The world is urbanizing rapidly. As a result, competition among cities to attract and retain resources has also increased. In light of heightened urbanization and city competition, questions over the balance to strike between... [ view full abstract ]
The world is urbanizing rapidly. As a result, competition among cities to attract and retain resources has also increased. In light of heightened urbanization and city competition, questions over the balance to strike between competitiveness and quality of life concerns are vehemently debated. Notably, debates on this issue are administrative and relate to (public) managerial strategies capable of striking an acceptable balance. Citizen stances on the debate trace back to a combination of ideological orientation and information consumption.
Governments are striking to disclose performance information that would enhance citizens’ acceptance of governments’ operations and, in turn, support.
Studies suggest that conservatives have psychological needs to manage uncertainty and as a result have a strong preference for order, tradition and security (Jost 2017). Conversely, liberals tend to be more comfortable with uncertainty and place a greater emphasis upon the importance of novelty, equality and progress.
This study argues that these ideological differences and the subsequent emphasis placed upon processes and outcomes can be used to explicate conditions under which liberals and conservatives adopt policy preferences that are otherwise inconsistent with their ideology.
In an effort to address this gap in the literature, we intend to examine citizen preferences as they relate to the balance governments seek to strike between economic growth and sustainable resource management and service-delivery, emphasizing the centrality of government in the process of governance. To this end, we aim to investigate how performance information pertaining to administrative processes and outputs shapes citizens perceptions of innovativeness and support for competitiveness and quality of life. We then compare how the effects of performance information pertaining to processes and outcomes on evaluations of government vary by party affiliation.
