Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
International Review of Administrative Sciences
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, C. W.
Right arrow Articles by de Vries, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

High expectations, varying outcomes: decentralization and participation in Brazil, Japan, Russia and Sweden

Christina W. Andrews

State University of São Paulo, Brazil

Michiel S. de Vries

Department of Public Administration, Radbound University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

In the past 20 years, decentralization has been proposed as a strategy for enhancing public participation. Aid-providing organizations, such as the World Bank, stimulated decentralization processes in several countries in the hope that this would promote civic empowerment, diminish corruption, enhance efficiency, and improve public service delivery. This assumption forms the basis for a comparative analysis into the relation between decentralization and participation at the local level in Brazil, Japan, Russia and Sweden. A multi-level regression analysis using the data of the Democracy and Local Governance Project was undertaken in order to test the `one size fits all' and the `diversity in development' hypotheses. The results show that the second hypothesis was corroborated. Perceived autonomy had a different impact on openness to participation depending on the country considered; in one country (Japan), perceived autonomy diminished public officials' willingness to be open to public participation.

Key Words: Brazil • decentralization • Japan • participation • Russia • Sweden

International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 73, No. 3, 424-451 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0020852307081151
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?