Local Government Size and Political Efficacy: Do Citizen Panels Make a Difference?

References

• Adamson, D. (2010). Community empowerment: Identifying the barriers to “purposeful” citizen participation. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 30, 114–126. doi:10.1108/01443331011033319
   Google Scholar
• Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and Interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Allers, M. A., & Geertsema, J. B. (2016). The effects of local government amalgamation on public spending, taxation, and service levels: Evidence from 15 years of municipal consolidation. Journal of Regional Science, 56, 659–682. doi:10.1111/jors.2016.56.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almond, G., & Verba, S. (1963). Civic culture. Boston. Boston, MA: Little Brown and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, I., & Low, S. M. (1992). Place attachment. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. (2010). Community psychology, political efficacy and trust. Political Psychology, 31, 59–84. doi:10.1111/pops.2010.31.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., Cowell, R., Downe, J., Martin, S., & Turner, D. (2008). Supporting effective citizenship in local government: Engaging, educating and empowering local citizens. Local Government Studies, 34, 489–507. doi:10.1080/03003930802217462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Åstrom, J., Jonsson, M. E., & Karlsson, M. (2017). Democratic innovations: Reinforcing or changing perceptions of trust? International Journal of Public Administration, 40, 575–587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bish, R. L., & Ostrom, V. (1973). Understanding urban government: Metropolitan reform reconsidered (Vol. 20). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blomgren Bingham, L., Nabatchi, T., & O’Leary, R. (2005). The new governance: Practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government. Public Administration Review, 65, 547–558. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00482.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2002). Democracy, institutions and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 371–390. doi:10.1017/S0007123402000157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. (1998). Public choice theory and local government: A comparative analysis of the UK and the USA. Houndmills, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, M. B. (2006). Citizen panels and the concept of representation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14, 203–225. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00245.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryan, M. L., & Jenkins, S. P. (2016). Multilevel modelling of country effects: A cautionary tale. European Sociological Review, 32, 3–22. doi:10.1093/esr/jcv059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callahan, K. (2007). Citizen participation: Models and methods. International Journal of Public Administration, 30, 1179–1196. doi:10.1080/01900690701225366
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, A., Gurin, G., & Miller, W. E. (1954). The voter decides. Oxford, UK: Row, Peterson, and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Caparas, M. V. G., & Agrawal, A. (2016). Why citizens participate in local governance: A case of two Philippine LGUs. International Journal of Public Administration, 39, 952–962. doi:10.1080/01900692.2015.1064444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caprara, G. V., Vecchione, M., Capanna, C., & Mebane, M. (2009). Perceived political efficacy. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1002–1020. doi:10.1002/ejsp.604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheyne, C., & Comrie, M. (2002). Enhanced legitimacy for local authority decision-making: Challenges, setbacks and innovation. Policy and Politics, 30, 469–482. doi:10.1332/030557302760590404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coffe, H., & Geys, B. (2006). Community heterogeneity: A burden for social capital? Social Science Quarterly, 87, 1053–1072. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2006.00415.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, D. L., & Kahn, M. E. (2003). Understanding the American decline in social capital, 1952-1998. Kyklos, 56, 17–46. doi:10.1111/kykl.2003.56.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. G., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12, 289–314. doi:10.1007/BF00992337
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A. (1967). The city in the future of local democracy. American Political Science Review, 61, 953–970. doi:10.2307/1953398
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and Democracy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denters, B. (2002). Size and political trust: Evidence from Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning C – Government and Policy, 20, 793–812. doi:10.1068/c0225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denters, B., Goldsmith, M., Ladner, A., Mouitzen, P. E., & Rose, L. E. (2014). Size and local democracy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, J., & Dollery, B. (2016). Does size still matter? An empirical analysis of the effectiveness of Victorian local authorities. Local Government Studies, 42, 15–28. doi:10.1080/03003930.2013.869497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, J., Dollery, B., & Kortt, M. A. (2016). Can’t get no satisfaction? The association between community satisfaction and population size for Victoria. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75, 65–77. doi:10.1111/aupa.2016.75.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead – Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 467–494. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farazmand, A. (ed.). (2004). Sound governance: Policy and administrative innovations. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Farazmand, A. (2017). Governance reforms: The good, the bad, and the ugly; and the sound: Examining the past and exploring the future of public organizations. Public Organization Review, 17, 595–617. doi:10.1007/s11115-017-0398-y
   Google Scholar
• Finkel, S. E. (1985). Reciprocal effects of participation and political efficacy: A panel analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 891–913. doi:10.2307/2111186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finkel, S. E. (1987). The effects of participation on political efficacy and political support: Evidence from a West German panel. Journal of Politics, 49, 441–464. doi:10.2307/2131308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischel, W. A. (2001). The homevoter hypothesis: How home values influence local government taxation, school finance and land-use policies. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, W. F., & Gurley, T. (2006). Will consolidation improve sub-national governments? World Bank Working Paper 3913.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66–75. doi:10.1111/puar.2006.66.issue-s1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, J. P. (1977). Social control, deterrence and perspectives on social order. Social Forces, 56, 408–423. doi:10.1093/sf/56.2.408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, V., Osgood, J. L., & Boden, D. (2017). The role of citizen participation and the use of social media platforms in the participatory budgeting process. International Journal of Public Administration, 40, 65–76. doi:10.1080/01900692.2015.1072215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, S. W. (2015). The democratic costs of size: How increasing size affects citizen satisfaction with local government. Political Studies, 63, 373–389. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 273–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64, 55–65. doi:10.1111/puar.2004.64.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishii, R. (2017). Community participation in local governance – An empirical analysis of urbanized local governments in the Philippines and Uganda. International Journal of Public Administration, 40, 907–917. doi:10.1080/01900692.2016.1242610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John, P. (2010). Larger and larger? The endless search for efficiency in the UK. In H. Baldersheim & L. E. Rose (eds), Territorial choice: The politics of boundaries and borders. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Kelleher, C. A., & Lowery, D. (2004). Political participation and metropolitan institutional contexts. Urban Affairs Review, 39, 720–757. doi:10.1177/1078087404264219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelleher, C. A., & Lowery, D. (2009). Central city size, metropolitan institutions and political participation. British Journal of Political Science, 39, 59–92. doi:10.1017/S0007123408000392
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kernaghan, K. (2009). Moving towards integrated public governance: Improving service delivery through community engagement. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75, 239–254. doi:10.1177/0020852309104174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch, P., & Rochat, P. E. (2017). The effects of local government consolidation on turnout: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment in Switzerland. Swiss Political Science Review, 23, 215–230. doi:10.1111/spsr.2017.23.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapointe, S., Saarimaa, T., & Tukiainen, J. (2018). Effects of municipal mergers on voter turnout. VATT Institute for Economic Research Working Paper 106. Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Lassen, D. D., & Serritzlew, S. (2011). Jurisdiction size and local democracy: Evidence on internal political efficacy from large-scale municipal reform. American Political Science Review, 105, 238–258. doi:10.1017/S000305541100013X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., & Stoker, G. (2001). Trends in public participation: Part 1 – Local government perspectives. Public Administration, 79, 205–222. doi:10.1111/padm.2001.79.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowndes, V., & Sullivan, H. (2008). How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance. Public Administration, 86, 53–74. doi:10.1111/padm.2008.86.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons, W. E., Lowery, D., & DeHoog, R. H. (1992). The politics of dissatisfaction: Citizens, services, and Urban Institutions. New York, NY: ME Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Margolis, M. (1979). Viable democracy. New York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S. (2009). Engaging with citizens and other stakeholders. In T. Bovaird & E. Loffler (eds), Public management and governance (pp. 279–296). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S., & Webb, A. (2009). Citizen-centred public services: Contestability without consumer-driven competition? Public Money & Management, 29, 123–130. doi:10.1080/09540960902768038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michels, A. (2012). Citizen participation in local policy making: Design and democracy. International Journal of Public Administration, 35, 285–292. doi:10.1080/01900692.2012.661301
   Google Scholar
• Morlan, R. L. (1984). Municipal vs national election voter turnout: Europe and the United States. Political Science Quarterly, 99, 457–470. doi:10.2307/2149943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrell, M. E. (2003). Survey and experimental evidence for a reliable and valid measure of internal political efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 589–602. doi:10.1086/378965
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouritzen, P. E. (1989). City size and citizens’ satisfaction: Two competing theories revisited. European Journal of Political Research, 17, 661–688. doi:10.1111/ejpr.1989.17.issue-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, K. (1982). Is small really so beautiful. Is big really so ugly? Size, effectiveness and democracy in local government. Political Studies, 30, 190–206. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1982.tb00532.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal efficacy in the 1988 National election study. American Political Science Review, 85, 1407–1413. doi:10.2307/1963953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niskanen, W. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Oates, W. (1999). An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37, 1120–1149. doi:10.1257/jel.37.3.1120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Office for National Statistics (2003). Census 2001: Key Statistics for Local Authorities. London, UK: The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, J. E. (2000). City size and civic involvement in metropolitan America. American Political Science Review, 94, 361–374. doi:10.2307/2586017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C. M., & Warren, R. (1961). The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review, 55, 831–842. doi:10.1017/S0003055400125973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pattie, C., & Johnston, R. (2005). Electoral participation and political context: The turnout-marginality paradox at the 2001 British general election. Environment and Planning A, 37, 1191–1206. doi:10.1068/a3747
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollock, P. H. (1983). The participatory consequences of internal and external political efficacy: A research note. Western Political Quarterly, 36, 400–409. doi:10.1177/106591298303600306
   Google Scholar
• Rallings, C., & Thrasher, M. (2006). Local elections handbook 2005. Plymouth, UK: LGC Elections Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Robson, K., & Pevalin, D. (2016). Multilevel modeling in plain language. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigues, M., & Meza, O. D. (forthcoming). “Is there anybody out there?” Political implications of a territorial integration. Journal of Urban Affairs.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A., Tijmstra, S. A., & Bwire, A. (2009). Fiscal decentralisation, efficiency, and growth. Environment and Planning A, 41, 2041–2062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, L. E. (2002). Municipal size and local nonelectoral participation: Findings from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway. Environment and Planning C – Government and Policy, 20, 829–851. doi:10.1068/c0227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe, L. J. (1970). Theories and values of local government. Political Studies, 18, 153–174. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1970.tb00867.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soul, S., & Dollery, B. (2000). The effect of municipal population size on political effectiveness: An empirical note on four local government jurisdictions in New South Wales. Regional Policy & Practice, 9, 64–66.
   Google Scholar
• Stegmueller, D. (2013). How many countries for multilevel modeling? A Monte Carlo study comparing Bayesian and frequentist approaches. American Journal of Political Science, 57, 748–761. doi:10.1111/ajps.12001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, J. (1996). Innovations in democratic practice in local government. Policy and Politics, 24, 29–41. doi:10.1332/030557396782200481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam, H. (1998). Communitarianism: A New Agenda for politics and citizenship. London, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Valentino, N. A., Gregorowicz, K., & Groenendyk, E. W. (2009). Efficacy, emotions and the habit of participation. Political Behaviour, 31, 307–330. doi:10.1007/s11109-008-9076-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Ryzin, G. G. (2008). Validity of an on-line panel approach to citizen surveys. Public Performance and Management Review, 32, 236–262. doi:10.2753/PMR1530-9576320203
   Google Scholar
• Verba, S., & Nie, N. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Wallis, J., & Dollery, B. (2006). Revitalizing the contribution non-profit organizations can make to the provision of human services. International Journal of Social Economics, 33, 491–511. doi:10.1108/03068290610673261
   Google Scholar
• Weisbrod, B. A. (1997). The future of the nonprofit sector: Its entwining with private enterprise and government. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16, 541–555. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6688
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsh Assembly Government. (2009). Better outcomes for tougher times: The next phase of public service improvement. Cardiff, UK: Welsh Assembly Government.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, P. (2014). Commission on public service governance and delivery. Full report. Cardiff, UK: Crown Copyright.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, K., & Callaghan, K. (2005). Assessing citizen involvement efforts by local governments. Public Performance & Management Review, 29, 191–216.
   Google Scholar
• Yetano, A., Royo, S., & Acerete, B. (2010). What is driving the increasing presence of citizen participation initiatives? Environment and Planning C – Government and Policy, 28, 783–802. doi:10.1068/c09110
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar