City and county governments consolidate expecting to improve government efficiency. Expenditures, tax revenues, and local economic development are crucial determinants of government debt burdens. However, little attention has been devoted to the relationship between city-county consolidation and the level of debt burden. This study reviews the literature and explores the relationship between city-county consolidation and debt burdens. It reveals that certain factors, namely the level of public expenditure, economic development, taxes and other revenues, assessed value, and ‘political strength’ have all been assessed as affecting debt burdens. Taking consolidated and non-consolidated local governments in Korea, fixed effects regression analysis was employed to test the hypothesis that city-county consolidation is associated with an increase in the debt burden of local government. The results support the hypothesis of a positive correlation between city-county consolidation and debt burdens.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AshworthJ.GeysB., & HeyndelsB. (2005) “Government weakness and local public debt development in Flemish municipalities,” International Tax and Finance Public, 12(4): 395–422.
2.
BaberW. R., & SenP. K. (1986) “The political process and the use of debt financing by state governments,” Public Choice (1986–1998), 48(3): 201.
3.
BaeS.ChangD., & JooK. (2007) “The impact of goverment subsidiary on debt issurance,” Paper presented at the Korean Association of Public Administration.
4.
BentonJ. E., & GambleD. (1984) “City/County consolidation and economies of scale: Evidence from a time-series analysis in Jacksonville, Florida,” Social Science Quarterly, 65(1): 190–198.
5.
BermanD. R. (2003) Local government and the states : autonomy, politics, and policy. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
6.
BlomquistW.& ParksR. B. (1995) “Fiscal, service, and political impacts of Indianapolis-Marion County's Unigov”, Publius, 25(4): 37–54.
7.
BrecherC.RichwergerK., & WagnerM. V. (2003) “An approach to measuring the affordability of state debt,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 23(4): 65–85.
8.
CainB. (2009) “The impact of city-county consolidation on local Government finance,” Capstone Paper.
9.
CarrJ. B.BaeS., & LuW. (2006) “City-county government and promises of economic development: A tale of two cities,” State and Local Government Review, 38(3): 131–141.
10.
ChoiY. (2005) “The financial impacts of city-country consolidation, with special reference to major public facilities in Jeju Province,” Journal of the Korean Urban Management Association, 18(3): 147–169.
11.
ClingerJ. C.FeiockR. C.McCabeB. C., & ParkH. (2008) “Turnover, transaction costs, and time horizons: An examination of municipal debt financing,” The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2): 167–179.
12.
ClingermayerJ. C. (1991) “An intergenerational transfer model of state debt financing,” Public Choice (1986–1998), 72(1): 13–13.
13.
ClingermayerJ. C., & WoodB. D. (1995). “Disentangling patterns of state debt financing,” The American Political Science Review, 89(1): 108–120.
14.
CookG. C. A. (1973) “Effect of metropolitan government on resource allocation: The case of education in Toronto,” National Tax Journal (pre-1986), 26(4): 585.
15.
DayJ.& BoeckelmanK. (2012) “The impact of legislative term limits on state debt: Increased spending, flat fevenue,” Politics & Policy, 40(2): 320–338.
16.
DenisonD. V.YanW., & ZhaoZ. (2007) “Is management performance a factor in municipal bond credit ratings? The case of Texas school districts,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 27(4): 86–98.
17.
DrukkerD. M. (2003) “Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models,” The Stata Journal, 3(2): 168–177.
18.
DurningD.& NobbieP. (2000) “Post-transition employee perspectives of city-county unification: The case of Athens-Clarke County,” Public Administration Quarterly, 24(2): 140–168.
19.
EllisM. A.& SchansbergD. E. (1999) “The determinants of state government debt financing,” Public Finance Review, 27(6): 571–587.
20.
FaulkD.& GrassmueckG. (2012) “City-county consolidation and local government expenditures,” State and Local Government Review, 44(3): 196–205.
21.
FaulkD.& SchansbergE. (2009). “An Examination of Selected Economic Development Outcomes from Consolidation,” State and Local Government Review, 41(3): 193–200.
22.
FeiockR. C., & CarrJ. B. (1997) “A reassessment of city/county consolidation: Economic development impacts,” State and Local Government Review, 29(3): 166–171.
23.
FisherR. C. (2007). State & local public finance (3e [ed.]. ed.). Mason, OH, USA: Thomson South-Western.
24.
Garcia-SanchezI. M.MordanN., & Prado-LorenzoJ. M. (2012) “Effect of the political system on local financial condition: Empirical evidence for Spain's largest municipalities,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 32(2): 40–68.
25.
HildrethW. B.& MillerG. J. (2002) “Debt and the local economy: Problems in benchmarking local government debt affordability,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 22(4): 99–113.
26.
HirschW. Z. (1959). “Expenditure implications of metropolitan growth and consolidation,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 41(3): 232–241.
27.
HoechleD. (2007) “Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence,” Stata Journal, 7(3): 281–312.
28.
HongJ. (2005) “Intra-and inter-regional variations in the balanced growth effects of city-county consolidation,” Korean Ssociety and administration Public, 16(1): 299–324.
29.
JohnsonC. L. (1999) “Tax increment debt finance: An analysis of the mainstreaming of a fringe sector,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 19(1): 47–67.
30.
KrizK. A., & WangQ. (2013). Measuring and Monitoring Debt Capacity and Affordability: Market- and Nonmarket-based Models. In LevineH.JusticeJ. B.ScorsoneA.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Local Government Fiscal Health. Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.
31.
KruegerS.& WalkerR. W. (2010) “Management practices and state bond ratings,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 30(4): 47–70.
32.
LeeRobert D., & Johnson, Ronald Wayne. (1998). Public budgeting systems (6th ed.). Gaithersburg, Md.: Aspen Publishers.
33.
LimS.& HongS. (2012) “Analysing the determinants of local borrowings in Korea,” The Korean Journal of Local Finance, 17(1): 83–106.
34.
LoweryD. (2000) “A transactions costs model of metropolitan governance: allocation versus redistribution in urban America,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(1): 49–78.
35.
MartellC. R., & SmithB. M. (2004) “Grant levels and debt issuance: Is there a relationship? Is there symmetry?” Public Budgeting & Finance, 24(3): 65–81.
36.
MillerD.MirandaR.RoqueR., & WilfC. (1995) “The fiscal organization of metropolitan areas: The Allegheny County case reconsidered,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 25(4): 19–35.
37.
MillerD. Y. (2002). The regional governing of metropolitan America. Boulder, Colo.; Oxford: Westview Press.
38.
National Assembly Library (2013) Financial yearbook of local government. Accessed January 15, 2013 (www.nanet.go.kr).
39.
National Assembly Library (2013) Statistical yearbook of local government. Accessed January 25, 2013 (www.nanet.go.kr).
40.
OstromV.BishR. L.OstromE., & Institute for Contemporary, Studies. (1988). Local government in the United States. San Francisco, Calif.: International Center for Economic Growth affiliated with the Institute for Contemporary Studies.
41.
ParkJ.& HongJ. (2007) “Regional economic growth effects of city-county consolidation in Korea,” Journal of the Korean Association for Policy Studies, 16(1): 167–197.
42.
ParkJ. (2001) “Can the industrial merger theory explain the structure/process of local government consolidations?” Korean Public Administration Review, 34(4): 303–322.
43.
RobbinsM. D., & KimD. (2003) “Do state bond banks have cost advantages for municipal bond issuance?” Public Budgeting & Finance, 23(3): 92–108.
44.
RosentraubM. S. (2000) “City-county consolidation and the rebuilding of image: The fiscal lessons from Indianapolis's UniGov program,” State and Local Government Review, 32(3): 180–191.
45.
RuskD. (1993). Cities without suburbs. Washington, D.C.: Baltimore, Md.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press; Distributed by the Johns Hopkins University Press.
46.
SeldenC. S.& CampbellR. W. (2000) “The expenditure impacts of unification in a small Georgia county: A contingency perspective of city-county consolidation,” Public Administration Quarterly, 24(2): 169–201.
47.
SavitchH. V., & VogelR. K. (2004) “Suburbs without a city: power and city-county consolidation,” Urban Affairs Review, 39(6): 758–790.
48.
SavitchH. V., & VogelR. K. (2000) “Metropolitan consolidation versus metropolitan governance in Louisville,” State and Local Government Review, 32(3): 198–212.
49.
StockJ. H., & WatsonM. W. (2007). Introduction to econometrics (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson/Addison Wesley.
50.
TempleJ. (1994) “The debt/tax choice in the financing of state and local capital expenditures,” Journal of Regional Science, 34(4): 529–547.
51.
TrautmanR. R. (1995). “The impact of state debt management on debt activity,” Public Budgeting & Finance, 15(2): 33–51.
52.
VojnovicI. (2000) “The transitional impacts of municipal consolidations,” Journal of Urban Affairs, 22(4): 385–417.
53.
YooJ. (2010) “Explaining city-county consolidation initiatives in Korea and proposing a policy alternative,” Korean public administration review, 44(1): 179–202.
