Navigating the regionalism–public choice divide in regional studies

Michael R. Glass

Regional Studies, 2018, vol. 52, issue 8, 1150-1161

Abstract: While city-regions take on increasingly important social and economic roles, analytical perspectives on their political boundaries remain fragmentary. This paper considers the evolving debates over city-region boundaries in the United States, arguing that the two predominant perspectives (regionalism and public choice) each provide partial accounts of political fragmentation in city-regions. Regionalists and public choice theorists frame the urban question differently, leading to mismatched priorities that are ultimately self-defeating for both camps. Surmounting the conceptual impasse regarding regional boundary change will involve compromise and engagement with the communities who live there, and reflect the practical politics of specific city-regions.

Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00343404.2017.1415430 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:regstd:v:52:y:2018:i:8:p:1150-1161

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRES20

DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2017.1415430

Access Statistics for this article

Regional Studies is currently edited by Ivan Turok

More articles in Regional Studies from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().