Abstract
Even as some observers criticise its insularity and excessive dependence on political economy approaches, urban politics research has recently witnessed a profusion of studies employing cultural methods. This paper will review how researchers have used cultural methods in explaining political outcomes. It will argue that, in the US context, a sub-cultural model based on a traditionalism/non-traditionalism dichotomy offers greater potential than other approaches to account effectively for progressive strategies which seem illogical within a political economy framework. Finally, it explains how growing non-traditionalism and the global economy jointly explain the increasing acceptability of progressive development among both urban residents and corporate interests in US post-industrial cities. The paper illustrates these claims by applying this framework to development outcomes in Seattle and Las Vegas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
