Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T15:37:13.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Politics Matter? Redistributive Policies in English Cities 1949–74

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Keith Hoggart
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The importance of political parties for inter-governmental differences in public policies has long been the subject of dispute. Given their comparative intentions and their concern with end-products rather than decision processes, statistical analyses of policy outputs should provide a valuable tool in evaluating this question. This they have seemingly failed to do, largely because they have devoted insufficient attention to the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of their investigations. However, with Sharpe and Newton's Does Politics Matter? a theoretical approach has been introduced into the local outputs literature which should herald a new era in comparative statistical investigations and the welcome emergence of conceptual and theoretical advances. In addition, their efforts raise the promise of forging a closer alliance between the outputs literature and more detailed, qualitative investigations of policy-making processes in individual local authorities.

Type
Notes and Comments
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 1987 , pp. 359 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Jacob, H. and Lipsky, M., ‘Outputs, Structures and Power’, Journal of Politics, XXX (1968), 510–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fenton, J. H. and Chamberlayne, P. W., ‘The Literature Dealing with the Relationship Between Political Processes, Socio-Economic Conditions and Policies in American States’, Polity, I (1969), 388–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Coulter, P. B., ‘Comparative Community Politics and Public Policy’, Polity, II (1970), 22–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Sharpe, L. J. and Newton, K., Does Politics Matter? (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984).Google Scholar

3 Danziger, J. N., Making Budgets (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1978).Google Scholar

4 Peterson, P. E., ‘A Unitary Model of Local Taxation and Expenditure Policies’, British Journal of Political Science, IX (1979), 281–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Peterson, P. E., City Limits (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 For reviews of evidence on party effects in local output studies, see Fried, R., ‘Comparative Urban Policy and Performance’, in Greenstein, F. I. and Polsby, N. W., eds, Policies and Policy-Making: Handbook of Political Science, Volume Six (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1975), pp. 305–79Google Scholar; and Sharpe, L. J., ‘Does Politics Matter?’, in Newton, K., ed., Urban Political Economy (London: Frances Pinter, 1981), pp. 1–26.Google Scholar

6 For example, Newton, K. and Sharpe, L. J., ‘Local Outputs Research: Some Reflections and Proposals’, Policy and Polilics, V (1977), 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Some examples include Danziger, J. N., ‘Assessing Incrementalism in British Municipal Budgeting’, Brilish Journal of Political Science, VI (1976), 335–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Salanick, G. R. and Pfeffer, J., ‘Constraints on Administrative Discretion: The Limited Influence of Mayors on City Budgets’, Urban Affairs Quarterly, XII (1977), 475–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Morgan, D. R. and Pelissero, J. P., ‘Urban Policy: Does Political Structure Matter?’, American Political Science Review, LXXIV (1980), 999–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Brown, M. C. and Halaby, G. N., ‘Bosses, Reform and the Socio-Economic Bases of Urban Expenditure 1890–1940’, in McDonald, T. J. and Ward, S. K., eds, The Politics of Urban Fiscal Policy (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1984), pp. 69–99.Google Scholar

8 Easton, D., ‘An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems’, World Politics, IX (1957), 383–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 The theoretical case for focusing on translation effects is provided in more detail in Stonecash, J., ‘Politics, Wealth and Public Policy’, in Dye, T. R. and Gray, V., eds, The Determinants of Public Policy (Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath, 1980), pp. 21–37Google Scholar; and Hansen, T., ‘Transforming Needs into Expenditure Decisions’, in Newton, K., ed., Urban Political Economy (London: Frances Pinter, 1981), pp. 27–47.Google Scholar Empirical analyses which use a cross-sectional time frame to assess translation effects can be found in Hansen's paper; in Friedland, R., Power and Crisis in the City (London: Macmillan, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and in Hoggart, K., ‘Political Parties and Local Authority Capital Investments in English Cities 1966–1971’Google Scholar, Political Geography Quarterly, in (1984), 5–32.Google Scholar

10 Rose, R. and Karran, T. J., ‘Inertia or Incrementalism?: A Long-Term View of the Growth of Government’, in Groth, A. J. and Wade, L. L., eds, Comparative Resource Allocation (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1984), pp. 43–71.Google Scholar

11 Generally, this meant that when statistically significant differences were recorded in b coefficients, this could not be explained by groups of local authorities starting the study period with dissimilar output levels (i.e., these b coefficient differences were not simply a catching-up factor). In only a few cases could a catching-up effect be recognized. Where relevant, these have been referred to in the text.

12 For fuller details see Hoggart, K., ‘Political Control and Urban Redistributive Policies’ (doctoral dissertation, University of London, 1983).Google Scholar

13 For example, Pinch, S., ‘Patterns of Local Authority Housing Allocation in Greater London Between 1966 and 1973’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, III (1978), 35–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lamont, D., ‘The Determinants of Council House Expenditures in Scotland’Google Scholar, in Kirby, A. and Pinch, S., eds, ‘Public Provision and Urban Polities’ (Reading: University of Reading Geographical Paper 80, 1982), pp. 47–72Google Scholar; and Hoggart, , ‘Political Parties and Local Authority Capital Investments in English Cities 1966–1971’.Google Scholar

14 Sharpe, and Newton, , Does Politics Matter? p. 216Google Scholar; also Karran, T. J., ‘“Borough Politics” and “County Government” Administrative Styles in the Old Structure’, Policy and Politics, X (1982), 317–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 The chief officer positions used here were chief education officer or housing officer (depending on which output category was examined) and town clerk. The clerk's position was used because it represented the apex of the bureaucratic structure in the local authority (hence chief executive positions were used where relevant). The departmental chief officers were selected because they stood at the apex of the organizational structure with specific responsibility for the output categories investigated. A twenty-year cut-off (distinguishing shorter-duration and longer-duration officers) was relied on for the same reasons as those that distinguished authorities dominated by one political party from others.

16 Downs, A., Inside Bureaucracy (Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown, 1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Waste, R. J., ‘The Early Years in the Life Cycle of City Councils: A Downsian Analysis’, Urban Studies, XX (1983), 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Niskanen, W. A., Bureaucracy and Representative Government (Chicago: Aldine, 1971)Google Scholar; and Randall, M. V., ‘Housing Policy in London Boroughs’, London Journal, VII (1981), 161–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 In order to make allowance for differences in resource bases, analyses were undertaken in which controls were introduced for annual variations in central government grant contributions and the local product of a one penny rate. These did not lead to any changes in conclusions about the effects of political party and bureaucratic control (see Hoggart, , ‘Political Control and Urban Re-distributive Policies’, pp. 200–15).Google Scholar

20 For example, Sharpe, , ‘Does Politics Matter?’, p. 5.Google Scholar

21 Rose, R., Understanding Big Government (London: Sage, 1984), p. 31.Google Scholar

22 Rose, R., Do Parties Make a Difference? (London: Macmillan, second edition, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Hoggart, , ‘Political Control and Urban Redistributive Policies’, pp. 196–7.Google Scholar

24 Downs, A., ‘An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy’, Journal of Political Economy, XLV ( 1957), 135–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Tarschys, D., ‘The Growth of Public Expenditures’, Scandinavian Political Studies, X (1975), 9–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Larkey, R. D., Stolp, C. and Winer, M., ‘Theorizing About the Growth of Government’, Journal of Public Policy, I (1981), 157–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 For example, Vidich, A. J. and Bensman, J., Small Town in Mass Society (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, second edition, 1968).Google Scholar

27 See Heath, A., Jowell, R. and Curtice, J., How Britain Votes (Oxford: Pergamon, 1985).Google Scholar

28 See Oakeshott, M., ‘On Being Conservative’, in de Crespigny, A. and Cronin, J., eds, Ideologies of Politics (London: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 23–51Google Scholar; Bennett, R., ‘The Conservative Tradition of Thought’, in Nugent, N. and King, R., eds, The British Right (Farnborough: Saxon House, 1977), pp. 11–25Google Scholar; and Johnson, R. W., The Politics of Recession (London: Macmillan, 1985), pp. 235–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Parkinson, M., ‘Politics of Urban Education’ (Liverpool: University of Liverpool, Department of Political Theory and Institutions, 1972), p. 30.Google Scholar

30 Baxter, R., ‘The Working Class and Labour Politics’, Political Studies, XX (1972), 97–107, p. 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 Butterworth, R., ‘Islington Borough Council: Some Characteristics of Single-Party Rule’, Politics, I(1) (1966), 21–31, p. 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 For a similar view see Gyford, J., Local Politics in Britain (London: Croom Helm, 1976), p. 74Google Scholar; Turner, J. E., Labour's Doorstep Politics in London (London: Macmillan, 1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Bassett, K., ‘Political Responses to the Restructuring of the Local State’Google Scholar, in Boddy, M. and Fudge, C., eds, ‘The Local State: Theory and Practice’ (Bristol: University of Bristol, School for Advanced Urban Studies Working Paper 20, 1981), pp. 38–59.Google Scholar

33 Hoggart, K., ‘Welsh Local Authority Employment Since 1979: Political Party Effects in District Councils’, Regional Studies, XIX (1985), 447–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Hoggart, K., ‘Responses to Fiscal Stress: Local Government Expenditures in England 1974–1985’ (Oxford: Pergamon, Progress in Planning Monograph, 1987).Google Scholar

34 See Rose, R., ‘Class Does Not Equal Party’ (Glasgow: University of Strathclyde, Studies in Public Policy 74, 1980)Google ScholarPubMed; also, as quoted in Newby, H., Vogler, C., Rose, D. and Marshall, H., ‘From Class Structure to Class Action’, in Roberts, B., Finnegan, R. and Gallie, D., eds, New Approaches to Economic Life (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985), pp. 86–102Google Scholar, Ivor Crewe has reported that 59 per cent of former Labour voters who purchased their council home switched to the Conservatives at the 1983 general election; for further evidence on this point see Heath, , Jowell, and Curtice, , How Britain VotesGoogle Scholar, who also found a home ownership-Conservative voting link.

35 Hoggart, K.. ‘Political Party Control and the Sale of Local Authority Dwellings 1974–1983’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, III (1985), 463–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 For example, Young, K. and Kramer, J., Strategy and Conflict in Metropolitan Housing (London: Heinemann, 1978).Google Scholar

37 An examination of theoretical issues raised by this inconsistency can be found in Hoggart, K., ‘Geography, Political Control and Local Government Policy Outputs’, Progress in Human Geography, X (1986), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar