URBAN GOVERNMENT, URBAN POLITICS AND THE FABRICATION OF URBAN ISSUES: THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF URBAN POLICY

An "urban" definition of public policy problems raises great difficulties for the policy maker. If we emphasize implementation as a primary factor in evaluating public policy, we have good grounds for questioning the wisdom of an urban perspective. But urban questions have been and still are major areas of concern in public policy formulation. The ALP federal platform contains a long section on urban policies, reiterating what the Department of Urban and Regional Development (DURD) was striving to achieve under the Whitlam Government. At state level, urban problems have been tackled with varying degrees of success and seriousness, although at this level overall urban perspectives tend to be ignored, for reasons we shall indicate. However urban planning authorities have been tried in most capital cities, and metropolitan plans have been drawn up for all of them. They have concentrated mainly on land use and urban form. By the 1970s a common criticism of such planning was that it left aside many social and economic aspects of urban growth. For example, one (admittedly partisan) government source—the N.S.W. Department of Decentralization and Development—noted "a massive and increasing trend towards socio-economic segregation":
…the remoteness of central city facilities …the cost of commuter transport and the inadequacy of community facilities in low-income outer suburbs are operating to perpetuate economic under-privilege.     

URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANTS REVISITED

The Urban Development Block Grant (UDAG) program evolved from preceding programs in aid of distressed communities, including permitting local officials and private businesses wide berth in making deals for UDAG utilization and actively recruiting small cities to participate. This case study examines the impact these evolutionary departures had in two small cities—Follansbee, WV, and Farrell, PA—which received multi-million dollar UDAGs for steel projects in 1984 and 1988, respectively. Although the two cities had much in common economically, their use of UDAG funds was quite dissimilar. Outcomes were vastly disparate, raising questions about the ability of small communities, particulary those dominated by one declining company, to make appropriate decisions regarding program participation, as well as larger issues of federal intervention.     

URBAN PLANNING,POLICY AND MANAGEMENT*

Abstract: This paper deals with some important sources of confusion in discussions of urban issues. The first part distinguishes urban planning as a “future oriented” activity, from urban management which is primarily concerned with resource allocation. (The nature of urban development — interdependence and long life — makes a long-term perspective important.) When urban management aims to implement a plan the two are complementary. Urban policy covers a broader range of issues. The second part distinguishes four levels of debate about urban issues: ideological, political, operational and technical. Frequently debates in urban studies are not coherent because the participants are arguing at different levels and therefore make different assumptions about what is given and what can be varied. It is argued that the various levels form a hierarchy so that debates at any level need to assume particular positions with respect to higher level questions. Ideological issues include individual versus collective perspective, capitalist versus socialist, the appropriate role of markets and governments and the relative weight given to equity and efficiency criteria. The examples of political issues discussed are rationality versus group pressure as explanations of government behaviour, and whether planning is mainly a political or a professional activity. Operational issues include the appropriate level of government for carrying out urban functions and the role of statutory planning and other policy measures. Technical issues focus on predicting the effects of policy measures and external changes on cities. The different levels are illustrated by a discussion of policy towards inner city areas.     

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES TO INDUSTRY AND URBAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

This paper examines the use of financial incentives to industry to promote urban economic development. It describes the types of incentives offered and sumniarizes the research on the effects of these incentives on firm location. It then examines and contrasts the costs and benefits of incentives to various political jurisaictions—municipality, state and nation. Finally, it aadresses the question of whether incentives, as currently designed, can solve urban unemployment and income problems. It considers the types and intrastate locational preferences of inciustries typically sttracted by incentives and concludes that current incentives may be of limitea effectiveness in promoting urban development. The discussion is particularly relevant in light of continued federal emphasis on introduction of enterprise zones as the major tool of urban economic development policy.     

MEGA-EVENTS, URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND PUBLIC POLICY

As cities compete for jobs and capital in the context of limited federal aid and increasing global economic competition, a new and potentially high‐risk public policy strategy for stimulating local economic growth has emerged. This megaevent strategy entails the quest for a high‐profile event to serve as a stimulus to, and justification for, local development. How and why do American cities commit their resources to seeking a mega‐event? And, if a city lands a megaevent, how does that event affect local development policy? To address these questions, we examine the experiences of three American cities which have bid for and organized the Olympics in the contemporary era: Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Salt Lake City.     

TWO YEARS OF CO-OPERATIVE FEDERALISM—THE URBAN AND REGIONAL EXPERIENCE

Ideally, the evolution of a regional policy should provide a continuing testing ground on which to formulate ways of administering truly co-operative policies, involving all three levels of government. As the previous speakers, Sir Charles Barton and Mr Cappie-Wood, have demonstrated, there is presently a great interest in regionalism in this country. Some commentators have seen this as a re-awakening of the views of the post-war planning period, but with the significant change that this time, governments of all political colours are taking a definite interest in regional concepts.     

RURAL AND URBAN POVERTY: AN INCOME/NET WORTH APPROACH

This paper examines rural and urban changes in the distribution of poverty that would result from modifying the conventional poverty measure to include the annuity value of household net worth.
Use of this new income/wealth measure caused numerous shifts in the location and demography of the poverty population. Among those more often found to be in poverty under the new measure were young, renter, and large central city resident households. Age, homeownership, farm employment, education, retirement status, public assistance participation, and residence in the West were important factors in explaining the divergence of the WH and INC measures. The age and retirement impacts were significantly different in rural and urban areas. Rural residence itself was not an important factor in explaining WH and INC differences.