Urban Governing Alignments and Realignments in Comparative Perspective
- 1 July 1997
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Urban Affairs Review
- Vol. 32 (6) , 844-870
- https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749703200605
Abstract
The author develops an analytical framework for making cross-national comparisons, referred to as modes of governance, that centers on the study of how governing coalitions are built and maintained. He lays out the theoretical framework for modes of governance, which draws upon regime theory but goes beyond its conception of power structures. A primary concern is understanding the underlying causes of urban governing realignments and their impact on local strategic decision making. To illustrate the approach, the author compares politics of development in Boston, Massachusetts, and Bristol, England. Finally, the author considers the theoretical implications of the Boston/Bristol comparison.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Too Little, Too Late: The Politics of Local ComplacencyJournal of Urban Affairs, 1996
- Urban Regime Theory in Comparative PerspectiveEnvironment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 1994
- Between Whitehall and Town Hall: the realignment of urban regeneration policy in EnglandPolicy & Politics, 1994
- Urban Regime Capacity: A Comparison of Birmingham, England, and Detroit, MichiganJournal of Urban Affairs, 1993
- Urban Regimes in Comparative PerspectiveUrban Affairs Quarterly, 1993
- Urban Political Regime Formation: A Study in ContrastJournal of Urban Affairs, 1989
- Economic Development, Housing and Zoning: A Tale of Two CitiesJournal of Urban Affairs, 1986
- Systemic Power in Community Decision Making: A Restatement of Stratification TheoryAmerican Political Science Review, 1980
- Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical FrameworkAmerican Political Science Review, 1963
- Two Faces of PowerAmerican Political Science Review, 1962