IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/pubmgr/v17y2015i3p425-442.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Service Quality, Administrative Process, and Citizens' Evaluation of Local Government in the US

Author

Listed:
  • Gregg G. Van Ryzin

Abstract

It is often assumed that citizens evaluate government based on service quality or outcomes (such as safe neighbourhoods or good schools), but aspects of administrative process (such as fairness and respect) are also important. Using data from two US surveys, this study examines how service quality and administrative process influence citizens' evaluations of government. Results indicate that service quality matters most to ratings of the community; in contrast, administrative process is the dominant driver of trust; and both quality and process have large effects on judgements about government's overall job performance. Implications for public management research and practice are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregg G. Van Ryzin, 2015. "Service Quality, Administrative Process, and Citizens' Evaluation of Local Government in the US," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 425-442, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:pubmgr:v:17:y:2015:i:3:p:425-442
    DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2013.841456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14719037.2013.841456
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14719037.2013.841456?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. Brian E. Dollery & Joseph Garcea & Edward C. LeSage Jr (ed.), 2008. "Local Government Reform," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12592.
    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. Kumar, Anil, 2021. "Analysing the drivers of customer happiness at authorized workshops and improving retention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    2. James Gerard Caillier, 2020. "Bureaucratic Bashing and Praising: What Effect Does it Have on the Performance Citizens Assign Agencies?," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 685-701, December.
    3. Marzena Piotrowska-Trybull & Maria Jablonska-Woloszyn, 2020. "Assessment of Services Rendered by a Public Organization to the Citizen: The Perspective of Security in Peacetime," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 623-637.
    4. Yunsoo Lee, 2021. "Government for Leaving No One Behind: Social Equity in Public Administration and Trust in Government," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    5. Takis Venetoklis, 2021. "Exogenous shocks and citizens’ satisfaction with governmental policies: can empirical evidence from the 2008 financial crisis help us understand better the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(6), pages 1973-2000, December.
    6. Maria Denisa Vasilescu & Simona Andreea Apostu & Eva Militaru & Eglantina Hysa, 2022. "Public Opinion on European Health Policy, Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-17, April.

    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. David Bartolini, 2015. "Municipal fragmentation and economic performance in OECD TL2 regions," ERSA conference papers ersa15p607, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Brian Dollery & Michael Kortt & Bligh Grant, 2013. "Options for rationalizing local government structure: a policy agenda," Chapters, in: Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez (ed.), The Challenge of Local Government Size, chapter 10, pages 242-262, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Hanes, Niklas, 2003. "Empirical Studies in Local Public Finance: Spillovers, Amalgamations, and Tactical Redistribution," Umeå Economic Studies 604, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    4. Singh, Nirvikar & Srinivasan, T. N., 2004. "Fiscal Policy in India: Lessons and Priorities," Santa Cruz Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt8nx3v467, Department of Economics, UC Santa Cruz.
    5. Jean-Michel Josselin & Fabio Padovano & Yvon Rocaboy, 2013. "Grant legislation vs. political factors as determinants of soft budget spending behaviors. Comparison between Italian and French regions," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 10(3), pages 317-354, December.
    6. Benoît Le Maux & Kristýna Dostálová & Fabio Padovano, 2020. "Ideology or voters? A quasi-experimental test of why left-wing governments spend more," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 17-48, January.
    7. Bernard Dafflon, 2012. "Voluntary amalgamation of local governments: the Swiss debate in the European context," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1204, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    8. Quinn Bríd, 2015. "Local government reform – Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose?," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 63(2), pages 7-29, August.
    9. Banaszewska, Monika & Bischoff, Ivo & Bode, Eva & Chodakowska, Aneta, 2022. "Does inter-municipal cooperation help improve local economic performance? – Evidence from Poland," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    10. Juan Luis Gómez-Reino & Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2021. "Evidence on economies of scale in local public service provision: a meta-analysis," Working Papers. Collection A: Public economics, governance and decentralization 2103, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    11. Fabio FIORILLO, 2011. "A model on interests representation and;accountability in small local governments," Working Papers 356, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    12. Giovanna Di Ielsi & Fabio Fiorillo & Francesco Porcelli, 2022. "Le unioni di comuni in Italia: modelli di gestione associata a confronto (The Italian "unioni di comuni": A comparison among different management models of intermunicipal cooperation)," Moneta e Credito, Economia civile, vol. 75(297), pages 11-40.
    13. Dollery, B.E., 2021. "A critical appraisal of the Western Australian local government review panel’s recommendations," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 434-438.
    14. Juan Luis Gómez-Reino & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2013. "An international perspective on the determinants of local government fragmentation," Chapters, in: Santiago Lago-Peñas & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez (ed.), The Challenge of Local Government Size, chapter 2, pages 8-54, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Mark Callanan & Ronan Murphy & Aodh Quinlivan, 2014. "The Risks of Intuition: Size, Costs and Economies of Scale in Local Government," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 45(3), pages 371-403.
    16. Rhys Andrews, 2015. "Vertical consolidation and financial sustainability: evidence from English local government," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(6), pages 1518-1545, December.
    17. Aurélien Bargain & Christophe Maurel, 2017. "L'instrumentation de gestion au service de la mutualisation de services publics communaux : quels enjeux pour quels effets ?," Post-Print hal-01907611, HAL.
    18. Lucyna Rajca, 2014. "Local Government Reforms under New Labour," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 0201504, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    19. Callanan Mark, 2020. "Reforming local government: Past, present and future," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 68(4), pages 201-214, December.
    20. Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2013. "Fiscal Decentralization in Peru: A Perspective on Recent Developments and Future Challenges," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1324, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.

    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:taf:pubmgr:v:17:y:2015:i:3:p:425-442. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPXM20 .

    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.