Urban 171 Governing the City Governance: The process of deciding city policies and how they will be implemented. 2 key questions: 1. Who should make.

Urban 171

Governing the City

Governance:

• The process of deciding city policies and how they will be implemented.

• 2 key questions:• 1. Who should make these decisions?• 2. Who does make these decisions?• * In a democracy, the answer to # 1 is

“the people, ” through some sort of citizen participation. But this begs the question--”How?”

Classical Liberalism’s Impact on Modern Democratic Theory

• Humans are fundamentally rational.

• Humans are fundamentally self-interested.

Elite v. Mass Theories

• Different views about the degree to which humans are self-interested.

• Resulting in different positions regarding the need for increased citizen participation.

Elite Theorists: Protective v. Pluralist

• Negative View of Human Nature• Distrust Efforts to Increase Citizen

Participation for Fear of 3 Deadly Sins:

• 1. Conflict• 2. Alienation• 3. Delay

Protective Democrats

• Role of Government is to protect individual liberty (property); elites need to protect against too much mass participation.

– Founding Fathers--Madison, Federalist, #10– Problem of factions: Cure?

– A. Remove the Cause: Can’t, due to nature of humans

– B. Control the Effects: Constitutional Framework

Pluralist Democrats

• Average Citizen is apathetic and uninterested in governance and politics anyway. So, liberty is fostered through the competition among interest groups.

• “Pluralism of Elites”

David Truman

• Humans Naturally Form Interest Groups• Groups Arise Out of Division of Labor• Government, while not neutral, acts as

a balancing agent among competing interests. This is democratic for 4 reasons:– Opportunity for groups to emerge– Rules of the Game– Potential Groups (Latent Threat)– Multiple Points of Access

Mass Democrats: Developmental v.

Participatory Theorists

• Positive View of Human Nature

• Trust in the average citizen to make decisions

Developmental Theorists

• Citizens can be educated and can develop a “civic virtue” which permits them to move beyond their own self-interests and consider the public (common) interests.

– John Dewey: “We learn by doing,” so we can develop our democratic (small “d”] skills if the system is structured so that we can practice participation.

Participatory Theorists

• For citizens to really move beyond pure self-interest, need to have many opportunities to participate.

• Critique of the common definition of participation--voting.– Ben Barber: “Thin Democracy” develops

from a limited understanding of shared interests and common ground.

– “Democracy of Strangers!”

• Solution to this dilemma is to provide opportunities for citizens to engage in face-to-face meetings and talk to each other about politics, issues, common interests, and governance.

• According to Ben Barber, this promotes a “strong democracy” in which the likelihood that community interests will be seriously considered is greater.

Upshot for Urban Politics/Governance?

• Mass theorists have argued that city neighborhoods provide the unique opportunity to encourage the development of structures that would promote this type of “strong democracy,” and in the end help restore the role of the average citizens

Recent Research on Whether this Hypothesis is

Supported• The Rebirth of Urban Democracy , by

Berry Portney and Thomson.

• Examined 5 cities--Birmingham, Dayton, Portland, St. Paul, and San Antonio-- that had adopted some of the structural aspects of participatory democracy and compared them to 10 other cities that had not.

How Were the Cities Chosen?

• Had to have some sort of decentralized, structured decision making mechanism for average citizens to engage in face-to-face discussions, etc..

• Participation program had to be widespread

• Good reason to believe that citizens had a real chance to affect city governance.

3 Key Research Questions

• Is increased participation possible?

• Will government respond to citizen demands?

• Is increased participation destabilizing, e.g., does it promote the 3 deadly sins of conflict, alienation, and delay?

Question # 1

Is Increased Participation Possible?

Question # 2

Does Government Respond?

Question # 3

Is Increased Participation Destabilizing: Conflict?

Question # 3

Is Increased Participation Destabilizing: Delay?

Balance between Political and Bureaucratic Criteria• Elites (politicians and bureaucrats)

make decisions, but can be guided by strong citizen input. Balance is needed.

• Berry, Portney, Thomson (conclusions):– 1. Some exclusive power should be turned

over to NA’s– 2. Adm. Agencies should be rewarded for

working with NA’s– 3. Citizen Participation should be citywide

What do You Think?

• What are the problems associated with moving in this direction?

• What are the benefits as you see them?

• Do you think cities should move in this direction?