Abstract
dc:description.abstractLocal government is treated as a national system with homogenised institutional actors having equal interest in central initiatives. The urban centric focus of central policy makers marginalizes the important role played by small rural authorities. In failing to recognise the importance of small rural authorities the political and managerial structures utilised in such authorities do not meet the specific local needs. Change has been an endemic feature of local government over the last two decades. The ideological drive for much of the change has been premised on the notion that urban authorities are in some way the problem. The resulting solutions have been premised on this belief but have traversed the entire structure of English local government. Rural local government and specifically small rural authorities have been forced to adopt urban solutions to problems that are not always apparent in smaller authorities. The absence in small rural authorities of key urban institutions can be seen as an impediment but paradoxically offers such authorities the latitude to construct institutions suitable to local needs. These arguments were explored through a detailed empirical study of Rutland District Council in conjunction with a wider research focus on authorities in the defined category. The study combines both a qualitative and a quantitative approach to the case study authority which facilitated a comprehensive analysis of the importance of small rural authorities in contemporary English local government. The study challenges the orthodox view on the purpose of local government. The accepted orthodoxy of the inherent democratic nature local government is tested in relationship to small rural authorities.
Degree
thesis:*- Name dc:type.qualificationname
- PhD
- Level dc:type.qualificationlevel
- Doctoral
- Grantor dc:publisher.institution
- De Montfort University
- Year dc:date.issued
- 2000
Author and committee
dc:creator, dc:contributor.*- Author dc:creator
-
- Wingfield, Melvin