Knowledge and policy action in urban development: if we know so much, why is the urban condition not improving?

ADMINISTRAÇÃO PÚBLICA

Knowledge and policy action in urban development: if we know so much, why is the urban condition not improving?

Robert H. Wilson

Philips International Visiting Professor at the EAESP/FGV, Mike Hogg Professor of Urban Policy at LBJ School of Public Affairs and Director of the Urban Issues Program at the University of Texas at Austin. E-mail: [e-mail]

ABSTRACT

In spite of the wealth generation potential of the world's large metropolitan cities, poor living conditions for much of the world's urban population persist. Although the city has been widely studied, urban policy often remains ineffective. The paper adopts a policy process approach to analyze the relationship between knowledge and governmental action. Impediments to improving urban policy are found in the inadequate capacity of government to act and in the politics of democratic decision-making. The paper recommends that a pragmatic view of knowledge generation be adopted.

Key words: Urban policy, urban research, governmental capacity.

RESUMO

Apesar da geração de riqueza potencial das grandes cidades no mundo, as condições precárias de vida de uma grande parcela da população urbana persistem. Embora as cidades sejam muito estudadas, a política urbana é, aparentemente, ineficaz. Este trabalho assume uma abordagem da política pública na análise da relação entre conhecimento e ação governamental. As barreiras à melhoria da política urbana estão associadas com a incapacidade dos governos de atuar e com a política envolvida na tomada de decisões em regimes democráticos. O artigo recomenda que uma visão pragmática da geração do conhecimento deva ser utilizada.

Palavras-chave: Política urbana, pesquisa urbana, capacidade governamental.

Full text available only in PDF format.

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

NOTES

1. We need not worry, for now, about the normative dimension of governmental action, as contrasted for example by the liberal democratic concept in which government action is to create conditions where societal resources can be freely developed by individuals or a more aggressive concept in which government action is intended to promote change and development. Conceptions vary widely around the world and frequently citizens in a single country will dispute the appropriate purpose of government.

2. For a critique of the four-phase policy process model, see NAKAMURA, R. The textbook policy process and implementation research. Policy Studies Review, v. 7, n. 1, p. 142-154, Autumn 1987 and SABATIER, Paul A. Toward better theories of the policy process. PS: Political Science and Politics, v. xxiv, n. 2, p. 147157, June 1991.

3. One critique of the four-phase characterization of the policy process has been advanced by Kingdon. (KINGDON, John W. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Little: Brown, 1984). Instead of the sequential steps of agenda setting and policy formulation, Kingdon proposes three largely unrelated "streams": a problem stream, which consists of the knowledge about some problem and the effects of past policy, a community or network of advocates and specialists, and a political stream. The opportunity for major policy changes occurs when these three streams coincide to create windows of opportunities and such occurrences are rare.

4. An early formulation can be found in LINDBLOM, Charles, DAHL, Robert. Politics, economics, and welfare: planning and political-economic systems resolved into basic social processes. New York: Harper Torch Book, 1953.

5. For an analysis of this phenomenon in terms of a social learning, see Lindblom (1990).

6. For a very useful four volume series, see Urban research in the developing world, edited by Richard Stren and published by the Center for Urban and Community Studies at the University of Toronto (Volume I – Asia, 1994; Volume 2 – Africa, 1994; Volume 3 – Latin America, 1995; Volume 4 – Perspectives on the City, 1995).

• DAHL, Robert A. Democracy and its critics New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Chapter 5.
• INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE. Status of Panchayati Raj in the states of India, 1994. New Delhi, India: Concept Publishing Company, 1995.
• LINDBLOM, Charles. Inquiry and change: the troubled attempt to understand and shape society. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.
• PAUL, Samuel. A citizen report on public services: mixing barks and bites? In: WILSON, Robert H., CRAMER, Reid. (Eds.). International workshop on local governance: second annual proceedings. Austin, TX: LBJ School of Public Affairs, 1996.
• PEATTIE, Lisa R. An approach to urban research in the 1990s. In: STREN, Richard, BELL, Judith Kjellberg (Eds.). Urban research in the developing world Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto, 1995. Vol. 4: Perspectives on the City. p. 393.
• SINGER, Paul. Budgeting and democracy. In: WILSON, Robert H., CRAMER, Reid (Eds.). International workshop on local governance: second annual proceedings. Austin, TX: LBJ School of Public Affairs, 1996.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  23 Sept 2011
• Date of issue
  Mar 2000