2013
DOI: 10.1177/1078087412473068
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Group Involvements in City Politics and Pluralist Theory

Abstract: Abstract:The assessments of 75 councilors and mayors in eight cities in the Kansas City metropolitan area provide global measures of group organization, activity, and influence in community politics and measures of their specific involvements in 73 issues that arose in these communities. While variations in group involvement and influence -both in exercising social control and contributing to social production -are reported, the most general findings are that groups are less involved in city politics and their… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Scholars have studied the nature of various kinds of groups and their effects on the local environment, on environmental policymaking, and on governance (Schumaker, ). Some studies have looked at the context in which local environmental policymaking takes place, suggesting that key characteristics enabling group involvement in the local environment include “multilevel governance” (Agranoff & McGuire, ; Betsill & Bulkeley, ; Homsy & Warner, ), a mayor‐council form of government (Bae & Feiock, ), a population that is highly participatory and engaged (Portney & Cuttler, ), a “moralistic political culture” (Budd, Lovrich, Pierce, & Chamberlain, ) and other “nontraditional” political cultures (Rosdil, ), a relatively small or supportive business community (Feiock, Portney, Bae, & Berry, ), and the active presence of “bridge organizations” that serve as resource brokers across different types of organizations, geographic spaces, and environmental domains (Connolly, Svendsen, Fisher, & Campbell, ).…”
Section: The Group Basis Of City Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scholars have studied the nature of various kinds of groups and their effects on the local environment, on environmental policymaking, and on governance (Schumaker, ). Some studies have looked at the context in which local environmental policymaking takes place, suggesting that key characteristics enabling group involvement in the local environment include “multilevel governance” (Agranoff & McGuire, ; Betsill & Bulkeley, ; Homsy & Warner, ), a mayor‐council form of government (Bae & Feiock, ), a population that is highly participatory and engaged (Portney & Cuttler, ), a “moralistic political culture” (Budd, Lovrich, Pierce, & Chamberlain, ) and other “nontraditional” political cultures (Rosdil, ), a relatively small or supportive business community (Feiock, Portney, Bae, & Berry, ), and the active presence of “bridge organizations” that serve as resource brokers across different types of organizations, geographic spaces, and environmental domains (Connolly, Svendsen, Fisher, & Campbell, ).…”
Section: The Group Basis Of City Politicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our analysis suggests that zoning relief, like other planning tools, builds on existing power structures in ways that further problematically distort access to resources (Maloney, Stoker, and Smith 2000; Schumaker 2013). The relative strength of social and community networks in home expansion (story one) and permits for Sandy relief (story two) illustrate how longstanding racial inequities and community connections generated through civic networks such as those linking community associations and city agencies, impact access to zoning relief.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Typically, urban sustainability research use proxies for interest group presence where the value of the manufacturing sector (e.g., Koski & Lee, 2014), counts of manufacturing establishments (e.g., Sharp et al, 2011), or combined measures of Chamber of Commerce members and developers represents industry group strength (e.g., Daley et al 2013;Schumaker, 2013). While this approach is appropriate when interest groups are control variables and not the focal predictor, it neglects the variation of interest groups that are active in specialized issue domains.…”
Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%