The Devolution Revolution in Intergovernmental Relations in the 1990s: Changes in Cooperative and Coercive State-National Relations as Perceived by State Administrators

Cho, Chung-Lae; Wright, Deil S.

doi:10.1093/jopart/muh031

Cited by 31 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…describe coercive policies as leaving local governments with little-to-no discretion when implementing. These policies could be regulatory or statutory in nature, and involve funded or unfunded mandates (Cho and Wright 2004;Posner 2007; citation redacted for blind review). By design, grant funding is coercive in nature since locations have to comply in order to keep the cash flowing for specific policy actions.…”

Section: Coercive Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling disasters: Local emergency management perceptions about Federal Emergency Management and Homeland Security actions after September 11, 2001

Hildebrand¹

2017

JEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines local emergency manager's beliefs regarding control over tasks during various stages of the hazard cycle since federal policies went into effect following the September 11 attacks. The study considers whether a disparity exists between the actions of local officials during each phase of the "hazard cycle" and the policy expectations of the federal government, which call for greater federal control over activities in emergency management and homeland security. To do so, hypothesis testing investigates the jurisdiction's use of comprehensive emergency management (CEM) practices, the perceived "clarity" of the federal policy demands, and if the local actors feel coerced to comply with federal policy demands so that grant funding is not compromised. Using a model developed from "third-generation" policy implementation research, the results show that the odds of local officials citing federal control over these actions have very limited statistical significance. This signals that the perceived lack of local input into the development of these federal policies and the policies' limited use of traditional CEM measures may not be in concert with what local actors perform in the field. Simply put, the respondents claim to understand the federal policy demands, support the concept of federal control as the policies describe, yet follow their own plans or traditional CEM principles, even if such actions do not support the federal policy demands. These results align with pre-existing research in the emergency management field that show issues with efforts to centralize policies under the Department of Homeland Security and Federal Emergency Management Agency.

show abstract

Section: Coercive Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling disasters: Local emergency management perceptions about Federal Emergency Management and Homeland Security actions after September 11, 2001

Hildebrand¹

2017

JEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coercive efforts generally seek to enhance federal control over policy fields by compelling local governments to implement federal standards through both regulatory and statutory requirements, as well as specific mandates, both funded and unfunded (Cho and Wright 2004;Posner 2007). In the American system of intergovernmental relations many grant opportunities are coercive by nature.…”

Section: Coercive Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the American system of intergovernmental relations many grant opportunities are coercive by nature. As Conlan noted, "intergovernmental mandates and preemption offer the national government cheap policy tools for continued policy activism" (Conlan 1991: p. 44;Cho and Wright 2004). Contemporary coercive mandates from the federal level treat local governments as "regulatory agents."…”

Section: Coercive Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11

Hildebrand

2015

Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines what motivates local emergency management officials to implement federal emergency management and homeland security policies within their own departments since the September 11 attacks. Pre-existing research claims there is confusion among local governments about potential changes to the role local emergency management services play before, during, and after natural, accidental, or terror related incidents. Meanwhile, additional research claims the federal disaster management policies (The National Response Plan, National Incident Management System, and Incident Command System) lack flexibility in implementation expectations, and there is limited cohesion among the layers of government, actors, and interests involved. This study asserts that something must spur local actors to comply with federal policy demands in their daily operations given how the post-September 11 policies change the field. The study specifically examines the effects of coercion, defined as actions taken by the federal government to force state and local implementers to comply with federal policy demands. Available federal grant dollars for emergency management and homeland security practices could make a dramatic difference to local emergency management operations, forcing these actors to comply with federal policy demands, even if it is in a begrudging fashion that deviates from traditional Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) principles.

show abstract

“…In the spirit that all methods have their disadvantages, we report the perceptions of local government managers on the basis that their views provide an important, but certainly not definitive, perspective on these issues. As Cho and Wright explain (, 451): ‘What intergovernmental actors see and how they respond … are an important dimension of intergovernmental reality.’…”

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Multi-Level Governance of Wales: Layer Cake or Marble Cake?

Entwistle¹,

Downe²,

Guarneros‐Meza³

et al. 2012

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Provides a reading of the literatures on multi-level governance and federalism to develop a series of propositions about the nature of the relationship between different levels of government in the devolved United Kingdom.• Drawing on a survey of local government officers in Wales, the article reports support for both layer cake and marble cake interpretations of multi-level governance. • The article concludes with a discussion of the applicability of these models to our understanding of devolution in the United Kingdom.Since the United Kingdom began its devolution programme in 1999 governments operating at four different territorial scales-embracing the EU, the UK, the national and the local-have played a part in the governance of Wales. Multi-level governance of this type can be likened to a layer cake, in which each government operates in its own distinct jurisdiction, or to a marble cake in which governments have overlapping and interlaced responsibilities. Drawing on a survey that asked senior officers in Welsh local government to rate the impact of different levels of government, this article finds support for both interpretations of multi-level governance. Although largely discredited as a description of American federalism, the layer cake simile may have a new lease of life in the analysis of Europe's devolved nations and regions.

show abstract

The Devolution Revolution in Intergovernmental Relations in the 1990s: Changes in Cooperative and Coercive State-National Relations as Perceived by State Administrators

Cited by 31 publications

References 37 publications

Controlling disasters: Local emergency management perceptions about Federal Emergency Management and Homeland Security actions after September 11, 2001

Controlling disasters: Local emergency management perceptions about Federal Emergency Management and Homeland Security actions after September 11, 2001

Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11

The Multi-Level Governance of Wales: Layer Cake or Marble Cake?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About