No abstract

This article explores the impact of a brownfield redevelopment initiative in the state of Michigan. Although such programs are often perceived as having a positive impact, there is remarkably little evidence beyond anecdotal examples to support such claims. The reported analysis is based on a 5-year project to create a database capable of assessing the impact of the Michigan program. Findings indicate that a viable market for brownfield redevelopment has been created since the change in Michigan brownfield law. On average, brownfield sites have shown a decline in quality over time; however, many sites demonstrated significant improvement.

Drawing on work by Schattschneider (1960) and Baumgartner and Jones (1993) and examining governing nonprofits in three U.S. cities, the authors assert that governing nonprofits can provide a platform for restructuring political agendas. They take on roles and responsibilities traditionally reserved for the government, and they forge coalitions among and across groups, organizations, and sectors to address societal problems. These organizations require broad community support, embrace flexible policy agendas, and operate in the public domain. The success of governing nonprofits also lies in their ability to foster positive linkages with the local leadership without becoming completely identified with local authorities.

Over the past thirty years, there has been a dramatic transformation in the way the American political process operates. There has been a growing public perception that traditional political institutions lack the capacity to meet existing challenges. This has led many observers to call for a rethinking of how government does its work. Numerous alternatives, including the use of faith-based organizations, have been suggested. The current popular debate on the appropriate role of faith-based organizations in public service delivery has shed little light on a number of important issues raised by engaging such actors in governance issues. The impact of using faith-based institutions to design and implement public policy must be considered not only in terms of traditional evaluation standards, but also regarding potential long-term impacts on the political process itself. This article outlines a theoretical framework for the evaluation of faith-based organizations as "alternatives" to conventional governance structures. It identifies key practical and theoretical issues raised by such substitution, in both short and long range systemic terms. Copyright 2007 by The Policy Studies Organization.

In recent years, we have witnessed an increase in the role and influence of nonprofit organizations in local and regional policy decisions. Often, these organizations assume a quasi-governmental role in pursuit of their missions. Roles of coalition builder and policy initiator/formulator join more traditional roles of service provider and policy advocate. These emerging roles forge new relationships between the nonprofit, for-profit, and public sectors. In Detroit, there is evidence that nonprofit organizations such as New Detroit and Detroit Renaissance can play a role in redefining the local political agenda. Yet that role is severely limited if such organizations are not tied to public authority.