Local government decision-making - Local government decision-making in New Zealand: An interpretivist inquiry into influences and citizen preferences related to large capital investments

<p>Citizens’ active participation in local government affairs today is low, and no measurable signs indicate any improvement. To the contrary, evidence suggests citizen participation is deteriorating. Considerable debate has been involved in trying to establish whether its cause is citizenship deficits or democracy deficits. Alternatively, does another, yet-to-be-discovered driver explain the disconnection between local government and its citizens? Of greatest concern is that, in the near future, significant investment decisions and the outcomes they provide are likely to set the tone for our communities for the next 100 years or more. In this context, the diminishing participation may beget further disconnection. Furthermore, if citizens are not really in a position to make an informed decision, who is? Can we be sure those decision-makers are making the right decisions? Has the intent behind our participatory or deliberative democracy in the local government sector established itself in practice, as we might expect? Compounding this challenge is the complexity of the decision-making environment, which only enhances the gap between how citizens sense they are able to participate in these important long-term decisions and the political environments that struggle to find enduring solutions in which citizen preferences are weighted in a way that reflects community expectations. While the literature to date has covered citizenship and democracy deficits in some detail, understanding is more limited of the bureaucratic and representative deficits that are struggling with similar, if not identical issues. This research examines the concept and practice of local government decision-making. Its focus is on the influences that elected members weight in this process, and specifically the weight they give to citizen preferences in making their decisions. Moreover, if these preferences are not being given due weight, what are the implications for our deliberative democracy? And do the findings have any implications for how our communities ought to view the current decision-making environment?</p>

Smart city services: an empirical analysis of citizen preferences

In times of increasing urbanization worldwide, smart city management is becoming increasingly important. In this regard, successful implementation requires not only the creation of technological foundations but also, in particular, the inclusion and engagement of the citizens of the respective "smart city" (SC). Despite their recognized importance, knowledge concerning their needs and preferences is currently still rather limited. By surveying 906 citizens of a SC, this study provides comprehensive insights into the preference and relevance structure of digital SC services from a citizen perspective. To compare and contrast, the findings are finally cross-referenced with survey results from public officials.

"Good Politicians'': Experimental Evidence on Motivations for Political Candidacy and Government Performance

How can we motivate `good' politicians -- those that will carry out policy that is responsive to citizens' preferences -- to enter politics? In a field experiment in Pakistan, we vary how political office is portrayed to ordinary citizens. We find that emphasizing pro-social motives for holding political office instead of personal returns -- such as the ability to help others versus enhancing one's own respect and status -- raises the likelihood that individuals run for office and that voters elect them. It also better aligns subsequent policies with citizens' preferences. The candidacy decisions are explained by social influence, and not information salience -- we find that social versus personal messaging matters only when randomly delivered in a public setting but not in private. Results also show that changes in political supply, not citizen preferences or behavior, explain policy alignment. Taken together, the results demonstrate that non-financial motivations for political entry shape how politicians perform in office.

Who Likes to Vote by Mail?

Interest in voting by mail has increased during the coronavirus as a way to avoid in person contact. In this study, we conducted a survey in February 2020 in the United States to examine citizen preferences to cast their ballot at a polling station, over the internet, or by mail. By including simultaneously internet and mail as alternative voting options to the polling station we aim to disentangle convenience (both alternative options are presumably more convenient) from novelty (internet is more novel than mail and polling station voting). We find that the person who likes voting by mail the most is an older White-American with little interest in politics; and the person who likes voting by mail the least is a younger African-American or Latino with high interest in politics. All in all, the biggest cleavage in citizens’ preferences about how to vote is generational, not ideological.

The proposer or the proposal? An experimental analysis of constitutional beliefs

In many countries, constitutional amendments require the direct approval of voters, but the consequences of fundamental changes to the powers and operations of the state are difficult to anticipate. The referendums literature suggests that citizens weigh their prior beliefs about the merits of proposals against the heuristic provided by the partisanship of the proposer, but the relative salience of these factors across constitutional issue areas remains underexplored. This paper examines the determinants of citizen preferences on 12 diverse constitutional issues, based on a novel survey experiment in Japan. We show that support for amendments is greater when its proposer is described as non-partisan. However, constitutional ideology moderates this effect. Those who prefer idealistic constitutions that elevate national traditions tend to value proposals that expand government powers, compared to those who prefer pragmatic constitutions that constrain government authority. These results highlight the significance of constitutional beliefs that are independent of partisanship.