Administrative versus legislative management: The impact of discretion on water resource management in the West

The newest trend in public administration is to "re-invent government" in order to make agencies more business-like with a greater range of responsibility and discretionary power. Currently, agencies operate somewhere along a continuum between two ideal-types. The first, legislative management, is based upon an active role by the legislature in dealing with policy. Under this model, agencies are guided by external controls such as strict legislative guidelines and are granted little discretionary power for determining solutions to problems. The second, administrative management, is based upon an active role by the administrator. Under this model, legislation is generally vague and administrators are allowed to rely upon their professional expertise for determining solutions to problems. These models are ideal-types because no agency fits the description entirely. Instead, agencies will have both discretionary power and external controls depending on the specific policy area and particular relationships that emerge between agencies and legislatures.;The dissertation examines whether a difference in levels of discretionary power lead to variance in water planning, management, and use decisions by state agencies. Through the use of survey methodology the various levels of agency discretion has been determined. The differing degrees of discretion that place agencies along the continuum between legislative and administrative management are the independent variables for testing the impact that changes in discretionary power have on decision making. The dependent variables are a variety of tangible measures such as organizational structure, budgetary outlays, and determinations by water officials of how their state's future water needs will be met.;The findings indicate that discretion does not have the widespread impact that had been expected. Discretion does not change the decisions agencies make in many areas. However, discretion does have an impact on certain key decision areas and when discretion does have an impact, it is in the direction indicated by the hypothesis. When discretion does impact agency decisions making, increased discretion moves decisions towards unsustainable management practices. Before an attempt to "reform government" and increase administrative discretion is made in this specific area, it might be best to understand that an increase in discretionary power does not appear to result in better management.