Views
5 years ago

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

outcome should be far

outcome should be far back behind. One of reasons 67 for this is that the difficult to code. For more accurate measurement on political institutions, we need to consider various aspects of institutions. For example, rather simply using proportion of council members elected by district, we need to consider other critical aspects of election system such as council size, length of term, and other rules in the city charter. In addition, the relationship between executive and legislative institutions may provide different policy outcomes (Desantis and Renner 2002; Frederickson and Johnson 2001). Thus, we need to consider this relationship in-depth also. Second, relational nature of institutions is important in this research. The measurement of strong tie network as ILA expenditures is limited. For better measurement, it is necessary to identify various relational structures among local entities regarding environmental and land use issues. In that way, we could better understand how relational social resources influence local policy changes. Third, for better measurement of trends of community and physical characteristics, longitudinal data sets are necessary. The time-invariant assumption of community interests and physical characteristics could lead to significant random measurement errors because of not considering time variant impact. More precise measurement of city wide developmental and environmental interests is needed for better outcome. Fourth, King et al. (1995) argues that the importance of replication for policy research. Florida has its own community and institutional characteristics, which in turn results in different policy outcome. If this research is applied for other states, the results could be same or different. I expect that there should be same institutional effects on the policy decision making. However, even though there is a different result, this research may provide a basement framework for other researchers to study same subject. The other issue is a generalizability of a framework. IAD framework has been used for limited policy areas such as common pool resources. Starting with the monumental study by Lowi (1965), Wilson (1980), and Peterson (1981), types of policies 67 Coding like Frederickson’s work is even more difficult. Information in our data has limits to provide the whole dimension of his typology. For example, the information of whether elected officials are parttime or not is very limited in our data set. 89

have different consequences. Institutional impacts on policy choice could be different while various community and physical characteristics’ influences vary. To extend the usage of IAD framework require applying other policy areas such as affordable housing policy at the local level or similar policy areas such as Development of Regional Impact at the regional level. Applying various subjects and at the various levels may make the framework robust and generalizable in the policy analysis 68 . 68 Affordable housing at the local level is critical issue for the city government. It requires for cities to address collective action problems to provide more housings to the poor persons. Various community interests create barriers to provide affordable housing in a community. Development of Regional Impact (DRI) issues are another important ones because more efficient way of permission processes may reduce transaction costs from the conflicts of local entities. 90