Governmental Fragmental Versus Consolidation

Governmental Fragmental Versus Consolidation Governmental Fragmental Versus Consolidation A key concept in designing and testing the propositions is to survey residents from different localities both in the fragmented and consolidated systems of local governments. After the survey, an interview with residents from five matched pairs of socioeconomic areas located in two different urban centres. A quantitative research study that investigates the following hypothesis is then carried out: hypotheses that smaller fragmentation or jurisdiction may lead to better informed, greater participation, and feeling more efficacious by the citizens. My quantitative research study will be different with that of the Lyon and Lowery because it will majorly rely on the inductive reasoning to interpret and structure the meanings that are obtained from the collected data. The paper seeks to criticize how Lyons and Lowery measure reliability and validity about fragmented government and consolidated government.
For the purpose of analysis, it is not possible to establish a specific extent to which an empirical measure can be considered content valid. Content validity in an imprecise standard set against which to evaluate the validity of empirical measurement. Validity that is related to the criterion is also limited in the generalized applicability in the field of social sciences. The social scientist can only assess the construct validity of an empirical measurement if the measure can be placed in the theoretical context (Lyons &amp. Lowery, 1986). For a very long time, arguments on how to organize and analyse urban governments that are in the US has been structured to fit around two basic perspectives of theories. One of these theoretical perspectives that has been advanced by the civic reform traditions gives greater emphasis on the socioeconomic interdependencies that is found in urban centres in America. As it emphasizes on the socio-economic interdependence of urban area, it also laments on the fragmentation of the government systems that have been designed to serve them.
In trying to combine managerial and critical race theory paradigm, a method can be drafted to structure consolidated governments to handle different preferences of the citizens about the packages of tax service. Besides that a legal institutional created to measures and help in solving some of the alleged negative impacts of creating a larger units of local government authorities. Putting more emphasis on the larger representation as the opposed establishment of the districts will provide a better way of involving citizens in important decision-making processes. Besides that, it will offer a formal mechanism in which hearing and handling of the grievances among the citizens can be done. Therefore, those citizens who are living in consolidated are less efficacious about their ruling government than those people living in highly fragmented systems. This proposition results into frustration and cynicism on the part of those local citizens who may not find a point of access. It may also contribute to eroding the impact of consolidation on the level of confidence among the citizens about the influence that they can have over public policy.
In conclusion, it is necessary to draft a mechanism that can structure consolidated governments to handle different preferences of the citizens about the packages of tax service. Also, it may also be possible to create legal, institutional measures that can help in solving some of the alleged negative impacts of creating a larger units of local government authorities
Reference
Lyons, W. E., &amp. Lowery, D. (1986). Governmental Fragmental Versus Consolidation. Public Administration Review, 49(6), 533-543.