Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of fiscal contraction on innovation in the public sector

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Beginning in the mid-1970s, fiscal limitation laws, shrinking revenue bases in older cities, and reductions in state and federal grants all have reduced the resources available to carry out the functions of local government. What do these changes portend for the amount of innovation in local government, the types of innovations that are introduced, and the processes of introduction? This paper examines these questions by reviewing the literature on factors related to innovation in public service agencies and reorienting its implications in the new fiscal environment.

We conclude that on the whole the innovative process in the public sector has fallen on hard times. Yet, we identify those factors that a creative, innovative administrator can use to advantage in a period of fiscal constraints to bring about innovation. We also identify types of innovations that are likely to succeed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiken, Michael, and Robert R. Alford (1970). “Community structure and innovation: The case of public housing,” The American Political Science Review LXIV (3): 813–864.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, Walter S., Leland L. Johnson, and Edward W. Merrow (1977). “Government sponsored demonstrations of new technology,” Science 196: 950–957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, Paul, and Milbrey W. McLaughlin (1977). The Management of Decline: Problems, Opportunities,and Research Questions. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, P-5984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolten, Joseph (1975). “The Budgetary Process in Culver City, California.” Unpublished paper, Rand Graduate Institute, Santa Monica, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, Tom, and G. Stalker (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Jan M. (1980). Two Patrol Car Deployment Models: History of Use 1975–1979. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, P-6458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Jan M. (1978). “Transfer of emergency service deployment models to operating agencies,” Management Science 24: 719–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Jan, with Williams Bruns (1979). Improving Station Locations and Dispatching Practices in Fire Departments. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Jan M., and Peter Dormont (1975). Patrol Car Allocation Model: Executive Summary. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-1786/ 1-HUD/DOJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Jan M., Warren E. Walker, Anthony P. Jiga, and Sandra S. Polin (in preparation). The Impact of Fiscal Limitation on California's Criminal Justice System. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-2675-NIJ/RC.

  • Chaiken, Jan, et al. (1976). Criminal Justice Models: An Overview. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, John S. Y. (1979). “Police patrol budgeting by statistical forecasting and computer simulation,” Jounal of Contemporary Business 8: 35–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J., E. Katz, and H. Menzel (1966). Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study, New York: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colton, Kent W. (1978). “Routine computer technology: Implementation and impact,” in Kent W. Colton (ed.), Police Computer Technology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crecine, John P. (ed.) (1970). Financing the Metropolis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowther, R. F. (1964). “The Use of a Computer System for Police Manpower Allocation in St. Louis, Missouri,” Indiana University, Department of Police Administration.

  • Cyert, Richard (1978). “The management of universities of constant or decreasing size,” Public Administration Review 38 (4): 344–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, Richard, and James March (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • deLeon, Peter (1982). “New perspectives on program termination,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2 (2).

  • Downs, George, and Patrick Larkey (1981). “Fiscal reform and governmental efficiency: hanging tough,” Policy Sciences 13 (4): 381–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, Richard, and Milbrey McLaughlin (1981). Reform and Retrenchment: The Politics of California School Finance Reform. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, N-1679-NIE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feller, Irwin (1980). “Managerial response to technological innovation in public sector organizations,” Management Science 26 (10): 1021–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feller, Irwin, et al. (1974). Diffusion of Technology in State Mission-Oriented Agencies. University Park: Institute for Research on Human Resources, Pennsylvania State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • General Accounting Office (1978). State and Local Government Productivity Improvement: What is the Federal Role?, Report to the Congress of the United States, December 6.

  • Glaser, Edward (1976). Putting Knowledge to Use: A Distillation of the Literature Regarding Knowledge Transfer and Change. Los Angeles: Human Interaction Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, Ilene, and Robert Wasserman (1979). Managing Criminal Investigations. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hage, Jerald, and Michael Aiken (1967). “Program change and organization properties: a comparative analysis,” The American Journal of Sociology 72 (5): 503–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausner, Jack, Warren Walker, and Arthur Swersey (1974). An Analysis of the Deployment of Fire-Fighting Resources in Yonkers, New York. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-1566/2-HUD/CY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, Frederick O'R. (1972). “Innovation in state and local governments,” in Frederick O'R. Hayes and John Rasmussen (eds.). Centers for Innovation in the Cities and States. San Francisco: San Francisco Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hebert, Scott (1978). “The use of a computer-assisted patrol deployment model in the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department,” in Kent W. Colton (ed.), Police Computer Technology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrick, Thomas E., Donald R. Plane, et al. (1975). An Analysis of the Deployment of Fire-Fighting Resources in Denver, Colorado. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-1566/3-HUD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, Raymond D. and Charles Brecher (eds.) (1979). Setting Municipal Priorities1980. Montclair, NJ: Allanheld, Osmun, and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambright, W., A. Teich, and J. Carroll (1977). Adoption and Utilization of Urban Technology: A Decision-Making Study. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Research Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanouette, William J. (1982). “Recession brings labor, management closer together on union contracts,” National Journal 14 (10): 422–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, Charles H. (1978). “Organizational decline and cutback management,” Public Administration Review 38 (4): 316–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, Charles H. (1979). “More on cutback management: hard questions for hard times,” Public Administration Review 39 (2): 179–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, Charles H., Irene S. Rubin, and George G. Wolohojian (1981). The Politics of Retrenchment: How Local Governments Manage Fiscal Stress. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKean, R. (1972). “Property rights within government, and devices to increase governmental efficiency,” Southern Journal of Economics 39: 177–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menchik, Mark D. Judith Fernandez, and Michael Caggiano (1982). How Fiscal Restraint Affects Spending and Services in Cities. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-2644-FF/RC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, Lawrence (1969). “Determinants of innovation in organizations,” The American Political Science Review LXIII (1): 111–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosher, Lawrence (1982). “More cuts in EPA research threaten its regulatory goals, critics warn,” National Journal 14 (15): 635–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, William G. (1981). Theory Z: How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascal, Anthony H., et al. (1979). Fiscal Containment of Local and State Government. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-2494-FF/RC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, George (1980). “America's urban capital stock,” Policy and Research Report 10 (1): 7–10, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfiffner, James P., “Budgeting and the ‘People's Reform’,” Public Administration Review 40 (2): 194–200.

  • Public Affairs Counseling (a Division of Real Estate Research Corporation) (1976). Factors Involved in the Transfer of Innovations: A Summary and Organization of the Literature. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand Fire Project (Warren Walker, Jan Chaiken, and Edward Ignall, eds.) (1979). Fire Department Deployment Analysis. New York: Elsevier-North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roessner J., David (1979). “Federal technology policy: innovation and problem solving in state and local governments,” Policy Analysis 5 (2): 181–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Everett, and F. Shoemaker (1971). Communication of Innovations, second edition, New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosner, Martin M. (1968). “Economic determinants of organizational innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly 12: 614–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, Jack (1974). Planning and Organizing for Social Change: Action Principles from Social Science Research. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Robert J. (1982). “Bad numbers, bad government,” National Journal 14 (16): 686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santone, L. C. and G. N. Berlin (1969). A Computer Model for the Evaluation of Fire Station Location, Report 10093. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smothers, Ronald (1980). “Sanitation talks stressing gains in job efficiency,” The New York Times, November 10, p. B1.

  • Stanford, Rochelle L. (1982). “Picking up block grants: where there's a will, there's not always a way,” National Journal 14 (15): 616–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Maria B. (1982). “Volunteerism: a police department's response to changing times, The Police Chief XLIX (5): 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Victor (1965). “Bureaucracy and innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly 10 (1): 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Utterback, James (1971). “The process of technological innovation within the firm,” Academy of Management Journal 14 (1): 75–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Warren (1978). Changing Fire Company Locations: Five Implementation Case Studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Warren E., Jan M. Chaiken, Anthony P. Jiga, and Sandra S. Polin (1981). “The impact of proposition 13 on local criminal justice agencies: emerging patterns,” in Kevin N. Wright, (ed.), Crime and Criminal Justice in a Declining Economy. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, Aaron, (1978). The Politics of the Budgetary Process, Third Edition. Boston, MA: Little Brown & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, James Q. (1966). “Innovation in organization: notes toward a theory,” in James D. Thompson (ed.), Approaches to Organizational Design. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 193–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, Robert (1977). “Production efficiency versus bureaucratic self-interest: two innovative processes,” Policy Sciences 8: 381–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, Robert K. et al. (1976). A Review of Case Studies of Technological Innovations in State and Local Services. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, R-1870-NSF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaltman, Gerald, Robert Duncan, and Jonny Holbek (1973). Innovation and Organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Rand Corporation, 90406, Santa Monica, California, USA

    Warren E. Walker & Jan M. Chaiken

Authors
  1. Warren E. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan M. Chaiken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This paper was prepared for the National Institute of Education's Program on Research and Educational Practice.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walker, W.E., Chaiken, J.M. The effects of fiscal contraction on innovation in the public sector. Policy Sci 15, 141–165 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143076

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143076

Keywords

Search

Navigation