A resurgence of interest in substate regionalism today has implications for intergovernmental relations in the 1990s. This research analyzes changes in the sector alignments of regional councils as assessed by their executive directors for a 10-year period from 1985 to 1995. It explores the alignments of regional councils to five institutional sectors: the national government, state governments, the regional sector, local governments, and the private sector. The priorities the council directors expect to place on relationships with their state governments and with the private sector increase dramatically. Finally, the lowest sector priorities are placed on relationships with the national government, even though the latter remains the councils' single largest source of fiscal support.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations
. (1973). Substate regionalism and the federal system. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
2.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations
. (1982). State and local roles in the federal system. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
3.
Atkins, P S. (1984). The nether regions: A typological classification of regional councils. Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Maryland.
4.
Atkins, P. S.
(1990). The mauling and malling of regional councils. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Urban Affairs Association. Charlotte, NC, April 18-21.
5.
Baldassare, M.
(1986). Trouble in paradise: The suburban transformation in America. New York: Columbia University Press.
6.
Bowman, A.
, & Franke, J. (1984). The decline of substate regionalism. Journal of Urban Affairs, 6 (4), 51-63.
7.
Casella, W. N., Jr.
(1983). Regional planning and governance: history and politics. In G. C. Lim (Ed.), Regional planning: Evolution, crisis and prospects (Pp. 17-28). Totowa, NJ: Allanheld, Osmun.
8.
DeGrove, J. M.
(1988a). A battle over land use: A second wave emerges. State Government News, 31 (5), 8-10.
9.
DeGrove, J. M.
(1988b). Florida's greatest challenge: Balancing growth and the environment. Paper presented at the Strategic Planning Conference of the Hemispheric Policy Studies Center. Miami, Fl, December 13-14.
10.
DeGrove, J. M.
(1991). Evolving regional roles in state planning and growth management systems: What it means to planners and developers. Paper presented at the ALI-ABA Land Use Institute in Planning, Regulation, Litigation Eminent Domain and Compensation. Coronado, CA, July 31.
11.
Deister, A. D.
(1986). The regional planning councils: Champions or chameleons?Florida Environmental and Urban Issues, July 1-5.
12.
Derthick, M.
(1974). Between state and nation. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
13.
Dodge, W. R.
(1989). The emergence of intercommunity partnerships in the 1980s. National Civic Review, 78 (1) 5-14.
14.
Dodge, W. R.
(1990). Regional problem solving in the 1990s: Experimentation with local governance for the 21 st century. National Civic Review, 79 (4), 354-366.
15.
Esman, M. J.
(1972). Some issues in institution building theory. In D. Thomas, H. Potter, W. Miller, & A. Aveni (Eds.), Institution building: A model for applied social change (Pp. 65-90). Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Company.
16.
Gage, R. W.
(1988). Regional councils of governments at the crossroads: Implications for intergovernmental management and networks. International Journal of Public Administration, 11 (4), 467-501.
17.
Kingdon, J. W.
(1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little Brown & Company.
18.
Los Angeles 2000 Committee
(1988). L. A. 2000: A city for the future. LosAngeles: Author, November 15.
19.
McDowell, B. D.
(1980). Substate regionalism matures gradually. Intergovernmental Perspective, 6 (4), 20-26.
20.
McDowell, B. D.
(1983). The federal role in regional planning: Past and present. In G. C. Lim (Ed.), Regional planning: Evolution, crisis and prospects (Pp. 29-38). Totowa, NJ: Allanheld, Osmun.
21.
McDowell, B. D.
(1984). Regions under Reagan. Planning, 50 (8), 25-29.
22.
National Association of Regional Councils
. (1988). Future regional roles in reality. Washington, DC: Author.
23.
National Association of Regional Councils
. (1989). Regional council programs and activities: 1988 survey. Washington, DC: Author.
24.
Persons, G. A.
(1990). Defining the public interest: Citizen participation in metropolitan and state policy making. National Civic Review, 79 (2), 118-131.
25.
Pierce, N. R.
(1991). Regional governance: Why? Now? How?University of Virginia Newsletter, 67 (8), 1-6.
26.
Puget Sound Council of Governments
. (1990). Proposed framework plan: Principles to guide legislation mandating a new regional planning agency for the Central Puget Sound Area (revised June 22, 1990). Seattle, WA: Author.
27.
Seidman, H.
, & Gilmour, R. (1986). Politics, position and power (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
Siffin, W. J.
(1972). The institution building perspective: Properties, problems and promise. In D. W. Thomas, H. R. Potter, W. L. Miller, & A. F. Aveni (Eds.), Institution building: A model for applied social change (Pp. 113-148). Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Company.
29.
Taub, J. S.
(1986). COGS: Failures as regional planners. California Journal, 17 (11), 551-554.
30.
Thompson, J. D.
(1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw Hill.
31.
The White House
. (1981). America's new beginning: A program for economic recovery. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
32.
Walker, D. B.
(1986). Metropolitan cooperation and governance: The governmental dimension. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Municipal League. Kansas City, MO, November 8.
33.
Ward, D. M.
(1990). Regional governance in California: Citizen and policy implications. National Civic Review, 79 (2), 132-137.
34.
Weaver, R.
, & Wyman, S. (1991). Regional councils and their managers: Profiles, problems and prospects. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Urban Affairs Association. Vancouver, BC, April 17-21.
35.
Wikstrom, N.
(1984). Epitaph for a monument to another successful protest: Regionalism in metropolitan areas. Virginia Social Science Journal, 19 (1), 1-10.
