IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/luk/wpaper/8575.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Community Engagement in Planning and Development: Neighborhood Councils in Los Angeles

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Elliot
  • Kyu-Nahm Jun
  • Juliet Musso

Abstract

This paper presents preliminary evidence of the manner in which neighborhood councilsin Los Angeles are engaging in land use and planning. Charter reform in 1999 in LosAngeles authorized creation of a system of neighborhood councils charged withincreasing participation in city governance and making local government moreresponsive to community concerns. Neighborhood councils were intended to placecommunity members in a position to act rather than merely react to policies anddecisions handed down from City Hall – what scholars of political engagement describeas doing politics, rather than merely being attentive to politics. While NCs wereendowed with advisory capacity only, the charter created several channels to facilitatetheir provision of input on city policy formation and administration:• Provision that neighborhood councils would have an opportunity to providebudget input to the Mayor to be considered in development of the annual budget;• Development of an early notification system to inform community members ofmatters before the city council and its boards and commissions; and• Requirement that neighborhood councils monitor service delivery and meetregularly with departmental officials.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Elliot & Kyu-Nahm Jun & Juliet Musso, 2006. "Community Engagement in Planning and Development: Neighborhood Councils in Los Angeles," Working Paper 8575, USC Lusk Center for Real Estate.
    • Handle: RePEc:luk:wpaper:8575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://lusk.usc.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/wp-2006-1003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mitchell, Robert Cameron & Carson, Richard T, 1986. "Property Rights, Protest, and the Siting of Hazardous Waste Facilities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 285-290, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Toshiaki Sasao, 2004. "Analysis of the socioeconomic impact of landfill siting considering regional factors," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 6(2), pages 147-175, June.
    2. Libor Dusek & Lubomir Lizal (ed.), 2011. "CERGE-EI Tackles Transition," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b05, May.
    3. Hanousek, Jan & Filer, Randall K, 2004. "Consumers' Opinion of Inflation Bias Due to Quality Improvements," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(1), pages 235-254, October.
    4. Lejano, Raul P. & Davos, Climis A., 2001. "Siting noxious facilities with victim compensation: : n-person games under transferable utility," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 109-124.
    5. Levinson, Arik, 1999. "NIMBY taxes matter: the case of state hazardous waste disposal taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 31-51, October.
    6. Lejano, Raul P. & Davos, Climis A., 2002. "Fair Share: Siting Noxious Facilities as a Risk Distribution Game under Nontransferable Utility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 251-266, March.
    7. Livia Navone, 2013. "Property versus political holdouts: the case of the TGV rail line Lyon–Budapest in Italy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 409-426, June.
    8. Alberto Ansuategi & Charles Perrings, 2000. "Transboundary Externalities in the Environmental Transition Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(4), pages 353-373, December.
    9. Chuanwang Sun & Nan Lyu & Xiaoling Ouyang, 2014. "Chinese Public Willingness to Pay to Avoid Having Nuclear Power Plants in the Neighborhood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-27, October.
    10. Bigerna, Simona & Choudhary, Piyush & Kumar Jain, Nikunj & Micheli, Silvia & Polinori, Paolo, 2022. "Avoiding unanticipated power outages: households’ willingness to pay in India," MPRA Paper 114160, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Stephen Jarvis, 2021. "The Economic Costs of NIMBYism - Evidence From Renewable Energy Projects," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2021_300, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    12. Susan G. Hadden, 1991. "Public Perception of Hazardous Waste," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 47-57, March.
    13. Markusen, James R. & Morey, Edward R. & Olewiler, Nancy, 1995. "Competition in regional environmental policies when plant locations are endogenous," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 55-77, January.
    14. Pier Angelo Mori, 2013. "Customer ownership of public utilities: new wine in old bottles," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 2(1), pages 54-74, August.
    15. Gawande, Kishore & Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K., 2001. "A consumption-based theory of the environmental Kuznets curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 101-112, April.
    16. Michael E. Kraft & A. Myrick Freeman, 1989. "Introduction: Economic and Political Issues in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 279-281, September.
    17. Garrone, Paola & Groppi, Angelamaria, 2012. "Siting locally-unwanted facilities: What can be learnt from the location of Italian power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 176-186.
    18. Matthias Cinyabuguma & Virginia McConnell, 2013. "Urban Growth Externalities And Neighborhood Incentives: Another Cause Of Urban Sprawl?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 332-348, May.
    19. Bonev, Petyo & Emmenegger, Rony & Forero, Laura & Ganev, Kaloyan & Simeonova-Ganeva, Ralitsa & Söderberg, Magnus, 2024. "Nuclear waste in my backyard: Social acceptance and economic incentives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    20. Peter A. Groothuis & George Van Houtven & John C. Whitehead, 1998. "Using Contingent Valuation to Measure the Compensation Required to Gain Community Acceptance of a Lulu: the Case of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(3), pages 231-249, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:luk:wpaper:8575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Steins (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lcuscus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.