Book contents
- Experiments in Public Management Research
- Experiments in Public Management Research
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Part I Context
- Part II Methods
- Part III Substantive Contributions
- 8 Work Motivation
- 9 Experimenting with Leadership in Public Organisations
- 10 Prospects for Experimental Approaches to Research on Bureaucratic Red Tape***
- 11 Managerial Use of Performance Data by Bureaucrats and Politicians
- 12 Citizens and Public Performance Measures: Making Sense of Performance Information
- 13 Public Sector Transparency
- 14 Representative Bureaucracy: An Experimental Approach
- 15 Coproduction of Public Services
- 16 Expectations of and Satisfaction with Public Services
- 17 Citizen and Users’ Responses to Public Service Failure: Experimentation about Blame, Exit, and Voice
- 18 Assessing Public Support for Government Policy: Comparing Experimental and Attitudinal Approaches
- 19 Legislative Oversight of the Bureaucracy: Insights from Formal Modelling and Experimental Testing
- 20 Experimental Research for Nonprofit Management: Charitable Giving and Fundraising
- Part IV Issues and Implications
- Appendix Recommended Reporting Guidelines for Experiments in Public Management, a Checklist1
- Index
- References
18 - Assessing Public Support for Government Policy: Comparing Experimental and Attitudinal Approaches
from Part III - Substantive Contributions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 July 2017
Book contents
- Experiments in Public Management Research
- Experiments in Public Management Research
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Part I Context
- Part II Methods
- Part III Substantive Contributions
- 8 Work Motivation
- 9 Experimenting with Leadership in Public Organisations
- 10 Prospects for Experimental Approaches to Research on Bureaucratic Red Tape***
- 11 Managerial Use of Performance Data by Bureaucrats and Politicians
- 12 Citizens and Public Performance Measures: Making Sense of Performance Information
- 13 Public Sector Transparency
- 14 Representative Bureaucracy: An Experimental Approach
- 15 Coproduction of Public Services
- 16 Expectations of and Satisfaction with Public Services
- 17 Citizen and Users’ Responses to Public Service Failure: Experimentation about Blame, Exit, and Voice
- 18 Assessing Public Support for Government Policy: Comparing Experimental and Attitudinal Approaches
- 19 Legislative Oversight of the Bureaucracy: Insights from Formal Modelling and Experimental Testing
- 20 Experimental Research for Nonprofit Management: Charitable Giving and Fundraising
- Part IV Issues and Implications
- Appendix Recommended Reporting Guidelines for Experiments in Public Management, a Checklist1
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Experiments in Public Management ResearchChallenges and Contributions, pp. 376 - 393Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Arrow, K. J., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R., and Schulman, H.. 1993. ‘Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation’, Federal Register 58: 10 (January 15, 1993), 4601–14.Google Scholar
Bateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Day, B., Hanemann, W. M., Hanley, N., Hett, T., Lee, M. Jones, Loomes, G., Mourato, S., Ozdemiroglu, E., and Pearce, D. W. 2002. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual. Northampton, MA: Edwin Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, R. T., Hanemann, W. M., Kopp, R. J., Krosnick, J. A., Mitchell, R. C., Presser, S., Ruud, P. A., Smith, V. K., Conway, M., and Martin, K. 1998. ‘Referendum design and contingent valuation: the NOAA panels’ no-vote recommendation’, The Review of Economics and Statistics 80(2): 335–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christian-Smith, J., Gleick, P. H., Cooley, H., Allen, L., Vandenwarker, A., and Berry, K. A. 2012. A Twenty-First Century US Water Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, D. E., Ren, C., Reese, C., Waskom, R., Bauder, J., Mesner, N., Paige, G., Reddy, K., Neibauer, M., and Mahler, R. 2007. ‘Linking public attitudes with perceptions of factors impacting water and attending learning activities’, Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education 36: 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Competition Commission 2010. Review of Stated Preference and Willingness to Pay Methods. Retrieved from www.competition-commission.org.uk/our_role/analysis/summary_and_report_combined.pdf. Accessed February 2, 2016.Google Scholar
Menegaki, A. N., Hanley, N., and Tsagarakis, K. P. 2007. ‘The social acceptability and valuation of recycled water in Crete: a study of consumers’ and farmers’ attitudes’, Ecological Economics 62(1): 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. C. and Carson, R. T. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center 2016. ‘January 2016 religion and politics survey’, Available at: www.people-press.org/2016/01/22/budget-deficit-slips-as-public-priority/. Accessed 2 February 2016.Google Scholar
Stigka, E. K., Paravantis, J. A., and Mihalakakou, G. K. 2014. ‘Social acceptance of renewable energy sources: a review of contingent valuation applications’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 32 (April): 100–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoutenborough, J. W. and Vedlitz, A. 2014. ‘Public attitudes toward water management and drought in the united states’, Water Resource Management 28: 697–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by