The era of the global economy brings societal challenges that demand systems solutions to the concerns of community, including citizen engagement and coproduction. Survey research involving more than 1,800 citizens from a Midwestern urban community is used to help local government understand citizens' views of the merits of two very different approaches to citizen engagement. One approach uses organizations that are extensions of the arms of government to promote efficient communication between citizens and government. The second approach employs grassroots neighborhood-based organizations that are assumed to be advantaged at encouraging coproduction. Neighborhood-based organizations were found to be the people's choice for purposes of communication and bringing citizens together for collective solutions to the concerns of the community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BenestFrank (1999). AReconnecting Citizens with Citizens: What is the Role of Local Government?@Public Management81 (2): 6–11.
2.
BerryJeffery M., KentE. Portney and KenThomson (1989). AEmpowering and Involving Citizens.@ In James L. Perry ed., Handbook of Public Administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass: 208–221.
3.
BerryJeffery M., KentE. Portney and KenThomson (1993). The Rebirth of Urban Democracy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
4.
BlairRobert (2004). APublic Participation and Community Development: The Role of Strategic Planning.@Public Administration Quarterly28(1)102–147.
5.
BoxRichard C. (1998). Citizen Governance: Leading American Communities into the 21st Century. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
6.
ChapinLinda W. and RobertB. Denhardt (1995). APutting Citizens First!=in Orange County, Florida.@National Civic Review84 (3): 210–217.
7.
CrosbyNed, JanetM. Kelly and PaulSchaefer (1986). ACitizens Panels: A New Approach to Citizen Participation.@Public Administration Review46 (2): 170–178.
8.
DenhardtRobert B. (1993). The Pursuit of Significance: Strategies for Managerial Success in Public Organizations. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.
9.
FredericksonH. George (1991). AToward a Theory of the Public for Public Administration.@Administration & Society, 22 (4): 395–417.
10.
FredericksenPatricia J. (2004). ABuilding Sustainable Communities: Leadership Development Along the U.S.-Mexico Border.@Public Administration Quarterly28 (2):148–181.
11.
GlaserMark, RobertB. Denhardt and JosephW. Grubbs (1996). ACrime and Community-Based Intervention Strategies: Exploring Opportunities Through Partnerships Between Local Government and a Low-Income Community.@International Journal of Public Administration19 (7): 1139–1166.
12.
GlaserMark A., LeeE. Parker and StephaniePayton (2001). AThe Paradox between Community and Self-Interest: Local Government, Neighborhoods, and Media.@Journal of Urban Affairs23 (1): 87–102.
13.
GlaserMark A., LeeE. Parker and HongLi (2003). ACommunity of Choice or Ghetto of Last Resort: Community Development and the Viability of an African-American Community.@Review of Policy Research20 (3): 525–548.
14.
GlaserMark A., MariaP. Aristiguetta and StephaniePayton (2000). AHarnessing the Resources of Community: The Ultimate Performance Agenda.@Public Productivity and Management Review23 (4): 428–448.
15.
GlaserMark A., JanetVinzant Denhardt, and LindaK. Hamilton (2002). ACommunity v. Self-Interest: Citizens Perceptions of Schools as Civic Investments.@Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory12 (1): 103–127.
16.
GlaserMark A., MishaC. Jacob and LesaL. Lank (2005). AThe New Public Service and Community: A Framework to Guide Local Government.@Paper presented at the 66th Annual Conference of the American Society for Public Administration, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
17.
HaeberleSteven H. (1986). AGood Neighbors and Good Neighborhoods: Comparing Demographic and Environmental Influences on Neighborhood Activism.@State and Local Government Review, 18 (3): 109–116.
18.
HellingAmy and JohnClayton Thomas (2002) “Encouraging Community Dialog: Approach, Promise, and Tensions.”International Journal of Public Administration, 24 (7/8): 749–770.
19.
HolzerMarc and JackRabin (1995). APublic Service: Problems, Professionalism, and Policy Recommendations.@ In Competent Government: Theory and Practice: The Best of Public Productivity and Management Review, 1985-1993. Arie Halachmi and Marc Holzer (eds.).Burke, Virginia: Chatelaine Press: 249- 259.
20.
KathleneLyn and JohnA. Martin (1991). AEnhancing Citizen Participation: Panel Designs, Perspectives, and Policy Formation.@Journal of Policy Analysis and Management10 (1): 46–63.
21.
KingCheryl Simrell and CamillaStivers, eds. (1998). Government Is Us: Public Administration in an Anti-Government Era. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
22.
KingCheryl Simrell, KathrynM. Feltey and BridgetO.NeillSusel (1998). AThe Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration.@Public Administration Review58 (4): 317–326.
23.
LeeBarrett and AveryM. Guest (1983). ADeterminants of Neighborhood Satisfaction: A Metropolitan-Level Analysis.@Sociological Quarterly24 (Spring): 287–303.
24.
LoganJohn R. and GordanaRabrenovic (1990). ANeighborhood Associations: Their Issues, Their Allies, and Their Opponents.@Urban Affairs Quarterly26 (1): 68–94.
25.
LoweryDavid, RuthHoogland DeHoog and WilliamE. Lyons (1992). ACitizenship in the Empowered Locality: An Elaboration, a Critique, and a Partial Test.@Urban Affairs Quarterly28 (1): 69–103.
26.
MacManusSusan A. (1996). ADemocratizing the Capital Budget Planning and Project Selection Process at the Local Level: Assets and Liabilities.@Public Budgeting & Financial Management8 (3): 406–427.
27.
MansbridgeJane J. (1980). Beyond Adversary Democracy. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
28.
MathewsDavid (1994). ACommunity Change Through True Public Action.@National Civic Review83 (4): 400–404.
29.
NalbandianJohn (1994). AReflections of a Pracademic= on the Logic of Politics and Administration.@Public Administration Review54(6)531–536.
30.
PattersonPatricia M. (1998). AMarket Metaphors and Political Vocabularies: The Case of the Marginalized Citizen.@Public Productivity and Management Review, 22 (2): 220–231.
31.
SharpElaine B. (1990). Urban Politics and Administration: From Service Delivery to Economic Development. New York: Longman.
32.
StewartDebra W. (1985). AProfessionalism vs. Democracy: Friedrich vs. Finer Revisited.@Public Administration Quarterly (Spring): 13–25.
33.
StiversCamilla (1994). AThe Listening Bureaucrat: Responsiveness in Public Administration.@Public Administration Review54 (4): 364–369.
34.
SvaraJames H. (1994). AThe Structural Reform Impulse in Local Government: Its Past and Relevance to the Future.@National Civic Review83 (3): 323–347.
35.
SvaraJames H. (2001). AThe Myth of the Dichotomy: Complementarity of Politics and Administration in the Past and Future of Public Administration.@Public Administration Review61(2)176–183.
36.
TimneyMary M. (1998). AOvercoming Administrative Barrier to Citizen Participation.@ In Cheryl Simrell King and Camilla Stivers, eds., Government Is Us: Public Administration in an Anti-Government Era. Thousand Oaks: SAGE: 88–101.
37.
ThomasJohn Clayton (1983). ACitizen Participation and Urban Administration: From Enemies to Allies?@Journal of Urban Affairs5 (3): 175–182.
38.
ThomasJohn Clayton (1995). Public Participation in Public Decisions: New Skills and Strategies for Public Managers.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
39.
ThomasJohn Clayton (1986). Between Citizen and City: Neighborhood Organizations and Urban Politics in Cincinnati.Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas.
40.
ThomasJohn Clayton (1993). APublic Involvement and Governmental Effectiveness: A Decision-Making Model for Public Managers.@Administration & Society24 (4): 444–469.
41.
WarrenRobert, MarkS. Rosentraub and LouisF. Weschler (1992). ABuilding Urban Governance: An Agenda for the 1990s.@Journal of Urban Affairs14 (3/4): 399–422.
