Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-xh428 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-16T20:33:43.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jurisdiction size and local government effectiveness: Assessing the effects of municipal amalgamations on performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2026

Jens Blom‐Hansen Open the ORCID record for Jens Blom‐Hansen [Opens in a new window] ,
Kurt Houlberg Open the ORCID record for Kurt Houlberg [Opens in a new window]  and
Søren Serritzlew Open the ORCID record for Søren Serritzlew [Opens in a new window]
Jens Blom‐Hansen
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark
Kurt Houlberg
Affiliation:
VIVE—The Danish Center for Social Science Research, Copenhagen, Denmark
Søren Serritzlew*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark
*
Address for correspondence: Søren Serritzlew, Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark. Email: soren@ps.au.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The optimal jurisdiction size has been debated since Plato and Aristotle. A large literature has studied economic and democratic scale effects, but we have almost no knowledge of the effects of jurisdiction size on the effectiveness of local services. This is due to two methodological problems. First, selection bias and reverse causality often render change in jurisdiction size an endogenous variable. Second, there is a lack of empirical indicators of effectiveness, and most studies therefore focus on spending measures. Extant research thus studies economies of scale, leaving effectiveness of scale unexamined. We address both problems in a quasi‐experimental study of public schools. Our findings from the school area indicate that jurisdiction size does not have systematic effects on effectiveness. Our analysis therefore supports recent studies of economic and democratic scale effects that indicate that the search for the optimal jurisdiction size is futile.

Keywords

municipal amalgamationsmergerseffectivenessscale effectsoptimal jurisdiction size

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
European Journal of Political Research , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , February 2021 , pp. 153 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 European Consortium for Political Research

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allers, M.A. & Geertsema, J.B. (2016). The effects of local government amalgamation on public spending, taxation, and service levels: Evidence from 15 years of municipal consolidation. Journal of Regional Science 56(4): 659‒682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, L.B., Boesen, A. & Pedersen, L.H. (2016). Performance in public organizations: Clarifying the conceptual space. Public Administration Review 76(6): 852‒862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, L.B., Heinesen, E. & Pedersen, L.H. (2014). How does public service motivation among teachers affect student performance in schools? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24(3): 651‒671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, M., Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2002). Revisiting economies of size in American education: Are we any closer to a consensus? Economics of Education Review 21(3): 245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, R., Boyne, G.A. & Walker, R.M. (2006). Subjective and objective measures of organizational performance: An empirical exploration. In Boyne, G.A. et al. (eds.), Public service performance: Perspectives on measurement and management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 14‒34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, S.C. & Serritzlew, S. (2007). The unintended effects of private school competition. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17(2): 335‒356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baekgaard, M., Blom‐Hansen, J. & Serritzlew, S. (2015). When politics matters. Governance 28: 459–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldersheim, H. & Rose, L.E. (eds.). (2010). Territorial choice: The politics of boundaries and borders. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, C.R. & West, M.R. (2010). Growing pains: The school consolidation movement and student outcomes. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 26(1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatti, Y. & Hansen, K.M. (2011). Who marries whom? The influence of societal connectedness, economic and political homogeneity, and population size on jurisdictional consolidations. European Journal of Political Research 50(2): 212‒238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatti, Y., Houlberg, K., Thranholm, E. & Pedersen, L.H. (2017). Kommunalpolitisk barometer 2017. Copenhagen, Denmark: VIVE.Google Scholar
Blom‐Hansen, J., Houlberg, K. & Serritzlew, S. (2014). Size, democracy, and the economic costs of running the political system. American Journal of Political Science 58(4): 790‒803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blom‐Hansen, J., Houlberg, K., Serritzlew, S. & Treisman, D. (2016). Jurisdiction size and local government policy expenditure: Assessing the effect of municipal amalgamation. American Political Science Review 110(4): 812‒831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A. (1996). Scale, performance, and the New Public Management: An empirical analysis of local authority services. Journal of Management Studies 33(6): 809‒826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A. (1998). Public choice theory and local government: A comparative analysis of the UK and the USA. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A. (2002). Concepts and indicators of local authority performance: An evaluation of the statutory frameworks in England and Wales. Public Money & Management 22(2): 17‒24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A. (2003a). What is public service improvement? Public Administration 81: 211‒227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A. (2003b). Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13(3): 367‒394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A., Farrell, C., Law, J., Powell, M. & Walker, R.M. (2003). Evaluating public management reforms: Principles and practice. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Boyne, G.A. & Walker, R.M. (2005). Determinants of performance in public organizations symposium . Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15: 483‒639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, G.A., Meier, K.J., O'Toole, L.J. Jr. & Walker, R.M. (eds.). (2006). Public service performance: Perspectives on measurement and management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, J. & Dollery, B. (2002). Do economies of scale exist in Australian local government? A review of research evidence. Urban Policy and Research 20: 391‒414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobban, T.W. (2017). Bigger is better: Reducing the cost of local administration by increasing jurisdiction size in Ontario, Canada, 1995‒2010. Urban Affairs Review 55: 462–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R.M. & March, J.G. (1992 [1963]). A behavioral theory of the firm. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dahl, R.A. & Tufte, E.R. (1973). Size and democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Denters, B., Goldsmith, M., Ladner, A., Mouritzen, P.E. & Rose, L. (2014). Size and local democracy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EVA. (2019). Evaluering af 7‐trins‐skalaen. Copenhagen: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
Foged, S.K. (2016). The relationship between population size and contracting out public services: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment in Danish municipalities. Urban Affairs Review 52(3): 348‒390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, W.F. (1981). Reviewing economies of size in education. Journal of Education Finance 6(3): 273‒296.Google Scholar
Fox, W.F. & Gurley, T. (2006). Will consolidation improve sub‐national governments? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, N. & Knight, B. (2008). The effects of school district consolidation on educational cost and quality. Public Finance Review 36(4): 408‒430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinesen, E. (2004). Determinants of local public school expenditure: A dynamic panel data model. Regional Science and Urban Economics 34(4): 429‒453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinesen, E. (2005). School district size and student educational attainment: Evidence from Denmark. Economics of Education Review 24(6): 677–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, W.Z. (1959). Expenditure implications of metropolitan growth and consolidation. Review of Economics and Statistics 41(3): 232‒241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooghe, L. & Marks, G. (2009). Does efficiency shape the territorial structure of government? Annual Review of Political Science 12: 225‒241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlberg, K., Olsen, A.L. & Pedersen, L.H. (2016). Spending and cutting are two different worlds: Experimental evidence from Danish local councils. Local Government Studies 42(5): 821‒841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbeau, L.M., Pétry, F. & Lamari, M. (2001). Left‐right party ideology and government policies: A meta‐analysis. European Journal of Political Research 40(1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jugl, M. (2019). Finding the golden mean: Country size and the performance of national bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 29(1): 118–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kersting, N. & Vetter, A. (eds.). (2003). Reforming local government in Europe. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knott, J.H. & Miller, G.J. (1987). Reforming bureaucracy: The politics of institutional choice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.Google Scholar
Koretz, D. (2008). Measuring up. What educational testing really tells us. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lassen, D.D. & Serritzlew, S. (2011). Jurisdiction size and local democracy: Evidence on internal political efficacy from large‐scale municipal reform. American Political Science Review 105(2): 238‒258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K.J. & O'Toole, L.J. Jr. (2006). Bureaucracy in a democratic state: A governance perspective. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K.J. & O'Toole, L.J. (2013). Subjective organizational performance and measurement error: Common source bias and spurious relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23: 429‒456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohr, L.B. (1973). The concept of organizational goal. American Political Science Review 67: 470‒481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouritzen, P.E. (ed.). (2006). Stort er godt. Otte fortællinger om tilblivelsen af de nye kommuner. Odense, Denmark: University Press of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
Oates, W.E. (1972). Fiscal federalism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
OECD. (2016). Education at a glance 2016: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1972). Metropolitan reform: Propositions derived from two traditions. Social Science Quarterly 53(3): 474‒493.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C. (2013). The logics of performance management. Evaluation 19(4): 346‒363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error. The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America's public schools. New York, NY: Alrede A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Sandsør, A.M.J., Falch, T. & Strøm, B. (2017). Local government mergers and school quality. Working paper.Google Scholar
Sawyer, M.C. (1991). The economics of industries and firms: Theories, evidence and policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tiebout, C.M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditure. Journal of Political Economy 64: 416‒424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, D. (2007). The architecture of government: Rethinking political decentralization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dooren, W., Bouckaert, G. & Halligan, J. (2015). Performance management in the public sector (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.M. & Andrews, R. (2015). Local government management and performance: A review of evidence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25(1): 101‒133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.M., Boyne, G.A. & Brewer, G.A. (2010). Public management and performance: Research directions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.M., Lee, M.J., James, O. & Ho, S.M.Y. (2018). Analyzing the complexity of performance information use. Public Administration Review 78(6): 852‒863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, K. (1991). Quality and public services. Public Administration 69(4): 503‒514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, M.E. (2011). Voting with your feet: Exit‐based empowerment in democratic theory. American Political Science Review 105(4): 683‒701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J.M. (2009). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. Michigan: South‐Western Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material 1
Download Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material(File)
File 249.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material 2
Download Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material(File)
File 32.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material

Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material 3
Download Blom‐Hansen et al. supplementary material(File)
File 12.9 KB