Growth Machine

Conceptual Background

In the 1970s, the field of urban sociology—and other fields focusing on urban research such as economics, urban geography, and planning—were proponents of the idea that cities could be understood as mere containers of human action. According to this idea—which echoes the original proposals of the Chicago School—a competition among actors takes place in the city for land and other resources. City form, distribution of land uses, and central place theory can be explained by this seemingly impersonal competition. By opposing this approach, the growth machine idea placed social action in the urban realm at the forefront of analysis.

Emerging to explain the political economy of the city, the growth machine idea countered the structuralist overtones present in urban theory since the publication in 1972 of Harvey's Social Justice and the City and Castells's The Urban Question by focusing on urban actors rather than forces. Explicit in the concept is the claim that land parcels are linked to specific interests, especially commercial, sentimental, and psychological interests. Prominent [Page 330]among the city shapers are the land interests of those whose properties gain value when growth occurs. These social actors make up the local growth machine—a term that has become standard in urban studies. The growth machine approach suggests that human action, especially urban action by specific actors, carries causal power when it comes to explaining the organization, shape, and distribution of people and jobs in the city. Interpersonal market forces are not enough to explain these mechanisms. Rather, social action, including manipulations and dealings guided by interest, becomes a key explanatory force in urban studies.

Cities and towns in the United States have traditionally welcomed capital investment, with little regard to the social or fiscal costs involved. Under tensions generated by the growing international concentration of capital, however, communities are realizing that the costs of such investments have risen. Some localities resist the usual growth agenda, and both the property-oriented rentier elite and the middle and working classes sometimes try to substitute other local goals. Capital responds with new efforts to penetrate localities by activating their branch managers, increasing political campaign contributions, and directly participating in the property development business. National politics and policies such as Ronald Reagan's New Federalism—help capital by manipulating urban policy to provide advantageous sites.

Contemporary Applications

The growth machine concept has generated substantial research in the United States and abroad. Comprehensive literature reviews were published in 1997 and 1999. A twentieth anniversary edition of Urban Fortunes was issued by the University of California Press in 2007. International surveys of contemporary U.S. urban sociology identify growth machine research as one of the four main themes in the field.

...