IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Methodology problems in urban governance studies

Listed author(s):
  • Scott Gissendanner
Registered author(s):

    Increasing attention has been paid to forms of urban governance, or how public and private sector actors cooperate in generating new policies. In fact, almost everywhere where urban governance structures have been looked for, they have been found. This apparent ubiquity of governance networks has ushered in a new era for urban studies, but it raises the issue of whether such structures vary and whether the differences can be measured and used in explaining other dimensions of city difference. The author argues that the ubiquity problem does not reflect a fatal deficit in urban governance concepts but is, rather, a correctable problem of methods. Urban governance research would benefit greatly from the more widespread use of existing descriptive methods and techniques which produce results that are easy to compare across cities, and thus expand the basis for inductive theory building. As the high cost of such methods discourages comparative research designs with multiple cases, a similar but more cost-effective research method -- which has advantages and disadvantages -- is discussed. The kinds of simple structural features of governance networks it reveals represent a new potential dimension of explanation in urban research.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: abstract
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see for details

    File URL:
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see for details

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Pion Ltd, London in its journal Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy.

    Volume (Year): 21 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 5 (October)
    Pages: 663-685

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:pio:envirc:v:21:y:2003:i:5:p:663-685
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pio:envirc:v:21:y:2003:i:5:p:663-685. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Neil Hammond)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.