An Inquiry into Fire Service Consolidation and the Economies of Scale Debate: The Centralization Versus Decentralization Argument

Addressing the current homeland security challenges requires scholars,
practitioners, elected officials, and community partners working in unison to mitigate the
hazards confronting first responders. Built on public choice theory, this research
addressed a specific component of the emergency preparedness matrix: the most
preferred fire service organizational design. The fire department organizational designs in
this study included a Florida county, city, and independent special control fire district
(ISFCD) that serve residents on a full-time platform. The concurrent embedded
methodology used attempted to unearth which organizational design achieves economies
of scale based on quarterly emergency service calls: the centralized county model or the
decentralized city/ISFCD models. This study was an inquiry into the centralization versus
decentralization argument, with emphases on fire service scale economies and inter-local
service agreements Using multiple linear regression modeling accompanied by face-to-face
interviews with the respective fire chiefs, this research showed that the county and
ISFCD achieve scale economies over 44 quarters, fiscal years 2004-2014. Moreover, the
interviews uncovered that response times were the driving factor behind instituting
voluntary inter-local service agreements between the three fire departments. Other
positive benefits from the service agreements include an increase in personnel and scene
safety, dispatch center protocol enhancements, multi-company/jurisdictional training,
overtime savings on large-scale disaster incidents, and trust building.
The implications of this research for the scholarly and practitioner community
include a better understanding of the technical and allocative efficiencies within the fire
service arena. Melding public choice theory with strands of inter-local service agreement
literature provides policymakers and scholars with a template for uncovering the fire
service production/provision narrative. Though the centralization-decentralization
argument is not solved within the research scope presented, the future narrative as
uncovered in the research requires a citizenry inclusion. The future public choice
prescriptions regarding fire service consolidation requires not only statistical modeling,
but a normative democratic ethos tone incorporating multiple stakeholders with the
citizens’ concerns at the forefront.