Skip Navigation



Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access published online on November 28, 2008
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, doi:10.1093/jopart/mun023
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cline, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Working Relationships in the National Superfund Program: The State Administrators’ Perspective

Kurt Cline

California State University, Fresno

Address correspondence to the author at kcline@csufresno.edu.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


   INTRODUCTION
 
The examination of working relationships is critical to understanding the negotiation and bargaining that is an important part of intergovernmental management (IGM) of environmental policy. According to Denise Scheberle (1997, 1), "These working relationships include formal and informal contact that occurs between federal and state personnel in the operation of any intergovernmental program." Since most national environmental statutes are designed to be administered at the state and local levels, this necessitates intergovernmental interaction. Regional Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials are the primary national contact for states. These regional offices are engaged in "system maintenance and program management and supervision" (Scheberle 1997, 164). This places regional and state participants in working relationships "at the heart of policy implementation" and management of environmental programs (Scheberle 1997, 1).

The design and implementation of national environmental policy exemplifies what is known as IGM. The concept of IGM emerged . . . [Full Text of this Article]


   THE NATIONAL SUPERFUND PROGRAM—A CASE OF IGM NEGOTIATON
 

   DATA—PERCEPTIONS OF STATE-LEVEL ADMINISTRATORS
 

   A MODEL OF COOPERATIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIPS
 
Defining the Dependent Variable—Cooperation
Independent Variables—Strategic Factors
Independent Variables—Structural Factors

   FINDINGS
 
Univariate
Multivariate

   CONCLUSIONS
 
Model
National Superfund Program
Negotiation and Bargaining in IGM

   APPENDIX
 
Items in the Cooperation Scale
Items in the Trust Scale
Items in Involvement Scale
Items in the Relationship with Headquarters (HQ) Scale
Items in the State Program Capacity Scale
Items in the Regional Program Capacity Scale
Items in the State Political Context Scale
Items in the National Political Context Scale
Items in the Nature of the Problem Scale

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?