2011. "Why Multi-Stakeholder Groups Succeed and Fail," Chapters, in: Susan Rose-Ackerman & Tina Søreide (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption, Volume Two, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2018. "Eco-System Services in Agrarian Value Chains: Value Detection of Bio-Diversity as Public Good Provision, Problems, and Institutional Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Sandler, Todd & Tschirhart, John T, 1980. "The Economic Theory of Clubs: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1481-1521, December.
    17. Stefan Krause & Fabio Méndez, 2005. "Policy Makers' Preferences, Party Ideology, and the Political Business Cycle," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(4), pages 752-767, April.
    18. Kamath Shyam J., 1994. "Privatization: A Market Prospect Perspective," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 53-104, March.
    19. Stefka Koeva, 2007. "Modern Political Economy: Traditional Approaches and New Directions," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 3-22.
    20. Henry Tulkens & Parkash Chandler, 1992. "Aspects stratégiques des négociations internationales sur les pollutions transfrontières et du partage des coûts de l'épuration," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 43(4), pages 755-768.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ags:nareaj:159468. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nareaea.html .

    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.