Policy & Politics of Governing Cities

  • Category:
    Performing Arts
  • Document type:
    Assignment
  • Level:
    Undergraduate
  • Page:
    2
  • Words:
    944

1Partial Title

РОLIСY & РОLITIСS ОF GОVЕRNING СITIЕS

Location

Policy and Politics of Governing Cities

Key aspects from two readings

Reading 1

Lowndes, V. and Sullivan, H. (2008) ‘How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance’. Public Administration 86(1): 53–74

According to Lowndes and Sullivan (2008), the issue of neighbourhood governance is highly regarded in policy agendas of most nations across Europe. Lowndes and Sullivan (2008), identifies four major rationales on neighbourhood governance. These rationales are social, political, civic and economic rationales. For instance, in England, the concept of ‘new colonialism’ develops a comprehensive case for neighbourhood governance on all the four rationales.

Lowndes and Sullivan (2008) asserts that there are four types of institutional design, which are: neighbourhood government, partnership, empowerment and management. Neighbourhood governance has various challenges which are analysed as per competence, capacity, equity and diversity. Lowndes and Sullivan (2008) argues that classic democracy of small units needs to be re-thought in terms of new governance which exists in the form of multi-level, e-enabled and multi-actor. Institutional designers are faced with a lot of questions on the purposes and priorities of neighbourhood governance (Lowndes & Sullivan 2008).

Reading 2

Pill, M.C. and Bailey, N. (2012) ‘Community Empowerment or a Strategy of Containment? Evaluating Neighbourhood Governance in the City of Westminster’. Local Government Studies, 38(6): 731-751

In this article, Pill and Bailey(2012), asserts that neighbourhood is a scale for intervention and has given rise to various forms of governance with different rationales. These rationales on the purpose of neighbourhood governance are contained in a fourfold typology as developed by Lowndes and Sullivan (2008).Pill and Bailey (2012) tests this approach by conducting an evaluation on neighbourhood initiatives in the Westminster City, delivered on the Paddington Development Trust, a third sector organization. Insider perspectives at the city as well as in the neighbourhood on infrastructure for neighbourhood management were evaluated in the study. This evaluation by Pill and Bailey (2012) suggests that in the Westminster city, civic and economic rationales predominate.

The Westminster approach is much dependant on the philosophy and funding regimes at both the central and local levels of the city and is mainly detached from other conventional services. This articles states that residents in the neighbourhood communities and cities have relatively little control over resources in the city. New governance mechanisms are certainly de-coupled whenever it is necessary (Davies & Pill 2012). This articles is summarized by stating that one major model for neighbourhood governance that can be more effective is the co-production (Pill &Bailey 2012).

Similarities and differences in the approaches of the two readings

Similarities

Both the two readings talk about neighbourhood governance and this is done in the perspective of fourfold typology as developed by Lowndes and Sullivan (2008). In the first reading by Lowndes and Sullivan (2008), neighbourhood is believed to exist in four main perspectives or rationales which are social, political, civic and economic rationales. In the second reading by Pill and Bailey (2012), these four main perspectives are advanced through conducting an evaluation on neighbourhood initiatives in the Westminster City. In both readings, neighbourhood is an intervention that gives rise to various forms of governance with different rationales.

Differences

In the first reading by (Lowndes and Sullivan (2008), a shallow study is done on the aspect of neighbourhood governance whereas in the second reading by Pill and Bailey (2012), a deep and a comprehensive study is done based on the fourfold typology developed in the first reading. In the first reading, a general study on neighbourhood governance is done whereas in the second reading, the study on neighbourhood governance as well as community empowerment is done on the city of Westminster.

Addition to the understanding of the main readings

This paper talks about the policies and politics of governing cities and the two additional readings highlight on the aspect of neighbourhood governance. The first reading by (Lowndes and Sullivan (2008), highlights the four main predominant rationales of governance, which enhance the understanding of politics on governance. In the UK, for example, the concept of neighbourhood has been a scale for action and intervention and gives rise to various forms of neighbourhood governance so as to realize various forms of purposes.

Lowndes & Sullivan (2008) defines the four predominant rationales that extensively explain the whole concept of governance. These rationales are: the civic rationale, which deals with the empowerment of citizens and communities, the social rationale, which means any form of partnership that takes a holistic approach in a given area; political rationale, which means governing through new forms of participation and representation, in other words, democracy; and finally economic rationale, which talks of management as a more effective local service delivery in governance. These rationales are further advances in the second reading by Pill and Bailey (2012), and this enhances further understanding of governance politics. A comprehensive study on the fourfold typology in the Westminster city adds to my understanding on the themes and concepts as covered in the essential readings on neighbourhood governance (Chaskin, & Greenberg, 2015).

Bibliography

Chaskin, RJ & Greenberg, DM 2015. ‘Between Public and Private Action: Neighbourhood Organizations and Local Governance’ Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 248-2672.

Davies, JS & Pill, MC 2012. ‘Hollowing-out Neighbourhood Governance? Re-scaling Revitalization in Baltimore and Bristol’ Urban Studies Vol. 49, No. 10, pp. 2199-2217.

Lowndes, V. & Sullivan, 2008, ‘How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance’. Public Administration Vol. 86, No. 1, pp. 53–74

Pill, MC & Bailey, N 2012, ‘Community Empowerment or a Strategy of Containment? Evaluating Neighbourhood Governance in the City of Westminster’. Local Government Studies, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp.731-751