How competitive is competitive bidding? The case of the single regeneration budget program

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 71-87

  John, Peter ^a   Ward, Hugh ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 11944267008     PISSN: 10531858     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jopart/mui004     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Arnold, Douglas R. 1979. Congress and the bureaucracy: A theory of influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
2. _. 1990. The logic of congressional action. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
3. Ball, Rick M. 1995. Local authorities and regional policy in the UK. London: Paul Chapman.
4. Balla, Steven J., Eric D. Lawrence, Forrest Maltzman, and Lee Sigelman. 2002. Partisanship, blame avoidance, and the distribution of legislative pork. American Journal of Political Science 46 (3): 515-25.
5. Bosch, Nùria, Francisco Pedraja, and Javier Suarez-Pandiello. 2000. Measuring the efficiency of Spanish municipal refuse collection services. Local Government Studies 26 (3): 71-90.
6. Carsey, Thomas M., and Barry S. Runquist. 1999. The reciprocal relationship between state defense interest and committee representation in Congress. Public Choice 99 (3-4): 455-63.
7. Considine, Mark. 2000. Selling the unemployed: The performance of bureaucracies, firms and non-profits in the new Australian "market" for unemployment assistance. Social Policy and Administration 34 (3): 274-95.
8. Dantzig, George. 1957. Discrete-variable extremum problems. Operations Research 5 (2): 266-77.
9. Department of Land Economy. 1996. Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget challenge fund: An examination of unsuccessful bids. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
10. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. 1997. Regeneration programmes - The way forward. London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
11. Department of Transport, Local Government and Regions. 2002. Neighbourhood regeneration: Lessons and evaluation evidence from ten Single Regeneration Budget case studies. Urban Research Summary No. 1. London: Department of Transport, Local Government and Regions.
12. Ennew, Christine, and David Whynes. 1998. Entrepreneurship and innovation among GP fundholders. Public Money and Management 18 (1): 59-64.
13. Ferejohn, John. 1974. Pork barrel politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14. Fokati, Marianna. 1999. The impact of market orientated reforms on choice and information: A case study of cataract surgery in outer London and Stockholm. Social Science and Medicine 48 (10): 1415-32.
15. Hall, Stephen. 2000. The way forward for regeneration? Lessons from the Single Regeneration Budget challenge fund. Local Government Studies 26 (1): 1-14.
16. House of Commons Environment Select Committee. 1995. First report. Single Regeneration Budget. London: HMSO.
17. John, Peter, Hugh Ward, and Keith Dowding. 2004. The bidding game: Competitive funding regimes and the political targeting of urban programme schemes. British Journal of Political Science, 34:405-28.
18. Krippendorff, Klaus. 1980. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19. Lane, Jan-Eric. 2001. From long-term to short-term contracting. Public Administration 79 (1): 29-47.
20. Martello, Silvano, and Paulo Toth. 1990. Knapsack problems: Algorithms and computer implementations. New York: Wiley.
21. Mawson, John, M. Beazley, A. Burfitt, C. Collinge, S. Hall, P. Loftman, B. Nevin, A. Srbljanin, and B. Tilson. 1995. The Single Regeneration Budget: The stocktake. Birmingham, England: University of Birmingham.
22. McDonald, John F., and Robert A. Moffitt. 1980. The uses of tobit analysis. Review of Economics and Statistics 62 (3): 318-21.
23. Oatley, Nick. 1995. Competitive urban policy and the regeneration game. Town Planning Review 66 (1): 1-14.
24. _. 1998. Cities, economic competition and urban policy. In Cities, economic competition and urban policy, ed. N. Oatley, 3-20. London: Paul Chapman.
25. Pressman, Jeffrey L., and Aaron Wildavsky. 1974. Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
26. Rhodes, John, Peter Tyler, and Angela Brennan. 2003. New developments in area-based initiatives in England: The experience of the Single Regeneration Budget. Urban Studies 40 (8): 1399-1446.
27. Rhodes, Rod A. W. 1988. Beyond Westminster and Whitehall. London: Unwin Hyman.
28. Robinson, Marc. 2000. Contract budgeting. Public Administration 78 (1): 75-90.
29. Rothkopf, Michael H., and Ronald M. Harstad. 1994. Modeling competitive bidding: A critical essay. Management Science 40 (3): 364-84.
30. Runquist, Barry S., ed. 1980. Political benefits. Lexington, MA: Lexington.
31. Stein, Robert, and Kenneth Bickers. 1995. Perpetuating the pork barrel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Stewart, Murray. 1994. Between Whitehall and town hall: The realignment of urban regeneration policy in England. Policy and Politics 22 (2): 133-46.
33. _. 1996. Competition and competitiveness in urban policy. Public Money and Management 16 (3): 21-26.
34. Tyler, Peter, Angela Brennan, and John Rhodes. 1996. Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget challenge fund: An examination of unsuccessful bids. Department of Land Economy Discussion Paper 74. Cambridge: Department of Land Economy.
35. _. 1999. Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget challenge fund. First final evaluation of three case studies. London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
36. Wallace, Marc A. 2003. An analysis of presidential preferences in the distribution of empowerment zones and enterprise communities. Public Administration Review 63 (5): 562-627.
37. Walsh, Keiron. 1995. Public services and market mechanisms. Basingstoke, England: Macmillan.
38. Ward, Hugh. 2002. A spatial model of bidding tournaments for the public funding of projects. Essex Papers in Politics and Government, No. 159. Essex, UK: University of Essex.
39. Wittman, Donald. 1995. The myth of democratic failure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.