Grappling with governance: the emergence of business improvement districts in a national capital
Grappling with governance: the emergence of business improvement districts in a national capital
Business improvement districts (BIDs) constitute a relatively new mode of urban governance in which business and property owners pay surtaxes for collectivized, privatized maintenance and development services in their respective neighborhoods. Although they are typically considered an innovative means of improving urban areas—or at the very least a benign intervention of business owners to draw new consumers—the case of Washington, D.C., shows that BIDs are also an increasingly entrenched neo-liberal institution promoted by state restructuring and interurban competition. Given local conditions, such as a permissive legislative environment and fragmented governance, the proliferation, size, and influence of D.C.’s BIDs pose concerns about institutional accountability, socioeconomic inequality, and sustainability of services. Using a mixed-methods approach that integrates urban governance theory, performance metrics, and interviews with BID and D.C. government officials, this study finds that Washington’s BIDs have promoted revitalization but also pose concerns about limited public accountability, exacerbated socioeconomic and spatial inequalities, and further retreat of the municipal government.
180-217
Lewis, Nathaniel M.
f0218afb-51ea-4141-a1e9-d031d8b98645
November 2010
Lewis, Nathaniel M.
f0218afb-51ea-4141-a1e9-d031d8b98645
Lewis, Nathaniel M.
(2010)
Grappling with governance: the emergence of business improvement districts in a national capital.
Urban Affairs Review, 46 (2), .
(doi:10.1177/1078087410378844).
Abstract
Business improvement districts (BIDs) constitute a relatively new mode of urban governance in which business and property owners pay surtaxes for collectivized, privatized maintenance and development services in their respective neighborhoods. Although they are typically considered an innovative means of improving urban areas—or at the very least a benign intervention of business owners to draw new consumers—the case of Washington, D.C., shows that BIDs are also an increasingly entrenched neo-liberal institution promoted by state restructuring and interurban competition. Given local conditions, such as a permissive legislative environment and fragmented governance, the proliferation, size, and influence of D.C.’s BIDs pose concerns about institutional accountability, socioeconomic inequality, and sustainability of services. Using a mixed-methods approach that integrates urban governance theory, performance metrics, and interviews with BID and D.C. government officials, this study finds that Washington’s BIDs have promoted revitalization but also pose concerns about limited public accountability, exacerbated socioeconomic and spatial inequalities, and further retreat of the municipal government.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 27 August 2010
Published date: November 2010
Organisations:
Population, Health & Wellbeing (PHeW)
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 377676
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/377676
ISSN: 1078-0874
PURE UUID: 791974b7-f8be-427a-9427-8e9b5e18450c
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 09 Jun 2015 13:14
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 20:07
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Nathaniel M. Lewis
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics