IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v45y1985i1p89-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bureaucracy and the divisibility of local public output

Author

Listed:
  • Rodolfo Gonzalez
  • Stephen Mehay

Abstract

The empirical results of this paper are derived from a monopoly view of local government decisionmaking in contrast to the competitive view offered by earlier researchers. That our results are similar to earlier findings lends additional support to the conclusion that local output is largely private in nature. Other than park and recreation services, there appear to be no economies in consumption for local services, nor any economies of density. Larger cities do not appear to be more efficient than smaller cities. 10 Of course, this result holds only for the sample of cities used here and does not rule out scale economies for communities smaller than those in our sample (i.e., below 25,000 population). The pure public goods case is frequently cited as a justification for the provision of many services by local government, and for increasing the size and reducing the number of local jurisdictions. Therefore, it is noteworthy that empirical tests derived from models that have employed differing assumptions about the monopoly power of local government have found little evidence to support these arguments for consolidating local government. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1985

Suggested Citation

  • Rodolfo Gonzalez & Stephen Mehay, 1985. "Bureaucracy and the divisibility of local public output," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 89-101, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:45:y:1985:i:1:p:89-101
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00163589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00163589
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00163589?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. Borcherding, Thomas E & Deacon, Robert T, 1972. "The Demand for the Services of Non-Federal Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 891-901, December.
    2. Melville L. McMillan & W. Robert Wilson & Louise M. Arthur, 1981. "The Publicness of Local Public Goods: Evidence from Ontario Municipalities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 14(4), pages 596-608, November.
    3. Romer, Thomas & Rosenthal, Howard, 1979. "The elusive median voter," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 143-170, October.
    4. Brennan,Geoffrey & Buchanan,James M., 2006. "The Power to Tax," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521027922.
    5. Gramlich, Edward M & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1982. "Micro Estimates of Public Spending Demand Functions and Tests of the Tiebout and Median-Voter Hypotheses," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 536-560, June.
    6. Pommerehne, Werner W., 1978. "Institutional approaches to public expenditure : Empirical evidence from Swiss municipalities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 255-280, April.
    7. Robert Inman, 1978. "Testing political economy’s ‘as if’ proposition: is the median income voter really decisive?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 45-65, December.
    8. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64, pages 416-416.
    9. Romer, Thomas & Rosenthal, Howard, 1982. "Median Voters or Budget Maximizers: Evidence from School Expenditure Referenda," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(4), pages 556-578, October.
    10. Rogers Ahlbrandt, 1973. "Efficiency in the provision of fire services," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, September.
    11. Niskanen, William A, 1975. "Bureaucrats and Politicians," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 617-643, December.
    12. Ott, Mack, 1980. "Bureaucracy, monopoly, and the demand for municipal services," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 362-382, November.
    13. Lovell, Michael C, 1978. "Spending for Education: The Exercise of Public Choice," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(4), pages 487-495, November.
    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. Paul Wyckoff, 1989. "Bureaucracy and the ‘publicness’ of local public goods: A reply to Gonzalez, Folsom and Mehay," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 79-82, July.
    2. Chris Fawson & Gary Giroux, 1988. "An empirical extension of the municipal monopoly model to provision of community infrastructure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 79-83, April.
    3. Stephen Mehay & Kenneth Seiden, 1986. "Municipal residency laws and local public budgets," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 27-35, January.
    4. Kevin T. Duffy-Deno & Douglas R. Dalenberg, 1993. "The Municipal Wage and Employment Effects of Public Infrastructure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 30(9), pages 1577-1589, November.
    5. Stephen L. Mehay & Rodolfo A. Gonzalez, 1987. "Outside Information and the Monopoly Power of a Public Bureau: An Empirical Analysis," Public Finance Review, , vol. 15(1), pages 61-75, January.
    6. N. Vasudeva Murthy, 1987. "Bureaucracy and the divisibility of local public output: Further econometric evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 265-272, October.
    7. Rodolfo Gonzalez & Roger Folsom & Stephen Mehay, 1989. "Bureaucracy, publicness and local government expenditures revisited: Comment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 71-77, July.
    8. Gary Giroux, 1989. "Monopoly power and monitoring: A test using the Gonzalez and Mehay model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 73-78, October.
    9. Rodolfo Gonzalez & Stephen Mehay, 1987. "Municipal annexation and local monopoly power," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 245-255, January.
    10. Rodolfo A. Gonzalez & Stephen L. Mehay, 1990. "Publicness, Scale, and Spillover Effects in Defense Spending," Public Finance Review, , vol. 18(3), pages 273-290, July.
    11. Paul Wyckoff, 1988. "Bureaucracy and the ‘publicness’ of local public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 271-284, March.
    12. Kevin M. O'Brien, 1997. "Do Municipal Residency Laws Affect Labour Market Outcomes?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 34(11), pages 1759-1769, November.

    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. N. Vasudeva Murthy, 1987. "Bureaucracy and the divisibility of local public output: Further econometric evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 265-272, October.
    2. Rhee, Se-Koo, 1996. "The impact of intergovernmental grants-in-aid on public school expenditure under the segregated school system," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012396, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2007. "How Decisive Is the Decisive Voter?," Working papers 2007-28, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2008.
    4. Marc Baudry & Matthieu Leprince & Cyriaque Moreau, 2002. "Préférences révélées, bien public local et électeur médian : tests sur données françaises," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 156(5), pages 125-146.
    5. 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.
    6. Gebhard Kirchgassner, 2002. "The effects of fiscal institutions on public finance: a survey of the empirical evidence," Chapters, in: Stanley L. Winer & Hirofumi Shibata (ed.), Political Economy and Public Finance, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. G. Tridimas*, 1985. "Budget Deficits and the Growth of Public Expenditure in South Africa," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 53(4), pages 251-257, December.
    8. Saiz, Albert, 2011. "The median voter didn't show up: Costly meetings and insider rents," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 415-425, September.
    9. Rodney Fort, 1988. "The median voter, setters, and non-repeated construction bond issues," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 213-231, March.
    10. Benoît Le Maux, 2009. "Governmental behavior in representative democracy: a synthesis of the theoretical literature," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 447-465, December.
    11. Jeffrey S. Zax, 1985. "Municipal Employment, Municipal Unions, and Demand for Municipal Services," NBER Working Papers 1728, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, "undated". "The Role of Direct Democracy and Federalism in Local Power," IEW - Working Papers 209, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Alexander Eck & Carolin Fritzsche & Jan Kluge & Joachim Ragnitz & Felix Rösel, 2015. "Fiscal Capacity and Determining Structural Characteristics of the Eastern German Laender," ifo Dresden Studien, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 76, July.
    14. Alexander Eck & Joachim Ragnitz & Johannes Steinbrecher & Christian Thater, 2012. "The future appropriateness of the revenue sharing between different groups of municipalities in Saxony," ifo Dresden Studien, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 67, July.
    15. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Direct Democracy for Transition Countries," IEW - Working Papers 165, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    16. Randall Holcombe, 1989. "The median voter model in public choice theory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 115-125, May.
    17. Balsdon, Ed & Brunner, Eric J. & Rueben, Kim, 2003. "Private demands for public capital: evidence from school bond referenda," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 610-638, November.
    18. Sergey Sinelnikov & Pavel Kadochnikov & Ilya Trunin, 2008. "From Elections to Appointments of the Regional Governors: Major Challenges and Outcomes," Published Papers 2, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, revised 2008.
    19. George Boyne, 1987. "Median voters, political systems and public policies: An empirical test," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 201-219, January.
    20. Steven Deller & David Chicoine, 1988. "Representative versus direct democracy a Tiebout test of relative performance: Comment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 69-72, January.

    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:45:y:1985:i:1:p:89-101. 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.