The American federal system allows for a great deal of variability in policy implementation by municipal and county governments Devolution of that responsibility from the federal government to state and local governments will likely reinforce the variability. This article assesses the relative utility of Elazar's and Lieske's political culture theories with respect to the adoption of progressive collective bargaining practices. Findings from a survey of 703 local governments support the conclusions that certain political cultures are more likely to adopt progressive collective bargaining provisions, and Lieske's theory is at least as effective as Elazar's in predicting such adoption.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bardach, E. (1977). The implementation game. What happens after a bill becomes a law. Cambndge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Derthick, M. (1972). New towns in town: Why a federal program failed . Washington, DC: Urban Institute .
3.
DiIulio, J.J. Jr., Garvey, G. & Kettl, D.F. (1993). Improving government performance: An owner's manual . Washington, DC: The Brookmgs Institution .
4.
Dye, T.R. (1990). American federalism Competition among governments . Lexmgton, MA: Lexmgton Books.
5.
Eggers, W.D. & O'Leary, J. (1995). Revolution at the roots. New York, NY: Free Press.
6.
Elazar, D.J. (1984). American federalism: A view from the states (3rd edition). New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers, Inc.
7.
Golembiewski, R. T. & Wildavsky, A. [Eds.] (1984). The costs of federalism . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
8.
Grodzins, M. (1960). The federal system. In Goals for Americans : The report of the President's Commission on National Goals. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
9.
Ingram, H.M. (1990). Implementation: A review and suggested framework . In N. Lynn & A. Wildavsky (Eds.), Public administration: The state of the discipline. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.
10.
Ingram, H.M. & Mann, D.E. (1980). Why policies succeed or fail. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
11.
Kincaid, J. (1990). From cooperative to coercive federalism. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 509, 139-152.
12.
Kincaid, J. & Lieske, J. (1991). Political subcultures of the American states: State of the art and agenda for research. Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association .
13.
Lieske, J. (1993). Regional subcultures of the United States. Journal of Politics, 55, 888-913.
14.
Nice, D.C. & Fredericksen, P. (1995). The politics of intergovernmental relations (2nd edition). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall Publishers, Inc.
15.
O'Toole, L. (1986). Policy recommendations for multi-actor implementation: An assessment of the field. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 181-210.
16.
Peterson, P. E. (1990). Federalism and the Great Society. In P S. Nivola & D. H. Rosenbloom (Eds.), Classic readings in American politics (2nd edition). New York, NY: St. Martin's Press, Inc.
17.
Pressman, J.L. & Wildavsky, A. (1973, 1979, 1984). Implementation (3rd edition). Berkeley, CA : University of California Press.
18.
Rivlin, A.M. (1992). Reviving the American dream. The economy, the states and the federal government. Washington, DC: The Brookmgs Institution.
19.
Sabatier, P.A. & Mazmaman, D.A. (1983). Policy implementation. In S. S. Nagel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of policy studies. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
20.
Sharkansky, I. (1969). The utility of Elazar's political culture. Journal of Politics, 2, 66-83.
21.
Steel, B.S. & Lovnch, N.P. (1996). Public personnel management in county government . Review of Public Personnel Admmistration ,16, 32-56.
22.
Wildavsky, A. (1998). Federalism and political culture. Edited by D. Schleicher & B. Swedlow.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
23.
Wilson, J.Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. Basic Books, Inc.
