The Correlates of Local Government Responsiveness Under Decentralization: Do Performance Ratings Matter in the Philippines?

REFERENCES

• Ahmad, J., Devarajan, S., Khemani, S., & Shah, S. (2005). Decentralization and service delivery (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3603). Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Banerjee, A., Kumar, S., Pande, R., & Su, F. (2010). Do informed voters make better choices? (Experimental Evidence from Urban India Working Paper). Retrieved February 17, 2015, from http://www.snsindia.org/jpal_impact_evaluation.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bird, R., & Vaillancourt, F. (Eds.). (1998). Fiscal decentralization in developing countries. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Capuno, J. J. (2007). The quality of local governance and development under decentralization. In A. Balisacan & H. Hill (Eds.), The dynamics of regional development: The Philippines in East Asia (pp. 204–244). Chelthenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Capuno, J. J., & Garcia, M. M. (2010). Can information about local government performance induce civic participation? Evidence from the Philippines. Journal of Development Studies, 46, 624–643. doi:10.1080/00220380903023521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capuno, J. J., Garcia, M. M., Sardalla, J. S., & Villamil, L. G. (2007). The development payoffs of good governance: Emerging results of a social experiment in Bulacan and Davao del Norte. In M. C. Alfiler & E. Nicolas (Eds.), Public administration plus governance: Assessing the past, addressing the future (pp. 263–292). Quezon City, Philippines: U.P. National College of Public Administration and Governance.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, T., & Laegrid, P. (2005). Trust in government: The relative importance of service satisfaction, political factors and demography. Public Performance and Management Review, 28, 487–511.
   Google Scholar
• DeHoog, R. H., Lowery, D., & Lyons, W. E. (1990). Citizen satisfaction with local governance: A test of individual, jurisdictional, and city-specific explanations. Journal of Politics, 52, 807–837.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferraz, C., & Finan, F. (2008). Exposing corrupt politicians: The effects of Brazil’s publicly released audits on electoral outcomes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123, 703–745.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, M. A., & Hildreth, W. B. (1999). Service delivery satisfaction and willingness to pay taxes: Citizen recognition of local government performance. Public Productivity & Management Review, 23(1), 48–67.
   Google Scholar
• Gopakumar, K. (1998, September). Citizen feedback surveys to highlight corruption in public services: The experience of Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore. Paper presented at the Annual General Meeting of Transparency International, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN013110.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Green, D., & Vavreck, L. (2008). Analysis of cluster-randomized experiments: A comparison of alternative estimation approaches. Political Analysis, 16, 138–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatry, H. (1980). Performance measurement principles and techniques: An overview for local government. Public Productivity Review, 4, 312–339.
   Google Scholar
• Humphreys, M., & Weinstein, J. (2010). Policing politicians: Citizen empowerment and political accountability in Africa (Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www.columbia.edu/˜mh2245/papers1/scorecard2010.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. M. (2005). The dilemma of the unsatisfied customer in a market model of public administration. Public Administration Review, 65(1), 76–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. M., & Swindell, D. (2002). A multiple-indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: Correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review, 62, 610–621.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malena, C., Forster, R., & Singh, J. (2004). Social accountability: An introduction to the concept and emerging practice. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• McGee, R., & Gaventa, J. (2010). Review of impact and effectiveness of transparency and accountability initiatives: Synthesis report. Sussex, UK: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Mimeo.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, T. I., & Miller, M. A. (1991). Standards of excellence: U.S. residents’ evaluations of local government services. Public Administration Review, 51, 503–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, S. (2002). Holding the state to account: Citizen monitoring in action. Bangalore, India: Books for Change.
   Google Scholar
• Peruzzotti, E., & Smulovitz, C. (2006). Social accountability: An introduction. In E. Peruzzotti & C. Smulovitz (Eds.), Enforcing the rule of law: Social accountability in the new Latin American democracies (pp. 3–33). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Public Affairs Foundation, Sirker, K., & Cosic, S. (2007). Empowering the marginalized: Case studies of social accountability initiatives in Asia. Washington, DC: The World Bank Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ravindra, A. (2004). An assessment of the impact of Bangalore citizen report cards on the performance of public agencies (Evaluation Capacity Development Working Paper Series No. 12). Washington, DC: Operations Evaluation Department, World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Shingler, J., Van Loon, M. E., Alter, T. R., & Bridger, J. C. (2008). The importance of subjective data for public agency performance evaluation. Public Administration Review, 68(6), 1101–1111. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00958.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, R., & Vutukuru, V. (2010). Enhancing accountability in public service delivery through social audits: A case study of Andhra Pradesh. New Delhi, India: Centre for Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, P. (1995). On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 18, 277–310. doi:10.1080/0900699508525011
   Google Scholar
• Van de Walle, S., & Bouckaert, G. (2003). Public service performance and trust in government: The problem of causality. International Journal of Public Administration,26, 891–913.
   Google Scholar
• Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2001). Philippines: Filipino report card on pro-poor services. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar