Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Urban policy refers, broadly, to the numerous ways in which national or federal governments implement programs that affect the nature of cities, including modes and priorities of financing municipalities, strategic planning to stimulate urban economic growth, attempts to combat uneven regional development or encourage cooperation among local governments, control over negative externalities such as destruction of the natural environment, targeted subsidies for specific problems (e.g., homelessness), and political restrictions on the autonomy of the local state. As such, urban policy is closely related—but not identical—to urban and regional planning efforts. There is typically no single national urban policy, but aggregations of many different policies, some of which may work at cross-purposes, with varying effects over space and time. Because the capitalist city is not simply the product of market forces, but also of the state, urban policy plays a critically important role in shaping urban space and the quality of life within it.

Most “urban” policies are not specifically called urban; rather, they affect cities indirectly, such as when they address issues such as infrastructure, transportation, urban labor and housing markets, environmental problems (e.g., water supplies, air pollution), energy use and availability, and so forth. Policies aimed at specific economic sectors, such as protectionism for manufacturing firms, have uneven urban impacts; similarly, immigration controls differentially affect the supply of labor in urban space. Indeed, virtually all government policies have implicit, if not explicit, urban consequences, such as tax laws, land use controls, and anti-poverty programs.

Urban policy is both deeply political and geographical in nature. Far from being politically neutral, urban policies reflect the interests of multiple constituencies and stake-holders, including corporate interests, different social classes, various groups in civil society, and different factions within the state. Although urban policy often caters to hegemonic interests, it is important to view it as a contested arena in which different political interests and discourses jockey for influence. Additionally, because urban policy varies among and within countries, because it shapes urban space in different ways, urban policy is also profoundly spatial in nature.

This entry begins by noting variations in urban policy among countries; next, it briefly summarizes Keynesian urban policy that dominated in the early to mid 20th century; then, it focuses on neoliberalism and its impacts concerning how governments treated urban areas. Next, the entry discusses the implications of these trends for local planning efforts. It concludes with comments concerning urban policy in the developing world.

National Urban Policy Differences

Urban policies vary widely in time and among countries, depending on the global political and economic system, the structure and health of the national economy, their respective degrees of urbanization, national political dynamics (e.g., unitary vs. federal government structures), the relative degree of political autonomy enjoyed by local governments, modes of tax collection and disbursement of public moneys, national and local administrative priorities, the nature and severity of social problems, and popular historical and cultural climates that facilitate or inhibit government intervention.

Compared to Europe, Japan, or Canada, the political culture in the United States is markedly more favorably disposed to presumptions about the primacy and efficacy of the “free market” and exhibits a widespread mistrust of government intervention. As a result, with most governance effectuated at the local level, urban policy in the United States has always been relatively anemic compared to European states. In the United States, the bulk of tax revenues are generated and most public services are provided at the state and local levels rather than the federal one, and the country lacks national planning systems regulating land use, population, or other policy measures. Thus, despite the importance of the federal government in financing many local measures, American urban policy tends to be relatively ineffectual. In Canada, Germany, and the United States, provincial, Länder, and state governments, respectively, play important policy roles, a dimension lacking in Britain and many European countries.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading