Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:09:42.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Local Government Structure and the Co-ordination of Economic Development Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Joseph Lyons
Joseph Lyons*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
*
Department of Political Science, University of Western Ontario, London ON, N6A 5C2, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores how local government structure affects policy co-ordination. It compares the delivery of economic development services in two Ontario cities. In London, a specialized agency is the lead, but lacks full functional control, while in Hamilton policy control is consolidated in a single municipal department. The findings support the hypothesis of those who argue in favour of general-purpose governments, as the municipal hierarchy in Hamilton was instrumental in achieving policy co-ordination. Proponents of specialization argue that it limits the need for co-ordination between governments but, as the London case demonstrates, this logic breaks down when there are too many players with too few responsibilities.

Résumé

Cet article explore la façon dont la structure gouvernementale locale affecte la coordination des politiques. Il compare la prestation des services de développement économique dans deux villes de l'Ontario. A London, une agence spécialisée dirige les politiques, mais manque d'un contrôle fonctionnel complet tandis qu'à Hamilton la direction et le contrôle des politiques sont consolidés en un seul département municipal. Les résultats soutiennent l'hypothèse de ceux qui plaident en faveur des gouvernements à usage général, parce que la hiérarchie municipale à Hamilton a réussi à jouer son rôle dans la réalisation de la coordination des politiques. Les partisans de la spécialisation soutiennent qu'il limite la nécessité d'une coordination entre les gouvernements, mais comme le montre le cas de London, cette logique se décompose quand il y a trop de joueurs avec trop peu de responsabilités.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 173 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altshuler, Alan, Morrill, William, Wolman, Harold and Mitchell, Faith, eds. 1999. Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America. Washington DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Berry, Christopher R. 2009. Imperfect Union: Representation and Taxation in Multilevel Governments. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bish, Robert L. 1971. The Public Economy of Metropolitan Areas. Chicago: Markham/Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Bish, Robert and Warren, Robert. 1972. “Scale and Monopoly Problems in Urban Government Services.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 8: 97–122.Google Scholar
Bollens, John C. 1961. Special District Governments in the United States. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bradford, Neil. 2014. “Challenge and Change in London: The Social Dynamics of Urban Economic Governance.” In Governing Urban Economies: Innovation and Inclusion in Canadian City-Regions, ed. Bradford, Neil and Bramwell, Allison. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Bradford, Neil and Bramwell, Allison, eds. Governing Urban Economies: Innovation and Inclusion in Canadian City-Regions. 2014. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramwell, Allison. 2014. “The Politics of Coalition Building in a Deindustrializing City: Linkages, Leadership, and Agendas in Hamilton.” In Governing Urban Economies: Innovation and Inclusion in Canadian City-Regions, ed. Bradford, Neil and Bramwell, Allison. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Burns, Nancy. 1994. The Formation of American Local Governments: Private Values in Public Institutions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carr, Jered B. and Farmer, Jayce. 2011. “Contingent Effects of Municipal and County TELs on Special District Usage in the United States.” Publius 41: 709–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casella, Alessandra and Frey, Bruno. 1992. “Federalism and Clubs: Towards an Economic Theory of Overlapping Political Jurisdictions.” European Economic Review 36: 639–46.Google Scholar
City of Hamilton. 2002a. Economic Development Strategy. Hamilton, ON: City of Hamilton.Google Scholar
City of Hamilton. 2002b. Net Operating Budget. Hamilton, ON: City of Hamilton.Google Scholar
City of Hamilton. 2005. Economic Development Strategy: Hamilton's Clusters of Innovation. http://www.investinhamilton.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/EcDevStrategyFinal2005.pdf (July 7, 2014).Google Scholar
City of Hamilton. 2010. Hamilton Economic Development Strategy, 2010–2015. http://www.investinhamilton.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Hamilton-EcDev-Strategy2010.pdf (July 7, 2014).Google Scholar
City of Hamilton. 2011. Financial Report 2011. http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/09082A7A-FB06-400C-BDB8-7F156651ADCB/0/CityofHamiltonFinancialReport.pdf (July 7, 2014).Google Scholar
City of London. 1998. Investing in Prosperity: A Commitment to Innovation, Initiative and Competitiveness. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2000. Purchase of Service Agreement between the Corporation of the City of London and the London Economic Development Corporation. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2005a. London's Next Economy: Implementation Strategy “Step One.” London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2005b. Purchase of Service Agreement between the Corporation of the City of London and the London Economic Development Corporation. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2008. Purchase of Service Agreement between the Corporation of the City of London and the London Economic Development Corporation. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2009. Industrial Land Development Strategy Annual Monitoring and Pricing Report. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2011. 2011 Operating Budget Reports. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
City of London. 2013. Industrial Land Sales Negotiated Between 2001 and Present. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
Craig, S. G., Airola, J. and Tipu, M.. 2012. “General Purpose or Special District Governance? Technical Efficiency versus Rent Dissipation in Airport Finances.” Public Finance Review 40: 712–35.Google Scholar
De Bono, Norm. 2005. “Economic Plan Unveiled: The City's Proposed New Development Model goes to Board of Control Today.” The London Free Press, December 14, C1.Google Scholar
De Bono, Norm. 2006. “‘Little Overlords’ Slammed: One of London's Tech Leaders Decries ‘Playing Politics’ with the City's Economic Development.” The London Free Press, July 6, A1.Google Scholar
Dillon Consultants and Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 2010. City of Hamilton Airport Employment Growth District—phase 2: Financial/Economic Impact Analysis and Marketing Strategy. Hamilton, ON: City of Hamilton.Google Scholar
Foster, Kathryn. A. 1997. The Political Economy of Special-Purpose Government. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, Bruno and Eichenberger, Reiner. 2001. “Metropolitan Governance for the Future: Functional Overlapping Competing Jurisdictions.” Swiss Political Science Review 7: S–S.Google Scholar
Hamilton, David K. 2000. “Organizing Government Structure and Governance Functions in Metropolitan Areas in Response to Growth and Change: A Critical Overview.” Journal of Urban Affairs 22: 65–84.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet and Marks, Gary. 2003. “Unraveling the Central State, but How? Types of Multi-Level Governance.” The American Political Science Review 97: 233–43.Google Scholar
Horak, Martin. 2012. “Multilevel Governance in Toronto: Success and Failure in Canada's Largest City.” In Sites of Governance: Multilevel Governance and Policy Making in Canada's Big Cities, ed. Horak, Martin and Young, Robert. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, Martin and Young, Robert, eds. Sites of Governance: Multilevel Governance and Policy Making in Canada's Big Cities. 2012. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
International Economic Development Council. 2013. Accredited Economic Development Organization (AEDO) Accreditation Site Visit Report: City of Hamilton, Ontario Economic Development Division, February 6–8.Google Scholar
London Economic Development Corporation (LEDC). 2007. Building Success for London: Presentation to the Board of Control, December 12. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
Lowery, David. 2001. “Metropolitan Governance from a Neoprogressive Perspective.” Swiss Political Science Review 7: S–S.Google Scholar
Lyons, W. E. and Lowery, David. 1989. “Governmental Fragmentation versus Consolidation: Five Public-Choice Myths about How to Create Informed, Involved, and Happy Citizens.” Public Administration Review 49: 533–43.Google Scholar
Macintyre, Nicole. 2007. “An Economic Development Makeover: City Budget Allows for New Staff, Marketing Campaign to help Hamilton's Prospects.” The Hamilton Spectator, December 8, A1.Google Scholar
Magnusson, Warren. 1985. “The Local State in Canada: Theoretical Perspectives.” Canadian Public Administration 28: 575–99.Google Scholar
McCabe, Barbara Coyle. 2000. “Special-District Formation among the States.” State and Local Government Review 32: 121–31.Google Scholar
Miller, David Y. and Cox, Raymond W. III. 2014. Governing the Metropolitan Region: America's New Frontier. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Mullin, Megan. 2009. Governing the Tap: Special District Governance and the New Local Politics of Water. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Osgood, Jeffery L. Jr., Opp, Susan M. and Bernotsky, R. Lorraine. 2012. “Yesterday's Gains versus Today's Realities: Lessons from 10 Years of Economic Development Practice.” Economic Development Quarterly 26: 334–50.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor. 1972. “Metropolitan Reform: Propositions Derived from Two Traditions.” Social Science Quarterly 53: 474–93.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Vincent, Tiebout, Charles M. and Warren, Robert. 1961. “The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry.” The American Political Science Review 55: 831–42.Google Scholar
Paolatto, Paul. 2005. London's Next Economy: A Game Plan for Accelerating New Business Development in the London Region. London, ON: City of London.Google Scholar
Peters, Guy B. 1998. “Managing Horizontal Government: The Politics of Coordination.” Public Administration 76: 295–311.Google Scholar
Group, Randolph. 2007. City of Hamilton: Economic Development Business Development Profile and Governance Review. Hamilton, ON: City of Hamilton Google Scholar
Reese, Laura A. 2006. “The Planning–Policy Connection in U.S. and Canadian Economic Development.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 24: 533–73.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz W. 1994. “Games Real Actors Could Play: Positive and Negative Coordination in Embedded Negotiations.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 6: 27–53.Google Scholar
Siegel, David. 1994a. “The ABCs of Local Government: An Overview.” In Agencies, Boards, and Commissions in Canadian Local Government, ed. Richmond, Dale and Siegel, David. Toronto: The Institute of Public Administration Canada.Google Scholar
Slack, Enid and Bird, Richard. 2013. “Merging Municipalities: Is Bigger Better?” IMFG Papers on Municipal Finance and Governance, no. 14.Google Scholar
Canada, Statistics. 2013. Median Total Income, by Family Type, by Census Metropolitan Area. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm (October 30, 2013).Google Scholar
Tiebout, Charles M. 1956. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” The Journal of Political Economy 64: 416–24.Google Scholar
Teranet. 2013a. 41 Bittern Street, Ancaster—Geo Warehouse Enhanced Report. Toronto: Teranet.Google Scholar
Teranet. 2013b. 1363 Osprey Drive, Ancaster— Geo Warehouse Enhanced Report. Toronto: Teranet.Google Scholar
Tindal, Richard C. and Tindal, Susan Nobes. 2004. Local Government in Canada. 6th ed. Toronto: Thomson Nelson.Google Scholar