What if Anything is Wrong with Big Government?

Abstract

Starting without any a priori assumption that government is necessarily a force for good or ill, this article examines what negative consequences are likely to arise from big government – or government growing bigger still. Three generic effects are postulated: a loss of effectiveness, because of the use of weaker means-ends programme technologies for new programmes; an increase in contradictions between existing, growing and new programmes; and a possible reduction of consent, insofar as growth increases the ‘impropriety’ of government actions. The growth of government is shown to be ‘unbalanced’, that is, to occur in incommensurable ways and at varying rates for major resources (government revenue, personnel, and laws); government organizations; and programme outputs. The different character of growth in each element is examined, and particular consequences hypothesized for resource elements singly, for internal characteristics of organizations, and for their combination in programmes. The analysis suggests that while much growth involves no intrinsic problems of size (as long as economic resources are available to meet the costs), there is likely to be disproportionate loss of effectiveness, and increasing contradictions between programmes if big government grows bigger still.

Fiscal Policy and Unemployment in South Africa: 1980 – 2010

“…However, assorted results were observed due to the country or countries researched, methods used and the data employed. Research conducted in developed countries includes the work of Rose (1981), Tanzi and Zee (1997), Fatas and Mihov (1998), Abrams (1999), Kneller, Bleaney and Gemmell (1999), Hercowitz andStrawczynski (2004), andFeldmann (2006). To examine the relationship between fiscal policy and the behaviour of unemployment in developing countries, various researches have also been conducted.…”

Condemned to complexity? Growing state activity and complex policy systems

“…To analyze whether state activity enhances complexity, we need two measures—one for the size of state activity and one for its complexity. According to Rose (1981), the size of the government can be assessed by “different elements the government brings to bear in the policy process” (p. 7). By and large, these are expenditure (revenue), personnel, and policies (Rose, 1981 p. 8).…”

Previewing Policy Sciences: Multiple Lenses and Segmented Visions

“…Policy contexts are extraordinarily complex, involving private and public sector actors and institutions, participating in multiple programs over time. Early policy frameworks, which focused on the role of government alone (Larkey, Stolp, and Winer 1981; Rose 1981), quickly gave way to descriptions of policy realms involving a complex milieu of networks in which government is just one actor (Kettl 1988; White 1989; Wise 1990). Sabatier (1999) argues that policy theories identify the “critical relationships” that underlie these complex phenomena and distinguish the common sense frameworks of lay persons from the “self‐consciously, error seeking, and thus self‐correcting” design of science (5).…”