000			01529naa a2200181uu 4500
001			11518
003			OSt
005			20190211155504.0
008			030225s2006 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aLOWERY, David _96297
245	1	0	_aA transactions costs model of metropolitan governance - allocation versus redistribution in urban america
260			_cjan. 2000
520	3		_aThe apparent hegemony of the public-choice approach to metropolitan governance has been sharply challenged on a number of fronts during the 1990s with a series of new arguments for consolidation emphasizing the role of boundaries in defining interests and property rights so as to structure the distribution of political transactions costs within metropolitan areas. These new arguments have yet to be organized, however, into a coherent critique of the public-choice approach. This article provides such a statement. First, the nature of individual decision making implicit within the new case for metropolitan consolidation is examined. Second, its core institutional propositions on boundaries are discussed. And third, the key outcome hypotheses flowing fromt he new consolidationist case's assumptions about institutions and individual choice are evaluated in light of the public-choice case for jurisdictional fragmentation
773	0	8	_tJournal of Public Administration Research and Theory _g10, 1, p. 49-78 _d, jan. 2000 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20030225 _bLucima _cLucimara
998			_a20060209 _b1605^b _cQuiteria
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c11642 _d11642
041			_aeng