Urban Affairs Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Digaetano, A.
Right arrow Articles by Lawless, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, 546-577 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/10780879922184077

Urban Governance and Industrial Decline

Governing Structures and Policy Agendas in Birmingham and Sheffield, England, and Detroit, Michigan, 1980-1997

Alan Digaetano

City University of New York

Paul Lawless

Sheffield Hallam University

There has been a marked increase in comparative research examining the dynamics of regime formation in the United Kingdom and the United States. These authors consider regime formation processes in three deindustrializing cities: Detroit, Michigan, and Birmingham and Sheffield, England. The article identifies two cross-cutting themes: the effects of national/international political and economic forces on local governance and the role of public and private interactions in regime formation. Finally, in an attempt to enlarge the scope of regime theory, the authors develop a comparative perspective on urban governance based on the concepts of governing structures and policy agendas.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 European Urban and Regional StudiesHome page
R. Andrews
An Institutionalist Approach to Spatial Variations in Public Service Failure: Evidence From England
European Urban and Regional Studies, October 1, 2008; 15(4): 349 - 362.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
J. Pierre
Comparative Urban Governance: Uncovering Complex Causalities
Urban Affairs Review, March 1, 2005; 40(4): 446 - 462.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
A. M. Wood
Domesticating Urban Theory? US Concepts, British Cities and the Limits of Cross-national Applications
Urban Stud, October 1, 2004; 41(11): 2103 - 2118.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
P. Lawless
Power and Conflict in Pro-growth Regimes: Tensions in Economic Development in Jersey City and Detroit
Urban Stud, July 1, 2002; 39(8): 1329 - 1346.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
D. Valler and D. Betteley
The Politics of 'Integrated' Local Policy in England
Urban Stud, December 1, 2001; 38(13): 2393 - 2413.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
K. Mossberger and G. Stoker
The Evolution of Urban Regime Theory: The Challenge of Conceptualization
Urban Affairs Review, July 1, 2001; 36(6): 810 - 835.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
J. L. Bockmeyer
A Culture of Distrust: The Impact of Local Political Culture on Participation in the Detroit EZ
Urban Stud, December 1, 2000; 37(13): 2417 - 2440.
[Abstract] [PDF]