Borge, L E and Hopland, A O (2023) Fiscal and political determinants of local government maintenance. Building Research & Information, 51(8), pp. 937-948. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Taking advantage of a novel data set on maintenance in Norwegian local governments, a comparison was made between norms for good maintenance and actual maintenance spending. Although a sizeable minority complies with the norm, the average maintenance spending is well below the norm. A theoretical model is developed to guide the empirical analysis of the determinants of maintenance. It emphasizes the roles of fiscal capacity, fiscal distress, and political fragmentation. The empirical analysis reveals that high fiscal capacity (measured by local government revenue) and little fiscal distress (measured by rainy-day funds) are associated with a high priority of maintenance spending. However, political fragmentation that reflects myopic behaviour is associated with low maintenance priorities. The results are robust and become stronger when outliers and small local governments are omitted.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fiscal capacity; maintenance spending; myopic behaviour; political fragmentation |
| Index terms: | minority, fragmentation, distress, local government, determinant, norms, revenue |
| Subjects: | administrative law, sociology, risk assessment, business, economic analysis, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Risk Management, Legal Issues, Ethics, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 C |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here