The Library

Urban regime theory : a normative-empirical critique

Tools

Davies, Jonathan, 1966-. (2002) Urban regime theory : a normative-empirical critique. Journal of Urban Affairs, Vol.24 (No.1). pp. 1-17. ISSN 0735-2166

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Davies_Urban_Regime_0770216-lb-150611-ssrn-id1810546.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (111Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9906.00111

Abstract

Over the past 10 years, urban regime theory has become the dominant paradigm for studying urban politics in liberal democracies. Yet there is disagreement about how far it can help us to understand urban political processes. This article argues that regime theory is best understood as a theory of structuring with limits in its analysis of the market economy. These limits undermine its ability to explain the importance of political agency-the scope of individual or collective choice in political decisions and the impact of those choices in the evolution of US cities. It is further argued that there are important normative dimensions to urban regime theory, most fully articulated in Elkin's commercial republic, which academic commentaries have not acknowledged. However, the empirical analysis developed in regime theory contradicts its normative objectives. The absence of a conceptualization of market dynamics, in the light of pessimism about the prospects for equitable regime governance, not only limits it as a theory of structuring but it also renders it unable to explain how the commercial republic can be realized. Regime theory is, therefore, unconvincing for two reasons. It cannot explain how much local politics matter, and it fails to demonstrate that its normative goal-more equitable regime governance-can be achieved, given the realities of the US market economy. Regime theory needs a more developed understanding of structuring. It may be fruitful, therefore, for regime theorists to re-engage critically with variants of Marxism, which unlike Structuralism, recognize the possibility of agency.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	J Political Science > JS Local government Municipal government
Divisions:	Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Urban policy -- Great Britain, Local government -- Great Britain
Journal or Publication Title:	Journal of Urban Affairs
Publisher:	Blackwell Publishing
ISSN:	0735-2166
Date:	2002
Volume:	Vol.24
Number:	No.1
Number of Pages:	17
Page Range:	pp. 1-17
Identification Number:	10.1111/1467-9906.00111
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Restricted or Subscription Access
References:	Abrams, P. (1982). Historical sociology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Althusser, L. (1979). For Marx. London: Verso. Boyer, R. (1990). The regulation school: A critical introduction. Columbia University Press. Braybrooke, D. (1985). Contemporary Marxism on the autonomy, efficiency, and legitimacy of the capitalist state. In R. Benjamin & S. L. Elkin (Eds.), The democratic state (pp. 59–86). University of Kansas Press. Brown, M. (1999). Reconceptualizing public and private in urban regime theory: Governance in aids politics. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23(1), 70–87. Callinicos, A. T. (1987). Making history: Agency, structure and change in social theory. Polity Press. Callinicos, A. T. (2000). Equality. Polity Press. Cassidy, J. (1997, October 20, 27). The return of Karl Marx. The New Yorker, 248. Castells, M. (1977). The urban question: A Marxist approach. London: Edward Arnold. Clark, T. N., & Goetz, E. G. (1994). The antigrowth machine: Can city governments control, limit or manage growth. T. N. Clark T (Ed), Urban innovation: Creative strategies for turbulent times (pp. 105–145). Sage. Cox, K. R. (1995). Globalisation, competition and the politics of local economic development. Urban Studies, 32(2), 213–224. Cox, K. R., & Mair, A. (1988). Locality and community in the politics of local economic development. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 72(2), 307–325. Cox, K. R., & Mair, A. (1989). Urban growth machines and the politics of local economic development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 13(1), 137–146. Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs? Power and democracy in an American city. New York: Yale University Press. Davies, J. S. (2000). The hollowing-out of local democracy and the “fatal conceit” of governing without government. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2(3). 414– 428. Davies, J. S. (2001). Partnerships and regimes: the politics of urban regeneration in the UK. Aldershot: Ashgate. De Leon, R. (1992). The urban antiregime: Progressive politics in San Francisco. Urban Affairs Quarterly 27(4), 555–580. Derrida, J. (1994). Specters of Marx: The state of the debt, the work of mourning, and the new international. New York: Routledge. Di Gaetano, A. (1997). Urban governing alignments and realignments in comparative perspective: Developmental politics in Boston, Massachusetts, and Bristol, England, 1980–1996. Urban Affairs Review, 32(6), 844–870. Elkin, S. L. (1979). Castells, Marxism and the new urban politics. Comparative Urban Research, 7(2), 22–33. Elkin, S. L. (1985a). Between liberalism and capitalism: An introduction to the democratic state. In R. Benjamin & S. L. Elkin (Eds.), The democratic state (pp. 11–28). University of Kansas Press. Elkin, S. L. (1985b). Pluralism in its place: State and regime in liberal democracy. In R. Benjamin & S. L. Elkin (Eds.), The democratic state (pp. 179–212). University of Kansas Press. Elkin, S. L. (1985c). Economic and political rationality. The Journal of the Northeastern Political Science Association, XVIII(2), 253–271. Elkin, S. L. (1986). Regulation and regime: A comparative analysis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1), 49–72. Elkin, S. L. (1987). City and regime in the American republic. University of Chicago Press. Elkin, S. L. (1993a). Constitionalism: Old and new. In S. L. Elkin & K. E. Soltan (Eds.), A new constitutionalism: Designing political institutions for a good society (pp. 20–37). University of Chicago Press. Elkin, S. L. (1993b). Constitutionalism’s Successor. In S. L. Elkin & K. E. Soltan (Eds.), A new constitutionalism: Designing political institutions for a good society (pp. 117–143). University of Chicago Press. Elkin, S. L. (1994). Business-state relations in the commercial republic. Journal of Political Philosophy, 22, 115–139. Elkin, S. L. (1996a). The constitution of a good society: The case of the commercial republic. In K. E. Soltan & S. L. Elkin (Eds.), The constitution of good societies (pp. 118–145). Pennsylvania State University Press. Elkin, S. L. (1996b). Conclusion: Judging the Good Society. In K. E. Soltan & S. L. Elkin (Eds.), The constitution of good societies (pp. 186–205). Pennsylvania State University Press. Elkin, S. L., & Soltan K. E. (Eds.), (1993). A new constitutionalism: Designing political institutions for a good society. University of Chicago Press Feldman, M. M. A. (1997). Spatial structures of regulation and urban regimes. In M. Lauria (Ed.), Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy (pp. 30–50). Sage. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Harding, A. (2000). Regime formation in Manchester and Edinburgh. In G. Stoker (Ed.), The new politics of British local governance. Macmillan. Harding, A. (1996). Coalition formation and urban redevelopment: A cross-national study. Full summary of a research project funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Councils Local Governance Programme. Mimeo. Hunter, F. (1953). Community power structure: A study of decision makers. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Imbroscio, D. L. (1998a). Reformulating urban regime theory: The division of labour between state and market reconsidered. Journal of Urban Affairs, 20(3), 233–248. Imbroscio, D. L. (1998b). The necessity of urban regime change: A reply to Clarence N. Stone. Journal of Urban Affairs, 20(3), 261–268. John, P., & Cole, A. (1998). Urban regimes and local governance in Britain and France: Policy adaptation and coordination in Leeds and Lille. Urban Affairs Review, 33(3), 382– 404. Lauria, M. (Ed.). (1997). Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy. Sage. Lawless, P. (1994). Partnership in urban regeneration in the UK: The Sheffield Central Area Study. Urban Studies, 31(8), 1303–1324. Levine, M. A. (1994). The transformation of urban politics in France: The roots of growth politics and urban regimes. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 29(3), 383– 410. Lindblom, C. E. (1977). Politics and markets: The world’s political-economic systems. New York: Basic Books. Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan. Luttwak, E. (1999). Turbo-capitalism. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Molyneux, J. (1995). Is Marxism deterministic? International Socialism, 68, 37–73. National Bureau of Economic Research. (2001). The business-cycle peak of March 2001. National Bureau of Economic Research. Available: http://www.nber.org/cycles/november2001 [November 26, 2001]. Orr, M. E., & Stoker, G. (1994). Urban regimes and leadership in Detroit. Urban Affairs Quarterly 30(1), 48–73. Painter, J. (1997). Regulation, regime, and practice in urban politics. In M. Lauria (Ed.), Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy (pp. 122–143). Sage. Poulantzas, N. (1978). Political power and social classes. London: Verso. Rees, J. (1998). The algebra of revolution: The dialectic and the classical Marxist tradition. London and New York: Routledge. Soltan, K. E., & Elkin, S. L. (Eds.). (1996). The constitution of good societies. Pennsylvania State University Press. Stoker, G. (1995). Regime theory and urban politics. In D. Judge, G. Stoker, & H. Wolman (Eds.), Theories of urban politics (pp. 54–71). London: Sage. Stoker, G., & Mossberger, K. (1994). Urban regime theory in comparative perspective. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 12, 195–212. Stone, C. N. (1980). Systemic power in community decision making: A restatement of stratification theory. American Political Science Review, 74, 978–990. Stone, C. N. (1987a). Summing up: Urban regimes, development policy and political arrangements. In C. N. Stone & H. T. Sanders (Eds.), The politics of urban development (pp. 269–290). University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N. (1987b). Possible directions for future inquiry. In C. N. Stone & H. T. Sanders (Eds.), The politics of urban development (pp. 291–297). University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N. (1988). Pre-emptive power: Floyd Hunter’s community power structure reconsidered. American Journal of Political Science, 32(1), 82–104. Stone, C. N. (1989). Regime politics: Governing Atlanta 1946–1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N. (1990). The politics of urban restructuring: A review essay. Western Political Quarterly 43(1) 219–231. Stone, C. N. (1991). The hedgehog, the fox and the new urban politics: Rejoinder to Kevin R. Cox. Journal of Urban Affairs, 13(3), 289–297. Stone, C. N. (1993). Urban regimes and the capacity to govern: A political economy approach. Journal of Urban Affairs, 15, 1–28. Stone, C. N. (1998a). Regime analysis and the study of urban politics: A rejoinder. Journal of Urban Affairs, 20(3), 249–260. Stone, C. N. (1998b). Introduction: Urban education in political context. In C. N. Stone (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 1–22). University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N. (1998c). Civic capacity and urban school. In C. N. Stone (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 250–273). University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N. (Ed.). (1998d). Changing urban education. University Press of Kansas. Stone, C. N., & Pierannunzi, C. (2000, September), Atlanta’s biracial coalition in transition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association held in Washington DC. Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Ward, K. G. (1996). Rereading urban regime theory: A sympathetic critique. Geoforum, 27(4), 427– 438. Ward, K. G. (1997a). Rigourising regime theory. In J. Stanyer & G. Stoker (Eds.), Contemporary political studies, Vol 1 (pp. 181–197). Political Studies Association. Ward, K. G. (1997b). Coalitions in urban regeneration: A regime approach. Environment and Planning A, 29(8), 1493–1506. Wolman, H. (1992). Understanding cross national policy transfers: The case of Britain and the US. Governance, 5(10), 27–1045.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/11217