Second-Order Devolution: Data and Doubt

In this article, we explore changes in state—local relations. Our interest is the degree to which states have devolved power and authority to their localities... or not. From our empirical tests, we conclude that although centralization was the dominant trend from the mid-1950s until the mid-1980s,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Publius 2011-10, Vol.41 (4), p.563-585
Main Authors: Bowman, Ann O'M., Kearney, Richard C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Authority
Central-local government relations
Centralization
Cities
City halls
City managers
City politics
Company business management
Decentralization
Decentralization in government
Federal-state relations
Federalism
Financial management
Government centralization
Government regulation
Interstate relations
Legislators
Local government
Local politics
Managers
Political power
Political systems
Power
Public administration
Self determination
State capacity
State intervention
State legislators
State structure
Surveys
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In this article, we explore changes in state—local relations. Our interest is the degree to which states have devolved power and authority to their localities... or not. From our empirical tests, we conclude that although centralization was the dominant trend from the mid-1950s until the mid-1980s, the pattern since then has been somewhat uneven and variable across states. A survey of city managers supports a finding of a loss of local power at the hands of the states, but a survey of legislators offers an alternative perspective. We conclude with a discussion of the meaning and implications of state centralization and suggestions about how the concept could be captured more comprehensively.
ISSN:0048-5950
1747-7107
DOI:10.1093/publius/pjr002