Cleveland: The “Comeback” City: The Politics of Redevelopment and Sports Stadiums Amidst Urban Decline

Keating, W. Dennis

doi:10.4135/9781483327808.n10

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This research usually consists of single-case studies or volumes of collected case studies, and thus does not provide a comparative framework for identifying social patterns between and among cities (Blair and Swindell, 1997;Cagan and deMause, 1998;Keating, 1996;Noll and Zimbalist, 1997).…”

Section: Studying Publicly Financed Stadiumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Urban Power Structures and Publicly Financed Stadiums

Delaney¹,

Eckstein²

2007

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban elites are increasingly addressing local social problems though policies that turn their cities into tourist destinations. Often at the heart of these policies are new publicly financed sports stadiums. Ironically, this strategy is flourishing despite near-unanimous academic criticism, and increasing public skepticism, about this approach. Our research addresses this contradiction by exploring how and why powerful decisionmakers continue supporting publicly financed stadiums. We rely on local growth coalition theory to explore this topic because it offers analytical advantages, including looking beyond local sports teams as the focal point of these initiatives, addressing the variation in the outcomes of these initiatives, and acknowledging that policymakers are predisposed toward supporting these initiatives but that this predisposition does not always result in success.

show abstract

Section: Studying Publicly Financed Stadiumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, cities that are in danger of becoming ''second-class cities'' are more vulnerable to the pressure to subsidize stadiums. Cleveland is a prime example of this tourist strategy (Keating, 1996). The ''city as tourist attraction'' entails trying to change the image of a declining city into one of a tourist destination.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Power Structures and Publicly Financed Stadiums

Delaney¹,

Eckstein²

2007

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has been a major issue in United States cities such as Cleveland where neoliberal city councils have committed large amounts to facilitate new big league stadia (e.g. Bartimole 1994;Keating 1997). In Birmingham in the United Kingdom, spending on prestige projects and civic boosterism caused significant diversion of resources away from public housing and education (Loftman and Nevin 1998).…”

Section: Neoliberalism and Planning: Theoretical Issuesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Planning, economic development and the spatial outcomes of market liberalisation

Searle

CARDEW

2000

Urban Policy and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionOver the last two decades or so, the ideological context of planning has undergone a significant shift to one that more openly embraces the influence of the market. This is the result of the confluence of several factors, notably, public dissatisfaction with the outcomes of increased government activity, the weakening of social norms supporting planning, and intensified place competition for investment resulting from globalisation and concomitant new technology. Such factors have led governments to adopt a neoliberal ideology in which the market determines development outcomes, and government spending and regulation are reduced. Yet the effects of this new context on city structure are potentially complex. This is particularly because of indeterminacy about how the market-regulating character of planning is reconciled with the market dominance aims of neoliberalism, and about how these aims are reconciled with new styles of planning involving increased community participation. In addition, city outcomes remain subject to local contexts, including local power relations between state, capital, labour and the community, and the ensuing authority of planning.Such considerations raise specific issues for theory which this paper seeks to explore. How do urban planning and policy resolve the various potential contradictions of neoliberalism? What local and external conditions (local actors, institutions, external market attraction etc.) are significant in determining the way neoliberalism brings about development? Is the role of planning in this process

show abstract

“…Cleveland qua Cleveland (Krumholz, 1982;Keating, 1996;Warf and Holly, 1997;Chakalis et al, 2002;Wilson and Wouters, 2003;Hirt, 2005;Keating et al, 2005;Lowe, 2008). We draw upon this illuminating and important work.…”

Section: Iufmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational Comparisons: The Assembling of Cleveland's Waterfront Plan

Cook

Ward

2012

Urban Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper uses the ongoing attempts to redevelop the Cleveland waterfront to reveal the relational comparative geographies that are present in a number of contemporary urban revalorization strategies. It draws on archival papers, semistructured interviews, and the local grey literature to make three contributions to the existing urban-global studies literature. First, the paper argues that many contemporary waterfront and other similar redevelopment schemes are inherently comparative, with a significant amount of seemingly territorial politics and urban policy making characterized by actors' engagements with places elsewhere. Second, it shows that the framing of urban policy through relational comparisons is an established practice in many cities and that current redevelopment plans should be understood as informed by previous rounds of relational and territorial policy making. Third, it points to the importance of consultants in the current era -as examples of actors of transference -in shaping not only redevelopment plans but also the framing of the city in relation to other cities. ---No one public improvement is more important to the City of Cleveland than the development of her lake front in accordance with the best possible plan (Hopkins, 1927, p. 21) What we do with our great assets … will reshape Cleveland for decades to come (Jackson, 2010, quoted in Breckenridge, 2010 2 IUFThe regeneration of urban waterfronts is one of the key urban design and planning stories of the late twentieth century (Dovey, 2005, p. 9)

show abstract

Cleveland: The “Comeback” City: The Politics of Redevelopment and Sports Stadiums Amidst Urban Decline

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Urban Power Structures and Publicly Financed Stadiums

Urban Power Structures and Publicly Financed Stadiums

Planning, economic development and the spatial outcomes of market liberalisation

Relational Comparisons: The Assembling of Cleveland's Waterfront Plan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About