Abstract
I undertake a comprehensive study of innovative local governments, focusing upon cities which have initiated exemplary or influential programs and policies. I develop and test a conceptual model of the characteristics associated with innovative cities. My study is relevant to research on the devolution of responsibilities to subnational governments and the trend toward increased utilization of entrepreneurial methods in the provision of public services.
I develop a typology of innovative and non-innovative cities, using different levels of motivation and organizational capacity. Innovators (high motivation/high capacity) include Dynamic Cities, motivated by internal competition; Entrepreneurial Cities, motivated by external competition; and Crisis Cities, motivated by an acute problem. In contrast, Marginal Cities (low capacity/low motivation) lack financial and population resources and have limited prospects for improvement. Overwhelmed Cities (low capacity/high motivation) struggle to meet service needs. Satisfied Cities (high capacity/low motivation) have high capacity but no need for innovation.
I test hypotheses about the characteristics associated with innovative governments through linear and logistic regression analyses of the characteristics associated with large American and California cities. I analyze participant and winner information from the Innovations in American Government Program and California's Helen Putnam Award of Excellence Program. I also evaluate other award programs and an innovation-related organization. I use reinventing government practices survey results and original research on local gun control ordinances to highlight the importance of political ideology and additional factors influencing innovativeness. I supplement the statistical analyses with case studies.
I find strong support for the presence of the different city types and hypotheses. I especially find evidence of Dynamic Cities---established, middle to upper middle class, populous and urbanized communities with relatively diverse populations and robust, but not excessive, financial resources. Income disparities are strong predictors of innovativeness; extremely wealthy and low income communities are not innovative. The results suggest that innovation can be fostered by encouraging the development of distinctive community cultures, facilitating regional cooperation and reforming finance systems.