One of the trends marking neoliberalism and the attack on the welfare state from the right is the move toward the privatization of public services. Recent research in both the United States and Canada suggests that residents of the suburbs of large urban regions are more likely to vote for political parties on the right and to support neoliberal policies such as privatization, while the opposite is true for inner-city dwellers. However, the reasons why such a spatial division should occur have received little academic attention. This paper seeks to fill this gap in the literature by analyzing the relationship between residential location, spatial factors, and attitudes toward privatization, using survey data collected in the Toronto region. Results suggest that the way urban space influences residents' daily routines and personal experiences may then mediate their perception of the uses of public services and the efficacy of government spending, factors which are found to affect spatial disparities in support of and/or in opposition to privatization. Thus, there is some evidence that urban spatial form is important for understanding the geographic unevenness of support for neoliberalism, and thus ultimately for the production of ideology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbbateGYourkD, 2002, “The walkout: 15,000 more staff join Toronto picket lines in the largest municipal strike in Canadian history”Globe and Mail 4 July 4, page A1
2.
BenjaminW, 1986Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writing Ed. DemetzP, translated by JephcottE (Schocken Books, New York)
3.
BergerPLuckmannT, 1967The Social Construction of Reality (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx)
4.
BlaisAGidengilENevitteN, 2004, “Where does turnout decline come from?”European Journal of Political Research43221–236
5.
BoudreauJ A, 2000The MegaCity Saga: Democracy and Citizenship in this Global Age (Black Rose Books, Montreal)
6.
BourdieuP, 1977Outline of a Theory of Practice translated by NiceR (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
7.
BourdieuP, 1984Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste translated by NiceR (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
8.
BrennerNTheodoreN, 2002, “Cities and the geographies of ‘actually existing neoliberalism’”Antipode34349–379
9.
BurbankM J, 1995, “The psychological basis of contextual effects”Political Geography14621–635
10.
CampbellM, 2002, “Cracks showing in the house that Harris built”Globe and Mail 20 April, page A4
11.
CastellsM, 1978City, Class and Power (Macmillan, London)
12.
ClarkeJ, 2004, “Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neoliberalism”Journal of Social Policy3327–48
13.
CowenD, 2005, “Suburban citizenship? The rise of targeting and the eclipse of social rights in Toronto”Social and Cultural Geography6335–356
14.
CoxK R, 1969, “The voting decision in a spatial context”Progress in Geography1(1) 81–117
15.
CreswellT, 1996In Place/Out of Place: Geography, Ideology, and Transgression (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
16.
CurticeJ, 1995, “Is talking across the garden fence of political import?”, in Spatial and Contextual Models in Political Research Ed. EaglesM (Taylor and Francis, London) pp 195–210
17.
DonaldB, 2002a, “The permeable city: Toronto's spatial shift at the turn of the millennium”The Professional Geographer54190–203
18.
DonaldB, 2002b, “Spinning Toronto's golden age: The making of a ‘city that worked’”Environment and Planning A342127–2154
19.
DuncanJ SDuncanN G, 2004Landscapes of Privilege: The Politics of the Aesthetic in an American Suburb (Routledge, New York)
20.
DunleavyP, 1979, “The urban basis of political dealignment: Social class, domestic property ownership, and state intervention in consumption processes”British Journal of Political Science9409–443
21.
EngelsF, 1993The Condition of the Working Class in England (Oxford University Press, Oxford); originally published in 1845
22.
EnglandK, 1991, “Gender relations and the spatial structure of the city”Geoforum22135–147
23.
FavaS, 1975, “Beyond suburbia”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences42210–24
24.
FischelW A, 2001The Homevoter Hypothesis: How Home Values Influence Local Government Taxation, School Finance, and Land-use Policies (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
25.
GainsboroughJ, 2001Fenced Off: The Suburbanization of American Politics (Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC)
26.
GainsboroughJ, 2005, “Voters in context: Cities, suburbs, and the presidential vote”American Politics Research33435–461
27.
GoonewardenaK, 2005, “The urban sensorium: Space, ideology, and the aestheticization of politics”Antipode3546–71
28.
GrayJ, 2000, “Tories study privatizing municipal water, sewage: Push by Harris government comes in wake of Walkerton E. coli tragedy”Globe and Mail 13 June, page A1
29.
HamptonHRenoB, 2003Public Power: The Fight for Publicly Owned Electricity (Insomniac Press, Toronto)
30.
HarrisR, 1984, “Residential segregation and class formation in the capitalist city: Review and directions for research”Progress in Human Geography826–49
31.
HaydenD, 2002Redesigning the American Dream: Gender, Housing and Family Life (W W Norton, New York)
32.
Hogen-EschT, 2001, “Urban secession and the politics of growth: The case of Los Angeles”Urban Affairs Review36783–809
33.
IsinE, 1998, “Governing Toronto without government: Liberalism and neo-liberalism”Studies in Political Economy56169–191
34.
JeffreyB, 1999Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-conservatism in Canada (HarperCollins, Toronto)
35.
KeilR, 2000, “Governance restructuring in Los Angeles and Toronto: Amalgamation or secession?”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research24758–781
36.
KeilR, 2002, “‘Common-sense’ neoliberalism: Progressive conservative urbanism in Toronto, Canada”Antipode34578–601
37.
KipferSKeilR, 2002, “Toronto Inc? Planning the competitive city in the new Toronto”Antipode32227–264
38.
KohnM, 2004Brave New Neighbourhoods: The Privatization of Public Space (Routledge, New York)
39.
LarnerW, 2000, “Neo-liberalism: Policy, ideology, governmentality”Studies in Political Economy63(1) 5–26
40.
LarnerW, 2003, “Neoliberalism?”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space21509–512
41.
LarnerWWaltersW, 2000, “Privatisation, governance and identity: The United Kingdom and New Zealand compared”Policy and Politics28361–377
42.
LawsG, 1988, “Privatization and the local welfare state: The case of Toronto's social services”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series13433–448
43.
LeesL, 2004, “Urban geography: Discourse analysis and urban research”Progress in Human Geography28101–107
44.
LefebvreH, 1991Critique of Everyday Life translated by MooreJ (Verso, New York); originally published in 1958
45.
LefebvreH, 1999Writings on Cities translated by KofmanELebasE (Blackwell, Oxford); originally published in 1968
46.
LuVDemaraB, 2003, “Where the city was won: Downtown”Toronto Star 14 November, page F1
47.
McGirrL, 2001Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
48.
MillerW L, 1977, “Social class and party choice in England: A new analysis”British Journal of Political Science8257–284
49.
MitchellD, 2004The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space (Guilford Press, London)
50.
OliverJ E, 2001Democracy in Suburbia (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
51.
PattieC JJohnstonR J, 2003, “Local battles in a national landslide: Constituency campaigning at the 2001 British general election”Political Geography22381–414
PrattG, 1986, “Housing tenure and social cleavages in urban Canada”Annals of the Association of American Geographers76366–380
54.
PrattG, 1990, “Feminist analyses of the restructuring of urban life”Urban Geography11594–605
55.
PrattG, 2003, “Valuing childcare: Troubles in suburbia”Antipode35581–602
56.
RuskJ, 2002, “Controversial water plan flushed by city”Globe and Mail 20 November, page A23
57.
SaundersP, 1978, “Domestic property and social class”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research2233–251
58.
SewellJ, 1991, “Old and new city”, in The Canadian City Ed. GereckeK (Black Rose Books, Montreal) pp 31–38
59.
ShutzA, 1967The Phenomenology of the Social World (Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL)
60.
ThomasG S, 1998The United States of Suburbia (Prometheus Books, New York)
61.
TrudeauD, 2006, “Politics of belonging in the construction of landscapes: Place-making, boundary-drawing and exclusion”Cultural Geographies13421–443
62.
WalksR A, 2004a, “Suburbanization, the vote, and changes in federal and provincial political representation and influence between inner cities and suburbs in large Canadian urban regions, 1945–1999”Urban Affairs Review39411–440
63.
WalksR A, 2004b, “Place of residence, party preferences, and political attitudes in Canadian cities and suburbs”Journal of Urban Affairs26269–295
64.
WalksR A, 2006a, “The causes of city–suburban political polarization? A Canadian case study”Annals of the Association of American Geographers96390–414
65.
WalksR A, 2006b, “Aestheticization and the cultural contradictions of neoliberal (sub)urbanism”Cultural Geographies13466–475
66.
WalksR A, 2007, “The boundaries of suburban discontent? Urban definitions and neighbourhood political effects”The Canadian Geographer51160–185
67.
WillisA, 1998, “Powerful forces lie in privatization”Globe and Mail 29 December, page B11
68.
WolmanHMarckiniL, 1998, “Changes in central-city representation and influence in Congress since the 1960s”Urban Affairs Review34291–312
69.
WolmanHMarckiniL, 2000, “The effect of place on legislative roll-call voting: The case of central-city representatives in the US House of Representatives”Social Science Quarterly81763–781
70.
YoungI M, 1999, “Residential segregation and differentiated citizenship”Citizenship Studies3237–252
