IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/statpp/v12y2021i1p195-215n9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Peer Challenge in Local Government: The Role of Spatial Spillover and Past Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Jäkel Tim

    (School of Politics and Governance, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation)

Abstract

Voluntary assessments by a team of critical friends (external peer challenges) among local governments became established as popular complement to compulsory and centralized audits and inspections. This study empirically investigates the decision of English local authorities to have a voluntary peer challenge or not by taking advantage of an original dataset about participation in the Local Government Association’s Peer Challenge Programme (CPC) 2010–2015. We find that the LGA’s CPC programme does not carry a risk of leaving behind authorities with performance shortcomings. Councils with poor past performance scores and those with excellent ones do not differ in their tendency to invite a team of critical friends. Spatial clusters exist in the case of small district councils but not in the case of larger unitary authorities, London boroughs and metropolitan authorities. This implies that the corporate peer challenge process seems to be more suited to small authorities delivering community based services.

Suggested Citation

  • Jäkel Tim, 2021. "External Peer Challenge in Local Government: The Role of Spatial Spillover and Past Performance," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 195-215, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:statpp:v:12:y:2021:i:1:p:195-215:n:9
    DOI: 10.1515/spp-2020-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/spp-2020-0006
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/spp-2020-0006?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.

    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:bpj:statpp:v:12:y:2021:i:1:p:195-215:n:9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.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.