In 2009, the authors facilitated a citizen-participation process in a local community in Florida in the United States. Using an inductive content analysis across two online participation data sources, the study develops a set of testable propositions about cost functions of public participation. The study shows a nonlinear relationship between administrative costs and participation quantity. It also demonstrates no direct relationship between the costs and participation quality. Moreover, the cost functions vary in different participation mechanisms. These propositions provide a basis for future research to improve cost management in public participation.
AnderssonE.FennellE.ShahrokhT. (2011). Making the case for public engagement: How to demonstrate the value of consumer input. London, UK: Involve.
2.
ArnsteinS. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216-224.
3.
BabbieE. (2008). The basics of social research (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
BakerW. H.AddamsH. L.DavisB. (2005). Critical factors for enhancing municipal public hearings. Public Administration Review, 65, 490-499.
5.
BallaS. J. (2000). Legislative success and failure and participation in rule making. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 633-653.
6.
BanerjeeA. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 797-817.
7.
BarnesM.NewmanJ.KnopsA.SullivanH. (2003). Constituting “the public” in public participation. Public Administration, 81(2), 379-399.
8.
BeierleT. C. (1999). Using social goals to evaluate public participation in environmental decisions. Review of Policy Research, 16(3-4), 75-103.
9.
BryerT. A. (2007a). Toward a relevant agenda for a responsive public administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 479-500.
10.
BryerT. A. (2007b). Collaborative design of citizen engagement in city and county comprehensive planning: Teaching case and simulation competition in collaborative public management, collaborative governance, and collaborative problem solving, program on the analysis and resolution of conflicts. Syracuse, NY: Maxwell School of Syracuse University.
11.
BryerT. A. (2009). Explaining responsiveness in collaboration: Administrator and citizen role Perceptions. Public Administration Review, 69, 271-283.
12.
BryerT. A. (2011). The costs of democratization: Social media adaptation challenges within government agencies. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 33, 341-361.
13.
BryerT. A.ZavattaroS. M. (2011). Social media and public administration: Theoretical dimensions and introduction to symposium. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 33, 325-340.
14.
CoaseR. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law & Economics, 3, 1-44.
15.
CobbR. W.ElderC. D. (1983). Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda-building. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
16.
CohenN. (1995). Technical assistance for citizen participation: A case study of New York City’s environmental planning process. American Review of Public Administration, 25(2), 119-135.
17.
CooperT. L. (1979). The hidden price tag: Participation costs and health planning. American Journal of Public Health, 69, 368-374.
18.
CooperT. L. (2005). Civic engagement in the twenty-first century: Toward a scholarly and practical agenda. Public Administration Review, 65, 534-535.
19.
CooperT. L.BryerT. A. (2007). William Robertson: Exemplar of politics and public management rightly understood. Public Administration Review, 67, 816-824.
20.
CooperT. L.BryerT. A.MeekJ. W. (2006). Citizen-centered collaborative public management. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 76-88.
21.
CreightonJ. L. (1981). The public involvement manual. Cambridge, MA: Abt.
22.
CuppsS. D. (1977). Emerging problems of citizen participation. Public Administration Review, 37, 478-487.
23.
EdelmanM. (1985). The symbolic uses of politics. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
24.
FinkR. (2000). Quality. In BrinkerB. (Ed.), Guide to cost management (pp. 305-318). New York, NY: John Wiley.
25.
FinklerS. A. (2005). Financial management for public, health, and not-for-profit organizations (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
FrieseckeF. (2011, May18-22). Public participation in urban development projects: A German perspective. Paper presented at FIG Working Week 2011, Marrakech, Morocco.
27.
FranklinA. L.EbdonC. (2005). Are we all touching the same camel? Exploring a model participation in budgeting. American Review of Public Administration, 35(2), 168-185.
28.
FredericksonG. H. (1971). Toward a new public administration. In MariniaF. (Ed.), Toward a new public administration: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 309-331). Scranton, PA: Chandler.
29.
FungA. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 66-75.
30.
GillJ.MeierK. J. (2001). Ralph’s pretty-good grocery versus Ralph’s super market: Separating excellent agencies from the good ones. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 9-17.
31.
HandleyD. M.Howell-MoroneyM. (2010). Ordering stakeholder relationships and citizen participation: Evidence from the community development block grant program. Public Administration Review, 70, 601-609.
32.
HaywardT. (2010). Practitioner’s perspective—Managing for 2020: An exploration of role interdependence and balance. Public Administration Review, 70(S1), 129-136.
33.
HeinrichC.FournierE. (2004). Dimensions of publicness and performance in substance abuse treatment organizations. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(1), 49-70.
34.
HillC.LynnL. E.Jr. (2004). Governance and public management: An introduction. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(1), 3-11.
35.
HoustonG. F.HumphriesR.LiebenbergI. (2002). Public participation in democratic governance in South Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: Blue Weaver.
36.
HymanD. N. (2008). Public finance: A contemporary application of theory to practice (9th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
37.
InnesJ. E.BooherD. E. (2004). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory & Practice, 5, 419-436.
IrvinR. A.StansburyJ. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort?Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65.
40.
KathiP. C.CooperT. L. (2005). Democratizing the administrative state—Connecting neighborhood councils and city agencies. Public Administration Review, 65, 559-567.
41.
KeeleyM. (1984). Impartiality and participant-interest theories of organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 1-25.
42.
KeyV. O. (1961). Public opinion and American democracy. New York, NY: A. A. Knopf.
43.
KingC.StiversC. (1998). Introduction: The anti-government era. In KingC.StiversC. (Eds.), Government is us (pp. 3-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
KuranT.SunsteinC. R. (1999). Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Review, 51, 683-768.
45.
LowndesV.PratchettL.StokerG. (2001). Trends in public participation: Part 1—Local government perspectives. Public Administration, 79(1), 205-222.
46.
LijphartA. (1997). Unequal participation: Democracy’s unsolved dilemma. American Political Science Review, 91(1), 1-14.
47.
LindblomC. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through.”Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79-88.
48.
LukensmeyerC.TorresL. H. (2006). Public deliberation: A manager’s guide to public deliberation. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
49.
LynnL. E.HeinrichC. J.HillC. (2000). Studying governance and public management: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 10, 233-261.
50.
LangtonS. (1978). Citizen participation in America: Current reflections on the state of the art. In LangtonS. (Ed.), Citizen participation in America (pp. 1-12). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
51.
McCloskeyM. (1996). The skeptic: Collaboration has its limits. High Country News, 28(9), 7.
52.
MorrellM. E. (1999). Citizens’ evaluations of participatory democratic procedures: Normative theory meets empirical science. Political Research Quarterly, 52, 293-322.
53.
NoveckB. S. (2009). Wiki government: How technology can make government better, democracy stronger, and citizens more powerful. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
54.
PattersonS. C.CaldeiraG. A. (1983). Getting out the vote: Participation in gubernatorial elections. American Political Science Review, 77, 675-689.
55.
RobertsN. (2004). Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. American Review of Public Administration, 34, 315-353.
56.
SanoffH. (2000). Community participation methods in design and planning. New York, NY: Wiley.
57.
SelznickP. (1949). TVA and the grass roots: A study of politics and organization. Berkeley: University of California Press.
58.
ShirkyC. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: Penguin.
59.
SimonH. (1965). Administrative decision making. Public Administration Review, 25, 31-37.
60.
SniderJ. H. (2010). Deterring fake public participation. International Journal of Public Participation, 4(1), 89-103.
61.
TharpC. B. (2003). Who and why: Los Angeles’ neighborhood councils and the prevalence of socio-economic status, self-interest, and public interest in civic participation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.
62.
WagenaarH. (2007). Governance, complexity, and democratic participation. American Review of Public Administration, 37(1), 17-50.
63.
WaltersL.AydelotteJ.MillerJ. (2000). Putting more public in policy analysis. Public Administration Review, 60, 349-359.
64.
WangX. (2010). Performance analysis for public and nonprofit organizations. Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
65.
WarrenM. (1992). Democratic theory and self-transformation. American Political Science Review, 86(1), 8-23.
66.
WeberM. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
67.
WildavskyA. (1997). Budgeting: A comparative theory of budgetary processes (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
68.
WilliamsonO. E. (1999). Public and private bureaucracies: A transaction cost economics perspective. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 306-342.
