Urban Affairs Review

Is the Right to the City (RTTC) still a useful framework for a transformative urban politics? Given recent scholarly criticism of its real-world applications and appropriations, in this paper, we argue that the transformative promise in the RTTC lies beyond its role as a framework for oppositional struggle, and in its normative ends. Building upon Henri Lefebvre's original writing on the subject, we develop a “radical-cooperative” conception of the RTTC. Such a view, which is grounded in the lived experiences of the current city, envisions an urban society in which inhabitants can pursue their material and social needs through self-governed cooperation across social difference. Growing and diversifying spaces and sectors of urban life that are decoupled from global capitalism are, we argue, necessary to create space for this inclusionary politics. While grassroots action is essential to this process, so is multi-scalar support from the state.

The progressive potential of urban politics is the subject of growing interest. However, debates have been largely focused on large cities with strong progressive constituencies of activists and Left-voting residents. We know little about the opportunities and challenges for progressive politics in smaller urban areas. This article addresses these shortcomings through a discussion of “progressive urbanism” in relation to small towns. In doing so, it makes three main contributions. First, it provides a definition of progressive urbanism as political projects of social justice, citizenship and democracy exploring the contingent potential of “localism,” “urban movements” and “municipal government.” Second, the article provides empirical insights on small towns in the German state of Brandenburg governed by mayors of the Left Party. Third, the article outlines challenges and opportunities of progressive urbanism in small towns, providing points of reflection for future research.

Governance is a polysemic prescription for contemporary government and at an urban level has been instrumental in some radical and often striking reshaping of cities. This paper examines the interests and power structures behind those changes through the critical examination of the case of Medellin, Colombia, until recently a model of “good governance,” internationally acknowledged for its early millennium transformation from “murder capital to model city.” Based on extensive literature reviews and interviews, we unveil the forces underlying concrete governance practices. Major characteristics emerging from this perspective concern i) market hegemony, ii) the disempowerment of grass-roots movements and iii) the influence of illegal actors in the complex and shifting dynamics within and between the city's major players. The notion of both “good governance” and model practice are strongly revisited.

What explains the institutionalization of progressive city planning practices? Using Medellín as a case study, I analyze how state and nonstate actors target both formal and informal institutions in efforts to maintain the continuity of progressive public space provision practices. I introduce the idea of institutional compounding, defined as the quest by networks of individuals and organizations to create and sustain both formal and informal institutions, where each maintains its particular defining features while together they provide continuity and legitimacy to an existing practice. I draw on in-depth, semi-structured interviews, direct observation, and document analysis to demonstrate that continuity efforts are more likely to have an effect when actors engage in institutional compounding, since the strategy minimizes the shortcomings of formal and informal institutions alone. The findings contribute toward conceptualizing how nascent institutions become effective, highlighting how actors strengthen practices and how they seek to embed them through networked efforts.

To what extent do national partisan cues exert influence over local voting behavior? Despite being an “immigrant welcoming city,” in November, 2019, Tucson, Arizona, voters rejected Prop. 205—the Tucson Families Free and Together Initiative. We leverage theories of elite partisan cues to explain why voters in a progressive city voted against such an initiative. In contrast to Democratic support for sanctuary cities at the national level, we argue that mixed cues from local Democratic elites contributed significantly to a surprising rejection of the initiative. Using aggregate-level data and a framing experiment, we find that the local political environment split Democratic votes (50% favored, 50% opposed) while keeping Republican voters—who received consistent elite cues of opposition—uniformly against the proposition. This study illustrates how local partisan elite cues can shape ballot initiative voting outcomes, even to the point of overriding negative partisanship and national co-partisan consensus on the same issue.

Scholars and policymakers have long been interested in whether large-scale owners of rental properties have different management practices than smaller-scale owners and whether these differences matter for the housing stability of tenants. This is of particular concern among the 1- to 4-unit small rental properties that comprise half the nation’s rental housing stock. I conducted a nationwide survey supplemented with interviews to understand how owners (i) select their tenants and (ii) react to rent delinquencies. I find that larger-scale owners’ highly routinized property management systems make them much more likely to start the eviction process after a delinquency. However the tenant selection processes of professional owners also appear to result in a tenantry that has a somewhat higher delinquency rate, while the selection process for non-professional landlords raises fair housing concerns. I discuss how the link between the tenant selection and rent delinquency practices of landlords has a number of policy implications.

Continued critiques, evidence and newer reform trends have increasingly contested the use of market-centered models–the competition prescription–for urban public space maintenance as well as other local services. This article adopts a contextualized contingency perspective on the competition prescription and questions the contested status of market-centered models in a survey-based study of the current use of and satisfaction with private providers for maintenance of parks/greenspaces and road/streets in Scandinavian local governments. The study finds widespread use of and satisfaction with private providers. However, satisfaction depends on national context and multiple contingencies. The study challenges the contested status of market-centered models, highlights that different models serve different strategic objectives, and directs attention to discussions of context and key contingencies that define how well market-centered models perform.

Where earlier conceptions of problem neighbors saw them as contributing to neighborhood level forms of disorder, neighbor problems, in contrast, occur in the everyday domestic setting of residential life and challenge conceptual boundaries between public/private and civility/incivility. As a result, there is a need to better understand the phenomenon of problems between neighbors beyond conceptions of public disorder and to understand the processes that influence how and why neighbor problems arise. In this study, we examine neighbor problems as manifest in reported complaints to a local municipality in Australia to understand how neighborhood features affect the likelihood of neighbors experiencing problems with each other. We propose five hypotheses to examine the social-interactive, environmental, and geographical mechanisms of neighborhood effects and test these hypotheses through logistic regression models on the way certain neighborhood features relate to the prevalence of neighbor problems. The findings reveal the sources of neighbor problems that typically reside in a combination of the social-interactive dynamics of the neighborhood itself—including the composition of the resident population—and the environmental features of the neighborhood in terms of the condition, density and use of dwellings, but not in the location of the neighborhood relative to larger-scale political and economic forces of the city. The paper concludes with a discussion of the significance of these findings for research, policy, and practice.

This paper explores the structure of elite disagreement about the ideological or nonideological character of municipal politics. I propose two possible relationships between a representative’s own ideology and their beliefs about the character of municipal politics: an “ends-against-the-middle” pattern, in which ideologues on the left and right embrace an ideological vision of municipal politics, whereas moderates insist that municipal politics is not ideological; and an “asymmetric visions” pattern, in which individuals on the left endorse an ideological view of municipal politics and those on the right oppose it. I use new survey data from more than 800 mayors and councillors in Canada to assess these possible relationships. While both are supported by the data, the asymmetric visions pattern is the stronger of the two: the nonideological view of municipal politics is most firmly embraced by municipal politicians of the moderate right, while the ideological vision is most common among representatives on the left. This pattern, I argue, is in keeping with a century of municipal political history and should be incorporated into our theories of municipal elections, representation, and policy disagreement.

Virtually every city in the United States bans multifamily homes in at least some neighborhoods, and in many cities most residential land is restricted to single family homes. This is the case even though many metropolitan areas are facing skyrocketing housing costs and increased environmental degradation that could be alleviated by denser housing supply. Some scholars have argued that an unrepresentative set of vocal development opponents are the culprits behind this collective action failure. Yet, recent work suggests that opposition to density may be widespread. In this research note, I use a conjoint survey experiment to provide evidence that preferences for single-family development are ubiquitous. Across every demographic subgroup analyzed, respondents preferred single-family home developments by a wide margin. Relative to single family homes, apartments are viewed as decreasing property values, increasing crime rates, lowering school quality, increasing traffic, and decreasing desirability.

We highlight the use of a newer method—emerging hot spot analysis of space-time cubes from defined locations—for examining the spread of housing vacancy in large Ohio MSAs. Using this method, we discovered that many Ohio MSAs concurrently experienced spread, contraction, and vacancy stabilization in census tracts located adjacent to, or within close proximity of, one another. These results indicate that vacancy proliferation is not solely a matter of geographic determinism, whereby high vacancy in one tract predicts high vacancy in neighboring tracts in future years. We also found that vacancy spread at the tract level is associated with population dynamics at the neighborhood, city, and MSA levels. Our findings suggest that vacancy reduction initiatives should account for population trends at various geographic scales, not just physical conditions within a particular neighborhood or tract.