Strategic geographic targeting (SGT) of community development resources has become increasingly common among cities attempting to enhance the impact of limited community development resources. Through an examination of a unique geographically targeted community development initiative undertaken by the City of Detroit, the author shows that despite environmental changes that made adoption of SGT politically viable, efforts to implement SGT, particularly efficiency-based SGT (EB-SGT), were hampered by political, institutional, and technical factors. The author discusses the likely impact that these factors have on the potential for adopting and successfully implementing EB-SGT as a community development strategy in other cities.
Anderson, M.1964. The Federal Bulldozer: A Critical Analysis of Urban Renewal, 1949-1962. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
2.
Andrews, K.L., T. Forbes-Hogle, Y. Ho, J.S. Myers, D.E. Peterson, M. Stewart, G.J. Wells, A.E. Zamora, J.L. Zgobis, and S.B. Ziff.2005. On Target: A Housing Strategy for Detroit . Ann Arbor, MI: Urban and Regional Planning Program, Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning.
3.
Auger, D.A.1979. "The Politics of Revitalization in Gentrifying Neighborhoods: The Case of Boston’s South End." Journal of the American Planning Association45 (4): 515-22.
4.
Bachrach, P., and M.S. Baratz.1970. Power and Poverty: Theory and Practice . New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
5.
Bennett, L.1997. Neighborhood Politics: Chicago and Sheffield. New York: Garland.
6.
Boehlke, D.2004. Great Neighborhoods, Great City: The Healthy Neighborhoods Approach in Baltimore. Baltimore: Goldseker Foundation.
7.
Bolotin, F.N., and D.L. Cingranelli .1983. "Equity and Urban Policy: The Underclass Hypothesis Revisited." Journal of Politics45 (1): 209-19.
8.
Boyd, M.2008. "Defensive Development: The Role of Racial Conflict in Gentrification." Urban Affairs Review43 (6): 751-76.
9.
Boyle, J., and D. Jacobs.1982. "The Intracity Distribution of Services: A Multivariate Analysis." American Political Science Review76 (2): 371-79.
10.
Brophy, P.C., and K. Burnett.2003. Building a New Framework for Community Development in Weak Market Cities. Denver, CO: Community Development Partnership Network.
11.
City of Detroit Planning & Development Department.1999a. "Housing Detroit Strategic Policies, Part I."Detroit: Author.
12.
City of Detroit Planning & Development Department.1999b. "Housing Detroit Strategic Policies, Part II."Detroit: Author.
13.
City of Detroit Planning & Development Department.2001. "Welcome Home Detroit: Homeownership Policy Initiative for the City of Detroit."Detroit: Author.
14.
City of Detroit Planning & Development Department.2002. "Target Areas for Housing Reinvestment: Towards a Strategy for Housing in Detroit" (Draft). Detroit: Author.
15.
Cortes, A., K. Palm, M. Shipp, C. Smith, and P. Zeiler.1999. A Comprehensive Housing Policy for the City of Detroit. Detroit: Wayne State Univ., College of Urban, Labor, and Metropolitan Affairs.
16.
Davies, J.C., III.1966. Neighborhood Groups and Urban Renewal. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
17.
DeLeon, R.E.1992. "The Urban Antiregime: Progressive Politics in San Francisco ." Urban Affairs Review27 (4): 555-79.
18.
Elkin, S.L.1987. City and Regime in the American Republic. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
19.
Fainstein, N. I., and S. S. Fainstein, eds. 1983. Restructuring the City: The Political Economy of Urban Development. New York : Longman.
20.
Ferman, B.1996. Challenging the Growth Machine: Neighborhood Politics in Chicago and Pittsburgh. Studies in Government and Public Policy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
21.
Highsmith, A.R.2009. "Demolition Means Progress." Journal of Urban History35 (3): 348-68.
22.
Hunter, F.1953. Community Power Structure: A Study of Decision-Makers . Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press.
23.
Jenkins, W.D.2001. "Before Downtown." Journal of Urban History27 (4): 471-96.
24.
Jones, B.1985. Governing Buildings and Building Government: A New Perspective on the Old Party. Tuscaloosa: Univ. of Alabama Press.
25.
Jones, B.D., S.R. Greenberg, C. Kaufman, and J. Drew.1978. "Service Delivery Rules and the Distribution of Local Government Services: Three Detroit Bureaucracies." Journal of Politics40 (2): 332-68.
26.
Koehler, D.H., and M.T. Wrightson.1987. "Inequality in the Delivery of Urban Services: A Reconsideration of the Chicago Parks." Journal of Politics49 (1): 80-99.
27.
Lee, A., and D. Josar.2007. "Neighborhood Fix-It Plan-Mayor Wants $225 Million to Clean Up 6 Areas." Detroit News, May 16, 1A.
28.
Levy, F., A. Meltsner, and A. Wildavsky.1974. Urban Outcomes: Schools, Streets, and Libraries. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
29.
Linberry, R.L.1977. Equality and Urban Policy: The Distribution of Municipal Public Services. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
30.
Lipsky, M.1968. "Protest as a Political Resource." American Political Science Review62 (4): 1144-58.
31.
MacDonald, C.2010. "Bing: I’ll Move Some Residents."Detroit News, February 25, A4.
32.
Mallach, A.2008. Managing Neighborhood Change: A Framework for Sustainable and Equitable Revitalization. Montclair, NJ: National Housing Institute.
33.
Martin, L.2007. "Fighting for Control: Political Displacement in Atlanta’s Gentrifying Neighborhoods." Urban Affairs Review42 (5): 603-28.
34.
Miranda, R.A., and I. Tunyavong.1994. "Patterned Inequality? Reexamining the Role of Distributive Politics in Urban Service Delivery." Urban Affairs Review29 (4): 509-34.
35.
Mladenka, K.R.1978. "Organizational Rules, Service Equality, and Distributional Decisions in Urban Politics." Social Science Quarterly59 (1): 192-201.
36.
Mladenka, K.R.1980. "The Urban Bureaucracy and the Chicago Political Machine: Who Gets What and the Limits to Political Control." American Political Science Review74 (4): 991-98.
37.
Mladenka, K.R., and K.Q. Hill.1978. "The Distribution of Urban Police Services ." Journal of Politics40 (1): 112-33.
38.
Molotch, H.1976. "The City as Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place." American Journal of Sociology82 (September): 309-32.
39.
Mossberger, K., and G. Stoker.2001. "The Evolution of Urban Regime Theory: The Challenge of Conceptualization." Urban Affairs Review36 (6): 810-35.
40.
Next Detroit Neighborhood Initiative.2007 . "Brightmoor Work Plan." Detroit: Author.
41.
Palen, J. J., and B. London, eds. 1985. Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
42.
Peterson, P.E.1981. City Limits. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
43.
Purcell, M. ( 1997). Ruling Los Angeles: Neighborhood movements, urban regimes, and the production of space in southern California. Urban Geography18(8), 684-704.
Schill, M.H., and R.P. Nathan.1984. Revitalizing America’s Cities: Neighborhood Reinvestment and Displacement. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
46.
Sites, W.1997. "The Limits of Urban Regime Theory: New York City under Koch, Dinkins, and Giuliani." Urban Affairs Review32 (4): 536-57.
47.
Spiers, J.H.2009. "‘Planning with People’: Urban Renewal in Boston’s Washington Park, 1950-1970."Journal of Planning History8 (3): 221-47.
48.
Steger, M.A.1984. "Group Influence Versus Decision-Making Rules: An Analysis of Local CDBG Allocational Decisions." Urban Affairs Review19 (3): 373-94.
49.
Stoecker, R., and A. Vakil.2000. "States, Cultures, and Community Organizing: Two Tales of Two Neighborhoods." Journal of Urban Affairs22 (4): 439-58.
50.
Stone, C.N.1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta 1946-1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
51.
Stone, C.N.2004. "It’s More Than the Economy After All: Continuing the Debate About Urban Regimes." Journal of Urban Affairs26 (1): 1-19.
52.
Stone, C.N.2005. "Looking Back to Look Forward: Reflections on Urban Regime Analysis." Urban Affairs Review40 (3): 309-41.
Thomson, D.E.2008. "Strategic, Geographic Targeting of Housing and Community Development Resources: A Conceptual Framework and Critical Review." Urban Affairs Review43 (5): 629-62.
55.
Wong, K.K., and P.E. Peterson.1986. "Urban Response to Federal Program Flexibility: Politics of Community Development Block Grant." Urban Affairs Review21 (3): 293-309.
