Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:42:44.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explaining the Puzzles in Policy Change: Local Finance Reform in Britain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Glen Bramley
Glen Bramley
Affiliation:
Urban Studies, Bristol University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper compares four different theoretical accounts of the reform of British local government finance at the end of the 1980s: public choice, marxian political economy, bureaucratic process, and party politics. Five key questions are identified as the most essential and puzzling features of the change: why reform; the timing of reform and implementation; the national non-domestic rate; the choice of a poll tax; and why the ‘final solution’ of direct central control has been eschewed. The ability of each theoretical approach in answering these five key questions is then assessed in the light of what we know about the history and logic of local government finance in Britain. The conclusion is that the reform can be explained, but that no single theoretical approach can give a completely satisfactory account. Overall, a competitive party politics model, complemented by public choice ideology and bureaucratic process, gives the fullest explanation.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 1990 , pp. 45 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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

REFERENCES

Allison, G. (1971) Essence of Decision. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Baeon, R. and Eltis, W.. (1976) Britain's Economic Problem: too few producers. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bailey, S. and R., Paddison (eds. (1988) The Reform of Local Government Finance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bennett, R. (1988) ‘The non-domestic rate and the local taxation of business’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Finance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bramley, G. (1985) ‘Incrementalism run amok? Local government finance in Britain’, Public Administration, 63:1; 100–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramley, G. (1987a) ‘Paying for Local Government’, in Brenton, M. and Ungerson, C. (eds) The Yearbook of Social Policy in Britain 1986–1987. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bramley, G. (1987b) ‘Horizontal disparities and equalisation: a critique of “Paying for Local Government’”, Local Government Studies (01/02).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramley, G. and Evans, A.. (1981) ‘Block Grant: some unresolved issues’, Policy and Politics, 9:2, 173–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramley, G., Le Grand, J. and W., Low (1989) ‘How far is the poll tax a ‘Community Charge’? The implications of service usage evidence’, Policy and Politics, 17:3, 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, J. and Tullock, G.. (1962) The Calculus of Consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Carvel, J. (1986) ‘Baker rejects justification for council cash limits’, Guardian (7.5.86)Google Scholar
Cockburn, C. (1977) The Local State: management of cities and people. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
Daily Telegraph (1981) ‘Marxist enclaves’, (leader, 13.1.81).Google Scholar
Daily Telegraph (1985) ‘Fresh plea on rates’ (26.2.85)Google Scholar
Davies, H. (1988) ‘Local government under siege’, Public Administration, 66:1, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of the Environment (1976) Local Government Finance: report of the Committee of Enquiry. Cmnd. 6453. London: HMSOGoogle Scholar
Department of the Environment (1981) Alternatives to Domestic Rates. Cmnd. 8449. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Department of the Environment (1986) Paying for Local Government. Cmnd 9714 London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P. (1981) ‘Professions and policy change: notes towards a model of ideological corporatism’, Public Administration Bulletin, 36, 3–16.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P. (1984) ‘The limits to local government’, in Boddy, M. and Fudge, C. (eds) Local Socialism?. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P. (1986) ‘Explaining the privatization boom: public choice versus radical approaches’, Public Administration, 64:1, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, C.Jackman, R. and Perlman, M.. (1980) Local Government Finance in a Unitary State. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Game, C. (1988) ‘The underwhelming demand for the poll tax’, Public Money and Management, 8:4, pp. 55–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J. and Travers, T.. (1986) The Block Grant: a study in central-local relations. London: Public Finance Foundation.Google Scholar
Gough, I. (1979) The Political Economy of the Welfare State. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guardian, (1981) ‘Heseltine to curb rates powers’ (11.12.81; p. 26).Google Scholar
Guardian, (1983a) ‘King to lead fight against heavy rate rises’ (8,1,83; p.26).Google Scholar
Guardian, (1983b) ‘PM wants rates pledge in manifesto’ (28.4.83; p. 28).Google Scholar
Guardian, (1984) ‘Tory peers still restive on rates’ (29.3.84).Google Scholar
Heclo, H. and Heclo, A.Wildavsky, A. (1981) The Private Government of Public Money, 2nd. ed.London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hepple, L. (1989) ‘Destroying local leviathans and designing landscapes of liberty? Public choice theory and the poll tax’. IBG Conference Paper (January).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, M. and Bramley, G.. (1986) Analysing Social Policy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
House of Commons Environment Committee (1982) Enquiry into method ojfinancing local government in the context of the government’s Green Paper. Second Report, Session 1981/2. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. (1988) ‘Rates reform and the housing market’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Einance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jackman, R. (1982) ‘Does central government need to control the total of local government spending?’, Local Government Studies, 8:3 (05/06).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, R. (1986) ‘Paying for local government’, Local Government Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, R. (1988) ‘Local Government Finance and Macro-Economic Policy’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Einance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jones, G. and Stewart, J.. (1983) The Case for Local Government. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Jones, M. and Lipsey, D.. (1984) ‘The great rates fiasco’, Sundays Times, (15.1.84, p. 17).Google Scholar
Karran, T. (1988) ‘Local taxing and local spending: international comparisons’ in Paddison, R. and Bailey, S. (eds) Local Government Einance: International perspectives. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
King, D. (1984) Fiscal Tiers: the economics of multi-level government. London: Allen and Uwin.Google Scholar
King, D. (1988) ‘The future role of grants in local government finance’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Einance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. (1979) ‘Still muddling, not yet through’, Public Administration Review, 517–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovering, J. (1988) ‘The local economy and local economic strategies’, Policy and Politics, 16:3, 145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, K. (1980) Balancing the Books. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Newton, K. and Karran, T.. (1985) The Politics of Local Expenditure. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niskanen, W. A. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government. New York: Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J. (1973) The Eiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St. Martins Press.Google Scholar
O'Leary, B. (1987a) ‘British farce, French drama and tales of two cities: reorganization of Paris and London Governments 1957-86’, Public Administration, 65, Winter, 369–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Leary, B. (1987b) ‘Why was the GLC abolished?’ International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 193–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oates, W. (1971) Eiscal Federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
OECD (1984) Revenue Statistics of OECD Member Countries 1965–1984. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Offe, C. (1984) Contradictions of the Welfare State. London: HutchinsonGoogle Scholar
Paddison, R. (1988) ‘The British reform in its international context’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Einance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pola, G. and Cerea, G.. (forthcoming) Local Government Finance: theory and applied research. Proceedings of an international seminar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. (1981) Control and Power in Central-Local Government Relations. Farnborough: Gower.Google Scholar
Richards, P. (1988) ‘Recent history oflocal fiscal reform’, in Bailey, S. and Paddison, R. (eds) The Reform of Local Government Einance in Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. and Jordan, A.. (1979) Governing under Pressure. London: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
Saunders, P. (1984) ‘Rethinking local polities’, in Boddy, M. and Fudge, C. (eds) Local Socialism?. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Stoker, G. (1988) The Politics of Local Government. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiebout, C. M. (1956) ‘A Pure Theory of Local Expenditure’, Joarnal of Political Economy 64, 10, 416–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, K. (1988) ‘Fiscal crisis and stress: origins and implications’ in Paddison, R. and Bailey, S. (eds) Local Government Einance: International perspectives. London: Routledge.Google Scholar