Class Notes (836,290)
Canada (509,749)
POL305Y1 (56)
Lecture

Lec 8.docx

5 Pages
45 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POL305Y1
Professor
Rachael Gibson
Semester
Summer

Description
Pol306 July 30 Lecture Lecture 7 and 8: Canadian cities in comparative perspective + Community Power and Urban Regimes -The logic of comparison:  Most observations in academic research (or in real life) imply some sort of comparison - e.g., big small, short-tall  Without a comparative framework, we cannot tell this  Single case studies have their own value, but it is impossible to tell whether the findings from such a case study are unique or common without comparative context.  Consistency in conceptualization is needed in order to compare and integrate findings  A common language of measurement is needed  Four pitfalls in comparison (Sartori): o Parochialism  Refers to tendency of comparative scholars to continually invent new terms or adapt the usage of existing terms in order to suit their own research purposes.  This gets in the way of efforts to aggregate research and test/refine existing theories  Example: casual usage of the term “urban regime” to describe any type of private-public partnership at the local level; suggestion that “regime change is when there is election of a new mayor o Misclassification  When important difference are ignored by the researcher and unlike phenomena are clustered together  Industrial “cluster” refers to a localized industry configuration, such as a local concentration of pharmaceutical firms and their supporting infrastructure (e.g., R&D facilities, universities)  Example: use of the term “cluster” to refer to national bundles of industries; use of term “regime” to refer to any political system. o Degreeism  Refers to the abuse of continua to represent all difference as merely quantitative (a matter of degree), rather than qualitative different  Example: statement that democracy exists in many countries “to a certain degree” vs. developing a specific set of criteria for democracy and distinguishing between those countries that meet the criteria and those that do not. o Concept stretching  Has to do with removing aspects of the original meaning of the concept so that it can accommodate more cases  Development a broader umbrella under which a growing number of variable can fit  Concept eventually becomes meaningless if it can be applied to almost anything  Example: the term “regime” used to refer to a coalition that does not include actors from the private sector – a “bureaucratic regime” -Core elements of a comparative framework:  Based on a theory/model, which provides some statement on what causes variation in the DV (e.g., structure of the electoral system influences voter turnout)  These causal models translate theory into variable which are linked to the empirical cases (e.g., ward vs. “at large” systems. -Selecting cases  Most similar system design o Selects cases as similar as possible in most independent aspect but varies on the DV o Allows us to control for large number of variables o Puts us in a good position to uncover a causal relationship between two variable o The difference in the DV caused by different values on one of the IV’s -the promise of comparison in Urban Politics research  The “most similar systems” designs is easier to apply at urban/municipal level than the national level  Embeddedness of cities in came national institutional context allows us to control for national policies/ national political culture factors  There are many more cites than countries in the world - a greater universe available for case selection. -Success of local political power  Interest groups and other sources of local political power interact with municipal officials to shape policy outcomes  Three important bodies of theory have been developed to explain these sources of local political power and influence o Community power studies  Example: Dahls article o Public choice model o Urban regime theory  Leading proponent, Clarence Stone – Regime politics (1989)  Study of Atlanta over the period 1946-88 o Atlanta’s predominately white business elite worked closely with the city’s predominantly black local government leadership for decades in an informal bi-racial governing coalition. o The coalition successfully pursued a shared agenda of sustained economic growth + gradual dismantling of the Jim Crow system o Regime has now collapsed, but urban regime idea has become dominate theory in urban politics o Demonstrated how local politics matters despite limited resources and fragmentation of power  Urban regime theory stresses coalition-building as a key part of the governing process  Unlike pluralist perspectives (Dahl), stems from a political economy perspective  Views power as fragmented due to the division of labour between market and state  What is an “urban regime” o Stone defines as urban regime as “the informal arrangements by which public bodies and private interest function together in order to be able to make and carry out governing decisions” o Builds on idea that formal structures of local government are inadequate on their own to mobilize and coordinate the resources needed to produce a “capacity to govern” o Individual actors may have private agendas, but coming together involves opportunities and responsibilities to act which are greater than the individual interests/goals.  Urban regimes consist of three related parts: 1) capacity, 2) a set of
More Less

Related notes for POL305Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit