Faced with the imminent loss of its industrial base, Detroit undertook the Central Industrial Park Project to prepare a site for a proposed General Motors assembly plant. By recalculating the benefits and costs involved in that project, this article raises questions concerning the appropriateness of using benefit cost analysis as the sole determinant of local redevelopment policy, and offers a framework for understanding community power in the light of the experiences of Detroit. Rejecting pluralist and reformist notions of community power that focus on who directly benefits, this article suggests that the locus of community power rests with those factions in the community that succeed in maximizing their potential for future gain. Furthermore, any examination of community power at any given moment must also include an analysis of past outcomes. The range of possible outcomes in the present is constrained by the nature of past confrontations between factions within the community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BACHRACH, P. and M. BARATZ (1962) "The two faces of power."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.56: 947-952.
2.
BACHRACH, P. and M. BARATZ (1963) "Decision and nondecision."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.57: 632-642.
3.
BACHRACH, P. and M. BARATZ (1970) Power and Poverty, Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
4.
BALBUS, I. (1971) "The concept of interest in pluralist and Marxian analysis."Politics and Society1, 2: 151-177.
5.
CASTELLS, M. (1972) City, Class and Power. New York: St. Martin's.
6.
CASTELLS, M. (1977) The Urban Question. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
CONNOLLY, W. (1972) "On `interests' in politics."Politics and Society2: 459-477.
8.
COX, K. (1973) Conflict, Power and Politics in the City. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
CROCKER, T. D. (1975) "Cost benefit analysis of cost benefit analysis," pp. 341-359 in H. M. Peskin and E. P. Seskin (eds.) Cost Benefit Analysis and Water Pollution Policy. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
10.
DAHL, R. A. (1958) "A critique of the ruling elite model."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.52: 463-469.
11.
DAHL, R. A. (1961) Who Governs?New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
12.
DAHL, R. A. (1972) Democracy In The United States. Chicago: Rand McNally.
13.
Detroit, The City of (n.d.) "Employment plan for the central industrial park project." Submitted to the Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce by Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
14.
Detroit, The City of (1980a) "Scoping document for the proposed central industrial park project." August 29, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
15.
Detroit, The City of (1980b) "Funding approval under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974." Submitted to HUD, September 2, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
16.
Detroit, The City of (1980c) "Emergency request for alternative arrangements under section 1506.11 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969." Submitted to the Council on Environmental Quality, September 10, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
17.
Detroit, The City of (1980d) "Amendment to the funding approval under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974." Submitted to HUD, November 24, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
18.
Detroit, The City of (1980e) "Environmental impact statement: central industrial park, the cities of Detroit and Hamtramack, MI."December, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
19.
Detroit, The City of (1981a) "Request for and reservation of program funds." Application to the Economic Development Agency of the Department of Commerce. September, Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
20.
Detroit, The City of (1981b) "Standard federal assistance report." Submitted to the Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation by Detroit Community Economic Development Department.
21.
DOMHOFF, G. W. (1978) Who Really Rules?New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
22.
DUNLEAVY, P. (1976) "An issue centered approach to the study of power."Pol. Studies24: 423-434.
23.
EWEN, L. A. (1978) Corporate Power and Urban Crises in Detroit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
24.
FASENFEST, D. (1984)"Benefit-cost analysis: an evaluation tool for urban redevelopment." Presented at the Midwest Sociological Society Meetings, Chicago.
25.
FISCHOFF, B. (1977) "Cost benefit analysis and the art of motorcycle maintenance "Policy Sciences8: 177-202.
26.
FREY F. (1971) "Comment: on issues and nonissues in the study of politics."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.65, 4: 1081-1101.
27.
General Motors Corporation (1981) "Central industrial park project development agreement between General Motors Corporation as developer and the central industrial park project joint venture." Final, April 30.
28.
GORDON, D. (1977) "Capitalism and the roots of the urban crises," pp. 82-112 in R. E. Alcaly and D. Mermelstein (eds.) The Fiscal Crises in American Cities. New York: Vintage.
29.
GRAAFF, J. de V. (1975) "Cost benefit analysis: a critical view."South African J. of Economics43: 233-244.
30.
HARVEY, D. (1973) Social Justice of the City. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
31.
HARVEY, D. (1978a) "The urban process under capitalism."Int. J. of Urban and Regional Research2: 101-131.
32.
HARVEY, D. (1978b) "Labor, capital and class struggle around the built environment in advanced capitalist societies," in K. Cox (ed.) Urbanization and Conflict in Market Societies. Chicago: Maaroufa Press.
33.
HETTICH, W. (1976) "Distribution in cost-benefit analysis: a review of theoretical issues."Public Finance Q.4, 2: 123-150.
34.
HILL, R. C. (1978) "At the crossroads: the political economy of postwar Detroit."Urbanism Past and Present6: 2-21.
35.
HILL, R. C. (1981) "Economic crisis and political response in the motor city." Presented at the Conference on Economic Crisis and Political Response in the Auto City: Detroit and Turin, December 10-13, Detroit.
36.
JONES, B. D. and L. W. BACHELOR (1984) "Local policy discretion and the corporate surplus," pp. 245-267 in R. Bingham and J. Blair (eds.) Urban Economic Development. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
37.
LUKES, S. (1974) Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan.
38.
MILLS, C. W. (1956) The Power Elite. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
39.
MUSGRAVE, R. and P. MUSGRAVE (1980) Public Finance in Theory and Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
40.
NASH, C. , D. PEARCE, and J. STANLEY (1975) "An evaluation of cost-benefit criteria."Scottish J. of Pol. Economy22: 121-134.
41.
NEWTON, K. (1969) "A critique of the pluralist model."Acta Sociologica12,4:221-236.
42.
NEWTON, K. (1975) "American urban politics: social class, political structure and public goods."Urban Affairs Q.11: 241-264.
43.
NEWTON, K. (1982) "Is small really so beautiful? Is big really so ugly? Size, effectiveness and democracy in local government."Pol. Studies30, 2: 190-206.
44.
OPPENHEIMER, F. (1975) "Self-interest and political interest."Pol. Theory3: 259-276.
45.
POLSBY, N. (1968) "Community: the study of community power."Int. Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences3: 157-163.
46.
POLSBY, N. (1980) Community Power and Political Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
47.
SAUNDERS, P. (1979) Urban Politics: A Sociological Interpretation. New York: Penguin.
48.
STONE, C. N. (1980) "Systematic power in community decision making: a restatement of stratification theory."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.74, 4: 978-990.
49.
WHITE, D. M. (1972) "The problem of power."British J. of Pol. Sci.2: 479-490.
50.
WOLFINGER, R. E. (1971a) "Nondecisions and the study of local politics."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.65, 4: 1063-1080.
51.
WOLFINGER, R. E. (1971b) "Rejoinder to Frey's `comment.' "Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.65, 4: 1102-1104.
