The relationship between state government performance and state quality of life

International Journal of Public Administration

Volumn 26, Issue 12, 2003, Pages 1337-1354

  Coggburn, Jerrell D ^a   Schneider, Saundra K ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Government performance; Management capacity; Public management; State government; State policy priorities; State quality of life

Indexed keywords

EID: 85044914807     PISSN: 01900692     EISSN: 15324265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1081/PAD-120024400     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Poister, T. H., and Streib, G., 1999. Performance measurement in municipal government: assessing the state of practice. Public Admin. Rev., 59 (4): 325–335.
2. Mihm, C., Beyond plans, promises and good intentions: instilling results-oriented management in federal agencies. Meeting the Challenges of Performance-Oriented Government. Edited by: Newcomer, K., pp. 37–48. Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration/Center for Accountability and Performance.
3. Abrahamson, M. A., and Kamensky, J. M., 2001. “ Managing for results: cutting-edge challenges facing government leaders in 2002 ”. In Managing For Results Edited by: Abrahamson, M. A., and Kamensky, J. M., 3–17. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.
4. Wholey, J. S., 1999. Performance-based management: responding to the challenges. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22 (3): 288–307.
5. Broom, C., Caudle, S., Jennings, E. T., Jr. and Newcomer, K., Meeting the challenges of performance-oriented government. Meeting the Challenges of Performance-Oriented Government. Edited by: Newcomer, K., pp. 1–12. Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration/Center for Accountability and Performance.
6. Ingraham, P. W., and Moynihan, D. P., “ Beyond measurement: managing for results in state government ”. In Quicker Better Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government Edited by: Forsythe, D. W., 309–333. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press.
7. Lynn, L. E., Jr., Heinrich, C. J., and Hill, C. J., 2000. “ Studying governance and public management: why? how? ”. In Governance and Performance: New Perspectives Edited by: Heinrich, C. J., and Lynn, L. E., Jr. 1–33. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
8. Ridley, C. E., and Simon, H. A., 1943. Measuring Municipal Activities: A Survey of Suggested Criteria for Appraising Administration Chicago, IL: The International City Management Association.
9. Aristigueta, M. P., 1999. Managing for Results in State Government Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
10. Schick, A., 2001. “ Getting performance measures to measure up ”. In Quicker Better Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government Edited by: Forsythe, D. W., 39–60. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press.
11. Hatry, H. P., 1996. “ Tracking the quality of services ”. In Handbook of Public Administration, 2nd Ed. Edited by: Perry, J. L., 537–554. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
12. Swindell, D., and Kelly, J. M., 2000. Linking citizen satisfaction to performance measures: a preliminary evaluation. Public Performance & Management Review, 24 (1): 30–52.
13. National Performance Review (NPR). From red tape to results: creating a government that works better and costs less." Report of the National Performance Review, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 1993
14. Forsythe, D. E., Quicker Better Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government, Rockefeller Institute Press: Albany, NY, 2001
15. Joyce, P. G., and Tompkins, S. S., Using performance information for budgeting: clarifying terms and investigating recent state experience. Meeting the Challenges of Performance-Oriented Government. Edited by: Newcomer, K., pp. 61–96. Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration/Center for Accountability and Performance.
16. Melkers, J., and Willoughby, K., 1998. The state of the states: performance-based budgeting requirements in 47 out of 50. Public Admin. Rev.,: 66–73.
17. Hatry, H. P., 1999. Performance Measurement: Getting Results Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
18. Broom, C., Jackson, M., Harris, J., and Vogelsang-Coombs, V., 2000. Performance Measurement: Concepts and Techniques, 3rd Ed. Washington, DC: American Society for Public Administration/Center for Accountability and Performance.
19. Kopczynski, M., and Lombardo, M., 1999. Comparative performance measurement: insights and lessons learned from a consortium effort. Public Admin. Rev., 59 (2): 124–134.
20. Swiss, J. E., 1992. Adapting total quality management (TQM) to government. Public Admin. Rev., 52 (4): 356–362.
21. Kirlin, J. J., 1996. What government must do well: creating value for society. J. Publ. Adm. Res. Theor., 6 (1): 161–185.
22. Kirlin, J. J., 2001. Measuring Public Contribution to Valued Places. Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. August 29–September 22001, San Francisco, CA.
23. Merton, R. K., 1940. “ Bureaucratic personality and structure ”. In Classics of Public Administration, 4th Ed. Edited by: Shafritz, J. M., and Hyde, A. C., 100–108. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Publishers. (reprinted 1997)
24. Moore, M. H., 1997. Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Glaser, M. A., Aristigueta, M. P., and Payton, S., 2000. Harnessing the resources of community: the ultimate performance agenda. Public Productivity and Management Review, 23 (4): 428–448.
26. Hollar, D., 2003. A holistic theoretical model for examining welfare reform: quality of life. Public Admin. Rev., 63 (1): 90–104.
27. 1999. Smart Signals: Economic for Lasting Progress St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Planning. Minnesota Planning (Environmental Quality Board)
28. Savageau, D., 2000. Places Rated Almanac New York: John Wiley & Sons.
29. Glaser, M. A., 1991. The business psyche: exploring relationships between local quality of life and city image. Public Admin. Q., 15 (3): 287–303.
30. Elling, R. C., 1999. “ Administering state programs: performance and politics ”. In Politics in the American States, 7th Ed. Edited by: Gray, V., Hanson, R. L., and Jacob, H., 267–303. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
31. Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T., Reinventing Government, Plume Books: NY, 1992
32. Saiz, M., and Clarke, S. E., 1999. “ Economic development and infrastructure policy ”. In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, 7th Ed. Edited by: Gray, V., Hanson, R. L., and Jacob, H., 474–505. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
33. Quitno, M., 2000. “ Results of the 2000 Most Livable State Award ”. http://www.morganquitno.com/sr00mlrnk.htm (Accessed February 11, 2003)
34. 2000. State Policy Reports. The Camelot index. State Policy Reports, 18 (5): 2–11.
35. Ingraham, P. W., and Donahue, A. K., 2000. “ Dissecting the black box revisited: characterizing government management capacity ”. In Governance and Performance: New Perspectives Edited by: Heinrich, C. J., and Lynn, L. E., Jr. 292–318. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
36. Sandfort, J. R., 2000. “ Examining the effect of welfare-to-work structure and services on a desired policy outcome ”. In Governance and Performance: New Perspectives Edited by: Heinrich, C., and Lynn, L., 140–165. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
37. Jennings, E. T., Jr. and Ewalt, J. A.G., 1998. Interorganizational coordination, administrative consolidation, and policy performance. Publ. Admin. Rev., 58 (5): 417–428.
38. Jennings, E. T., Jr. and Ewalt, J. A.G., 2000. “ Driving caseloads down: welfare policy choices and administrative action in the states ”. In Governance and Performance: New Perspectives Edited by: Heinrich, C., and Lynn, L., 109–139. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
39. Mead, R., 1999. The decline of welfare in Wisconsin. J. Publ. Adm. Res. Theor., 9 (4): 597–622.
40. Milward, H. B., and Provan, K. G., 1998. Principles for controlling agents: the political economy of network structures. J. Publ. Adm. Res. Theor., 8 (2): 203–222.
41. Roderick, M., Jacob, B. A., and Bryk, A. S., 2000. “ Evaluating Chicago's efforts to end social promotion ”. In Governance and Performance: New Perspectives Edited by: Heinrich, C., and Lynn, L., 34–67. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
42. Donahue, A. K., Selden, S. C., and Ingraham, P. W., 2000. Measuring government management capacity: a comparative analysis of city human resource management systems. J. Publ. Adm. Res. Theor., 10 (2): 381–411.
43. O'Leary, R., and Yandle, T., 2000. Environmental management at the millennium: the use of environmental dispute resolution by state governments. J. Publ. Adm. Res. Theor., 10 (1): 137–155.
44. Coggburn, J. D., and Schneider, S. K., 2003. The quality of management and government performance: an empirical analysis of the American states. Public Admin. Rev., 63 (2): 206–213.
45. Barrett, K., and Greene, R., 1999. Grading the states: a managerial report card. Governing, 12 (5): 17–90.
46. Hanson, R. L., 1998. “ The interaction of state and local governments ”. In Governing Partners: State-Local Relations in the United States Edited by: Hanson, R. L., Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
47. Wildavsky, A., 1964. The Politics of the Budgetary Process Boston: Little Brown.
48. Wildavsky, A., and Caiden, N., 1997. The New Politics of the Budgetary Process, 3rd Ed. New York: Longman.
49. Garand, J. C., 1988. Explaining government growth in the U.S. states. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 82: 837–849.
50. Garand, J. C., and Hendrick, R. M., 1991. Expenditure tradeoffs in the American states: a longitudinal test, 1948–1984. Western Polit. Quart., 44: 915–940.
51. Jacoby, W. G., and Schneider, S. K., 2001. Variability in state policy priorities: an empirical analysis. J. Polit., 63 (2): 544–568.
52. Coe, C., 1999. Local government benchmarking: lessons from two major multigovernment efforts. Public Admin. Rev., 59 (2): 110–123.
53. Ringquist, E. J., and Garand, J. C., 1999. “ Policy change in the American states ”. In American State and Local Politics: Directions for the 21st Century Edited by: Weber, R. E., and Brace, P., 268–299. New York: Chatham House.
54. Donahue, J. D., 1999. The Devolution Revolution: Hazardous Crosscurrents New York: Century Foundation.
55. Baumgartner, F. R., and Jones, B. D., 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics Chicago: Univerrsity of Chicago Press.
56. Gray, V., 1999. “ The socioecononomic and political context of the states ”. In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, 7th Ed. Edited by: Gray, V., Hanson, R. L., and Jacob, H., 1–31. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.