Search results

Purpose – The chapter answers the question if urban regime theory (URT) can provide a useful framework to understand and solve problems of cooperation in regional processes in rural–urban areas.

Methodology/approach – The chapter is a theoretical discussion on problems found in contemporary rural spatial governance.

Findings – URT can provide a framework for understanding the obstacles encountered in regional development and is a promising perspective for the analysis of regional processes. A solution for problems in regional cooperation can be found in so-called ‘vital coalitions’, forms of vital interaction between regional actors, based on energy and productivity, that can create a ‘capacity to act’ in regions that have become ‘gridlocked’ by current procedures and regulations.

Research limitations/implications – A modern URT, applied in a regional context:(1)Can point out ‘how power is organised to act’;(2)Analyses informal networks between actors as bases for cooperation and vitality, and as a possible starting point for new (cultural) counter-regimes and(3)Offers insight into regional complexity and cooperation and into emergent regimes.

Practical implications – Vital coalitions are forms of self-governance, that introduce new agendas and function as forms of niche-innovation in regions. This can lead to the forming of new ‘cultural regimes’ in which the motives and values of civilians are a key element.

Originality/value of the chapter – The value of the chapter lies in the use of concepts in regions from a fresh new perspective, by translating the URT from a local, urban context to a regional rural–urban perspective.

Conceptualizations of university governance have varied over time, with some scholars focused on the structure of stakeholder groups such as faculty, staff, and students in relation to how institutions make decisions, others focus on the competing spheres of political influence guiding institutional development, and most recently that higher education has adopted business management structures or academic capitalism. Each of these conceptualizations offered new insights into how universities make decisions and evolve. The interactions between the non-profit aspects of higher education institutions and their effects on the internal governance structures have been underdeveloped. In this chapter, the authors propose an urban governance approach to understanding how actors and their institutions make decisions.

In this chapter, the authors dissect these models and propose a shift in perspective described as academic municipalities. Prior models on university decision-making and its impact on institutional constituents all make certain sacrifices when attempting to conceptualize the complex organizational functions of the university. Birnbaum and Tierney in their arguments do not provide enough value to the structure imposed on higher education institutions by virtue of their non-profit status. The corporate concept does not account for the political ramifications to university functions that reach beyond corporate models. Academic capitalism explains the shift of the university to account for changes in the global marketplace but it does not explain the latent functions of the university, such as contributing to the public good, housing, libraries, public services, and other non-market-based activities. What is needed is an explanation that accounts for both market and political forces at play in the university.

For a good part of the U.S. system of federalism municipal incorporation has been the formal structure for local communities. Over the last 60 years there has been a shift in this structure to special district government. The Woodlands, Texas presents an interesting case study on the incremental development of a former New Town community, the change in formal government organization and the potential for a different model of local governance structure in the 21st Century. The authors explore the four stages of development for The Woodlands over the past 40 years and assess this development through several model theories including institutional, urban regime, and urban governance. Contrary to some current literature on governance, The Woodlands appears to have transitioned from decentralization to more centralization while at the same time avoiding full incorporation as a municipality. It may be indicative of the new governance.

This chapter examines three Italian cities that have experienced a transition from “Fordism to tourism”: Genoa, Turin, and Milan. After an industrial crisis, they have invested in culture and tourism as alternative ways of development. This transition is examined using the theoretical framework of urban regimes highlighting five development trends: the city as a growth machine, the Fordist city, the creative city, the city as entertainment machine, and the blue-green city. By adopting this theoretical framework, the evidence shows how academic institutions, tour operators, and public authorities may or may not work together for the tourism development of their cities.

Playing as a global city, to maintain the economic dynamics and urban vitality, Hong Kong government would like to take urban regeneration in urban core as a kind of urban growth strategy. The government monopolizes land supply for urban development through the leasehold system, while the redevelopment agency is authorized to take land acquisition for urban redevelopment. The transformation of agency from Land Development Corporation (LDC) to Urban Renewal Authority (URA) reflected the formation of a coalition composed of quasi-public redevelopment agency and private developer, which facilitates land and property resumption in urban redevelopment. The URA-led projects often tend to redevelop obsolete communities into up-market neighborhoods, which possibly enables redevelopment agency and developers to gain more economic benefits from real estate appreciation. Nevertheless, evidences from some large redevelopment projects conducted by URA in Hong Kong such as Lee Tung Street, Langham Palace and Kennedy Town have presented that urban redevelopment is closely associated with gentrification triggered by displacement of original neighborhood residents. Hence gentrification in Hong Kong has raised more and more concerns about booming housing price as well as fragmentation of social networks. Through urban regime combined with growth machine approach, this paper will explain the collusion of redevelopment agency and private developers that jointly turns the URA-led redevelopment into neighborhood gentrification. And by examining Kwun Tong Town Centre Project (KTTCP), findings indicate that soaring property value will crowd low-income groups and working classes out from their original neighborhoods; and then those gentrified residential estates will be occupied by rich class. Moreover, increasing rent and operation costs will inevitably eliminate those family-operated small businesses; and then they will be superseded by high-end retailing and services. In this way, urban morphology will be reshaped perpetually through more and more gentrified neighborhoods.

Local governments have long been concerned with economic growth and development. Some local governments take an aggressive, proactive stance on economic development, while others take a more incremental, reactionary approach. When economic development opportunities arise, the frequently asked question is “Who’s on first?” Is it the responsibility of local government to take the lead in promoting economic development opportunities, or should local government remain in the background leaving development activities to private developers? This article uses community power theory to examine the evolution of economic development in Wichita, Kansas and the roles played by the public and private sectors and their impact on the course of development activities. In order for a booster regime to be successful, the lead government must establish the legitimacy of the development effort with other potential members of the coalition. The lead government must establish a hospitable business climate and establish a commitment to support the infrastructure and service needs of developers. Coalition members must view the undertaking as a positive-sum gain.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how North American professional team owners are engaging in broader urban development projects that have their teams as anchor tenants in new sports facilities, by examining the case of Rogers Arena in Edmonton, Canada.

Approached from a constructionist perspective, the study employed an instrumental case study strategy as it facilitates understanding and description of a particular phenomenon and allows researchers to use the case as a comparative point across other settings (with similar conditions) in which the phenomenon might be present.

Using urban regime theory as a framework, the authors found that in Edmonton, the team owner was able to align his interests with other political and business interests by engaging in a development strategy that increased the vibrancy of Edmonton’s downtown core. As a result, the owner was able to garner support for both the arena and the surrounding development.

The authors argue that this new model of team owner as developer has several implications: on-field performance may only be important insofar as it drives demand for the development; the owner’s focus is on driving revenues and profits from interests outside of the sports facility itself; and the team (and the threat of relocation) is leveraged to gain master developer status for the ownership group.

This paper adds to the understanding of owner interests and how franchise profitability and solvency can be tied to other related business interests controlled by team owners.

The purpose of this paper is to explore urban mobilisation patterns in two post-Soviet cities: Vilnius and Moscow. Both cities were subject to similar housing and urban policy during Soviet times, and they have implemented urban development using neoliberal market principles, provoking grassroots opposition from citizens to privatisation and marketisation of their housing environment and local public space. However, the differing conditions of democratic Lithuanian and authoritarian Russian public governance offer different opportunities and set different constraints for neighbourhood mobilisation. The purpose is to contrast local community mobilisations under the two regimes and highlight the differences between and similarities in the activists’ repertoires of actions in two distinct political and economic urban settings.

The paper employs qualitative methodology using data from semi-structured interviews conducted with community activists and state officials, presented using a comparative case study design.

Although, citizens’ mobilisations in the two cities are reactions to the neoliberalisation of housing and local public space, they take different forms. In Vilnius they are institutionalised and receive formal support from national and local authorities. Moreover, support from the EU encourages organisational development and provides material and cognitive resources for grassroots urban mobilisations. In contrast, residents’ mobilisations in Moscow are informal and face fierce opposition from local authorities. However, even in an authoritarian setting, grassroots mobilisations evolve using creative strategies to circumvent institutional constraints.

Little attention has been paid to grassroots urban mobilisations in post-Soviet cities. There is also a lack of comparative attempts to show variation in post-Soviet urban activism related to housing and local public space.

As cities choose entrepreneurial strategies to lure the mobile corporate service sector and its professional workforce, they also present more forbidding faces to the working class and poor. Scholars and activists have pointed to the passage of public conduct laws as evidence of how modern cities signal to the poor that their downtown cores are reserved for the privileged classes. Yet, even as scholars and advocates attest to the growing “meanness” of American cities, their reports have also routinely showcased cities that develop alternatives to criminalization. This chapter presents data from a historical case study of homeless politics in Philadelphia to shed light on the complex local dynamics undergirding or challenging the modern urban phenomena of “anti-homeless” legislation. Though a pro-development paradigm has slowly transformed Philadelphia since the early 1990s, the local business community has been consistently unsuccessful in its attempts to have new public conduct legislation passed or to have existing laws stringently enforced. Urban regime theory helps explain how a network of local homeless service provider and advocacy organizations has been able to use collaborative strategies to effectively shape the politics and policies of street regulation in the city.