David Y. Miller

Exploring the Horizontal and Vertical Dimensions of the Governing of Metropolitan Regions

A metropolitan region does not have formal institutional structures such as nations, states, and cities, but it is a system that can be conceptualized and studied as a whole. The study of metropolitan areas too often ignores the dynamic relationship sat the intersection of state and local governments. This study suggests a two-dimensional typology of governance in metropolitan regions. The authors found that governance affects the long-term competitiveness of the metropolitan economy. Governance does not determine economic outcomes but reduces the ability to adapt. The worst combination for metropolitan competitiveness is decentralization within regions where there is a centralized state government.

Municipal Managers: Regional Champions or Agents of Parochialism?

How local government managers acquire skills and knowledge of policy approaches applicable to multijurisdictional problems is the primary focus of this paper. Managers work in an environment where cities and their infrastructures are getting older and more expensive; economic and social disparities are increasing; and the cost of local services is rising faster than elected officials are willing to raise revenues (Miller, 2002). Municipal managers face these concerns on a daily basis, and they are the officials most likely to realize the inadequacy and ineffectiveness of acting alone when trying to solve problems that have metropolitan origins and effects. Solving these problems requires engaging in intergovernmental and inter-local activities in new and innovative ways. For that reason it is important that managers be prepared with a range of skills that facilitate regional solutions. To address this concern, we review the Model City Charter as well as training materials and guidelines from the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) and National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA) to determine whether the current emphases in local government management training prepare local managers to handle multijurisdictional or regional problems. Our conclusion is that there is a serious mismatch between the traditional skill set and what is now required for multijurisdictional problem solving.

Order out of Chaos: The Case for a New Conceptualization of the Cross-Boundary Instruments of American Regionalism

In the absence of consensus about which organizations matter or are the “right” manifestations of American regional intergovernmentalism scholarship has had to develop an imprecisely defined and tacitly circulated perception of regions and the cross-boundary organizations that embody them. Even where effort has been made to establish a broad and consistent definition for regional cross-boundary organizations these standards have been applied loosely and with notable exceptions. We argue that the lack of conceptual precision and consensus, to date, makes large-scale comparative research difficult and prone to potential blind spots. We offer a framework within which we can unify these different pieces. Rather than focusing on organization type, or geographical scales, we propose a system of identifying and studying regional organizations by five core attributes. We submit these regional intergovernmental organizations (RIGOs) as a conceptual lingua franca that transcends organizational nomenclature and statistical constructs and enables broad, methodologically rigorous, comparative research.