Political accountability and social equity in public budgeting: Examining the role of local institutions

IF 6.1 1区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Public Administration Review Pub Date : 2024-11-14 DOI:10.1111/puar.13905
Wenchi Wei
{"title":"Political accountability and social equity in public budgeting: Examining the role of local institutions","authors":"Wenchi Wei","doi":"10.1111/puar.13905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines how local institutions in U.S. municipalities can affect budget allocations for socially disadvantaged groups, specifically focusing on eight key institutions related to electoral rules, power dynamics, and bureaucratic authority. Additionally, we develop a composite index to assess the overall level of (de)politicization within the local institutional framework. Theoretically, local institutions can shape public officials’ political accountability and administrative discretion during policy processes, thereby influencing their decision‐making on budget allocations. Empirical analyses primarily use data from ICMA's multiround national surveys and employ the historical background of municipalities as an instrumental variable (IV) to address potential endogeneity problems associated with local institutions. We find that local institutions that strengthen politicians’ political accountability to citizens lead to greater budget allocations for redistributive social welfare, thereby fostering social equity in public budgeting. Conversely, the institutions that enhance the authority of senior bureaucrats negatively affect budget allocations for redistributive social welfare.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13905","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines how local institutions in U.S. municipalities can affect budget allocations for socially disadvantaged groups, specifically focusing on eight key institutions related to electoral rules, power dynamics, and bureaucratic authority. Additionally, we develop a composite index to assess the overall level of (de)politicization within the local institutional framework. Theoretically, local institutions can shape public officials’ political accountability and administrative discretion during policy processes, thereby influencing their decision‐making on budget allocations. Empirical analyses primarily use data from ICMA's multiround national surveys and employ the historical background of municipalities as an instrumental variable (IV) to address potential endogeneity problems associated with local institutions. We find that local institutions that strengthen politicians’ political accountability to citizens lead to greater budget allocations for redistributive social welfare, thereby fostering social equity in public budgeting. Conversely, the institutions that enhance the authority of senior bureaucrats negatively affect budget allocations for redistributive social welfare.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公共预算编制中的政治问责和社会公平:审查地方机构的作用
本文研究了美国市政当局的地方机构如何影响对社会弱势群体的预算分配,特别关注与选举规则、权力动态和官僚权威相关的八个关键机构。此外,我们还制定了一个综合指数来评估地方机构框架内(去)政治化的整体水平。从理论上讲,地方机构可以影响公职人员在政策制定过程中的政治责任和行政自由裁量权,从而影响他们对预算分配的决策。实证分析主要使用 ICMA 的多轮全国调查数据,并将市政当局的历史背景作为工具变量(IV),以解决与地方机构相关的潜在内生性问题。我们发现,加强政治家对公民的政治责任的地方机构会增加用于再分配社会福利的预算拨款,从而促进公共预算中的社会公平。相反,加强高级官僚权威的制度则会对用于再分配社会福利的预算分配产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Public Administration Review
Public Administration Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
10.80%
发文量
130
期刊介绍: Public Administration Review (PAR), a bi-monthly professional journal, has held its position as the premier outlet for public administration research, theory, and practice for 75 years. Published for the American Society for Public Administration,TM/SM, it uniquely serves both academics and practitioners in the public sector. PAR features articles that identify and analyze current trends, offer a factual basis for decision-making, stimulate discussion, and present leading literature in an easily accessible format. Covering a diverse range of topics and featuring expert book reviews, PAR is both exciting to read and an indispensable resource in the field.
期刊最新文献
The evolving practice of UK Government ministers Executive policymaking influence via the administrative apparatus First impressions: An analysis of professional stereotypes and their impact on sector attraction Evaluating use of evidence in U.S. state governments: A conjoint analysis How scholars can support government analytics: Combining employee surveys with more administrative data sources towards a better understanding of how government functions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1