scholarly journals Asymmetric decentralization: distortions and opportunities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Fiorillo ◽  
Michele G. Giuranno ◽  
Agnese Sacchi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
The Public ◽  
Optimal Degree ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

AbstractThis paper studies the interplay between central and local governments in defining the optimal degree of decentralization in terms of public goods supply. The choice between full centralization and asymmetric decentralization implies a trade-off between the possibility to provide public goods at a lower cost, wherever this is possible by decentralizing, and the possibility to fully internalize spillovers by full centralization. We find that asymmetric decentralization introduces distortions into the public decision-making process. We also demonstrate that the power to interfere in the central government’s ruling mechanisms should be reduced for the jurisdictions that have decentralized, in order to make their decentralization choice convenient even for the citizens in the less efficient jurisdictions. Finally, we find the conditions under which asymmetric decentralization can be simultaneously advantageous for both rich and poor regions through the design of appropriate equalization transfers.

Analysis of farms characteristics related to innovation needs: a proposal for supporting the public decision-making process

2021 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 104892
Author(s):  
Andrea Arzeni ◽  
Elisa Ascione ◽  
Patrizia Borsotto ◽  
Valentina Carta ◽  
Tatiana Castellotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

scholarly journals “All this Regulatory Uncertainty in the Air”: The Indispensability of Public Hearings in Guarding and Guiding Public Deliberation

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn Carroll ◽  
Pete Bsumek
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Environmental Communication ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Field Analysis ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Regulatory Uncertainty ◽  
Public Hearings ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

The field of Environmental Communication has often critiqued the shortcomings of public hearings, noting their limitations in bringing about effective and equitable public decision making. While this work has been significant, it has tended to limit the deliberative field to public hearings themselves, sometimes going so far as to assume that public hearings are the only spaces in which significant deliberations occur. Using a field analysis of the “No Coal Plant” campaign in Surry County, Virginia (2008–2013), the authors illuminate some limitations of existing literature. Their analysis suggests that while public hearings can be extremely limiting, even “failed” public hearings can play a critical role in constituting, organizing, and pacing formal and informal deliberative spaces, which are necessary for communities as they manage the stresses and strains of the decision-making process.

Public Participation in Local Regeneration Programmes in Poland

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 44-60
Author(s):  
Magdalena Miśkowiec ◽  
Katarzyna Maria Gorczyca
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Urban Space ◽  
Social Activity ◽  
Urban Regeneration ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Ict Tools ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

This article describes how the public participation is understood as involvement of individuals, groups and local communities in public decision making. On 9 October 2015, the Urban Regeneration Act was passed in Poland. The purpose of the Act is to integrate the local activities of the stakeholders in regeneration. Engaging stakeholders is essential for proper implementation of regeneration programmes and is aimed at preventing degradation of urban space and crisis phenomena by enhancing social activity. The main aim of the article is to focus on different forms of public participation in urban regeneration. The study includes an analysis of the public participation procedures employed during the implementation of Communal Regeneration Programmes in Poland, as exemplified by the Olkusz Commune. The analysis is summarised to form a model of public participation in regeneration programmes, including suggestions for the use of ICT tools for consultation purposes.

scholarly journals Testing the open government recipe: Are vision and voice good governance ingredients?

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Ingrams ◽  
Wesley Kaufmann ◽  
Daan Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Interaction Effect ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Open Government ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Two Component ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

Existing research shows that open government can result in better governance outcomes. However, there remains a gap in our understanding of how open government’s two component dimensions of transparency and participation – “vision” and “voice” – affect governance outcomes, and how they relate to each other within public decision-making. We use a survey experiment to test the impact of transparency and participation on a range of governance outcomes (satisfaction, perception of fairness, and trust) in a municipal decision-making process. The findings show that both transparency and participation positively affect these governance outcomes. However, we do not find support for an interaction effect of transparency and participation. Implications for research and practitioners are discussed.

scholarly journals Die proses van partikuliere en openbare besluitneming

1983 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
S. S. Brand
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The One ◽  
Two Sectors ◽  
Public Decision ◽  
Public Decision Making

Private and public decision-making The interaction between the private and public sectors is important in South Africa. Much criticism is expressed by the one sector against the other. This can be partly attributed to an incomplete understanding of the processes of decision-making in the two sectors, and of the differences between them. A comparison is drawn between the most important elements of the decision-making processes in the two sectors. Public decision-making deals mostly with matters concerning the community and the economy as a whole, whereas private decision-making is concerned mostly with parts of the whole. The aims at which decision-making in the two sectors are directed, differ accordingly, as do the perceptions of the respective decision-makers of the environment in which they make decisions. As a consequence, the criteria for the success of a decision also differ substantially between the two sectors. The implications of these differences between private and public decision-making for the approach to inflation and the financing of housing, are dealt with as examples. Finally, differences between the ways in which decisions are implemented in the two sectors, also appear to be an important cause of much of the criticism from the private sector about decision-making in the public sector.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document