Participatory Bias and Participatory Neighborhood Governance: Reanalyzing the Most-Likely Case of the Stockholm Neighborhood Renewal Program

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q2 URBAN STUDIES Urban Affairs Review Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI:10.1177/10780874231203919
Nils Hertting
{"title":"Participatory Bias and Participatory Neighborhood Governance: Reanalyzing the Most-Likely Case of the Stockholm Neighborhood Renewal Program","authors":"Nils Hertting","doi":"10.1177/10780874231203919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Strategies for revitalizing marginalized neighborhoods often include participatory innovations. According to the participatory bias argument, however, participatory governance arrangements benefit the privileged rather than the poor. In the present article, the validity of this argument is examined by analyzing how individual resources and social positions relates to recruitment to, participation within, and outcomes derived from participation in a most-likely case of bias in participatory neighborhood governance. Although the privileged were overrepresented in recruitment, the pattern was less clear regarding influence within the processes, and quite the opposite regarding certain outcomes of participation. Also in a most-likely case for bias, participatory neighborhood governance may induce empowerment among poor. Based on the observation that participants that differ with regard to available resources and social positions also have different motives for participation, a mechanism-based account regarding why and how bias in early phases under certain conditions may produce empowering outcomes is proposed.","PeriodicalId":51427,"journal":{"name":"Urban Affairs Review","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874231203919","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Strategies for revitalizing marginalized neighborhoods often include participatory innovations. According to the participatory bias argument, however, participatory governance arrangements benefit the privileged rather than the poor. In the present article, the validity of this argument is examined by analyzing how individual resources and social positions relates to recruitment to, participation within, and outcomes derived from participation in a most-likely case of bias in participatory neighborhood governance. Although the privileged were overrepresented in recruitment, the pattern was less clear regarding influence within the processes, and quite the opposite regarding certain outcomes of participation. Also in a most-likely case for bias, participatory neighborhood governance may induce empowerment among poor. Based on the observation that participants that differ with regard to available resources and social positions also have different motives for participation, a mechanism-based account regarding why and how bias in early phases under certain conditions may produce empowering outcomes is proposed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
参与性偏见与参与性社区治理:再分析斯德哥尔摩社区更新计划的最可能案例
振兴边缘化社区的策略通常包括参与式创新。然而,根据参与性偏见的观点,参与性治理安排有利于特权阶层,而不是穷人。在本文中,通过分析个人资源和社会地位如何与参与式社区治理中最可能存在偏见的情况下的招聘、参与以及参与所产生的结果相关,来检验这一论点的有效性。虽然特权阶层在征聘中所占比例过高,但在过程中的影响方面,这种模式不太清楚,而在参与的某些结果方面,则恰恰相反。此外,在最可能存在偏见的情况下,参与式社区治理可能会促使穷人获得权力。根据观察,在可用资源和社会地位方面不同的参与者也有不同的参与动机,提出了一种基于机制的解释,说明在某些条件下早期阶段的偏见为何以及如何产生赋权结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Urban Affairs Review
Urban Affairs Review URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Urban Affairs Reveiw (UAR) is a leading scholarly journal on urban issues and themes. For almost five decades scholars, researchers, policymakers, planners, and administrators have turned to UAR for the latest international research and empirical analysis on the programs and policies that shape our cities. UAR covers: urban policy; urban economic development; residential and community development; governance and service delivery; comparative/international urban research; and social, spatial, and cultural dynamics.
期刊最新文献
Creating Local “Citizen's Governance Spaces” in Austerity Contexts : Food Recuperation and Urban Gardening in Montréal (Canada) as Ways to Pragmatically Invent Alternatives Explaining Value Capture Implementation in New York, London, and Copenhagen: Negotiating Distributional Effects Examining the Smart City Generational Model: Conceptualizations, Implementations, and Infrastructure Canada's Smart City Challenge Celebrating Sixty Years of Urban Affairs Review with a Look at the 1970s and Street-Level Bureaucracy Whose Neighborhood Needs? Assessing the Spatial Distribution of Federal Community Development Funds
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1