Although Paul Peterson's City Limits has been influential, Peterson's assumptions about the capacity of local government actors to categorize and order policy preferences have been challenged. The author of this article tests the extent that mayors categorize and order their policy preferences using survey data from the Fiscal Austerity and Urban Innovation Project and factor analysis. This article finds that mayors in the United States categorize and order their policy preferences according to the City Limits policy typology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Balme, R.1992. Choosing the budget size: Mayor's spending preferences in a cross-national perspective. In Managing cities in austerity: Urban fiscal stress in ten Western countries, edited by P. E. Mouritzen, 101-121. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Baumgartner, F. R. , and B. D. Jones. 1993. Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
3.
Clark, T. N. , and L. C. Ferguson. 1983. City money. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
4.
Clarke, S. , ed. 1989. Urban innovation and autonomy: Political implications of policy change. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
Gottdiener, M.1987. The decline of urban politics: Political theory and the crisis of the local state. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Gurr, T. R. , and IX S. King. 1987. The state and the city. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
7.
Hair, J. F., Jr. , R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham. 1987. Multivariate data analysis. New York: Macmillian.
8.
Henig, J. R.1992. Defining city limits. Urban Affairs Quarterly27: 375-395.
9.
Hero, R. E. , and K. M. Beatty. 1988. The election of Federico Pefa as mayor of Denver: Analysis and implications. Social Science Quarterly70: 300-310.
10.
Jones, B. D.1982. Contracting limits: An end for city government?Urban Affairs Quarterly17: 379-388.
11.
Jones, B. D. . 1990. An uneasy certitude in urban political economy. Urban Affairs Quarterly25: 524-531.
12.
Kellow, A.1988. Promoting elegance in policy theory: Simplifying Lowi's arenas of power. Policy Studies Journal16: 713-724.
13.
Logan, J. R. , and H. L. Molotch. 1987. Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
14.
Lowi, T. J.1964. American business, public policy, case studies, and political theory. World Politics16: 677-715.
15.
Lowi, T. J. . 1988. An assessment of Kellow's "Promoting elegance in policy theory."Policy Studies Journal16: 725-728.
16.
Peterson, P. E.1981. City limits. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
17.
Peterson, P. E. , B. G. Rabe, and K. K. Wong. 1986. When federalism works. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
18.
Sanders, H. T. , and C. N. Stone. 1987. Developmental politics reconsidered. Urban Affairs Quarterly22: 521-539.
19.
Schneider, M.1989. The competitive city. Pittsburgh, PA: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press.
20.
Shannon, J.1990. The deregulation of the American federal system: 1789-1989. In The changing face of fiscal federalism, edited by T. R. Swartz and J. E. Peck, 17-34. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
21.
Smith, P. M.1988. City, state, and market: The political economy of urban society. New York: Basil Blackwell.
22.
Stein, R. M.1989. Market maximization of individual preferences and metropolitan municipal service responsibility. Urban Affairs Quarterly25: 86-116.
23.
Stein, R. M. . 1990. Urban alternatives: Public and private markets in the provision of local services. Pittsburgh, PA: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press.
24.
Stone, C. N.1980. Systemic power and community decision making: A restatement of stratification theory. American Political Science Review74 (4): 978-990.
25.
Stone, C. N. . 1987. The study of the politics of urban development. In The politics of urban development, edited by C. N. Stone and H. Sanders, 3-24. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
26.
Swanstrom, T.1988. Semisovereign cities: The politics of urban development. Polity21: 83-110.
27.
Wright, D. S.1982. Understanding intergovernmental relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
