Urban Problem Discourses: Understanding the Distinctiveness of Cities

REFERENCES

• Atkinson, R. (1999). Discourses of partnership and empowerment in contemporary British urban regeneration. Urban Studies, 36, 59–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, policy and politics: The construction of policy problems. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Bacchi, C. (2012). Why study problematizations? Making politics visible. Open Journal of Political Science, 2, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56, 947–952.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1963). Decisions and nondecisions: An analytical framework. American Political Science Review, 57, 632–642.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, D. A., & de-Shalit, A. (2011). The spirit of cities: Why the identity of a city matters in a global age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, W. (2002). The arcades project. Translated by H. Eiland & K. McLaughlin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benzler, S., & Heinelt, H. (1991). Stadt und Arbeitslosigkeit: Örtliche Arbeitsmarktpolitik im Vergleich. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Berking, H. (2012). The distinctiveness of cities: Outline of a research programme. Urban Research and Practice, 5, 316–324.
   Google Scholar
• Boddy, M., & Parkinson, M. (Eds.). (2004). City matters. Competitiveness, cohesion and urban governance. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N. (2004). New state spaces: Urban governance and the rescaling of statehood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2, 201–215.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, J. S. (2002). Urban regime theory: A normative-empirical critique. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24, 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. (1988). Foucault. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denters, B., & Mossberger, K. (2006). Building blocks for a methodology for comparative urban political research. Urban Affairs Review, 41, 550–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dery, D. (1984). Problem definition in policy analysis. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Digeser, P. (1992). The fourth face of power. Journal of Politics, 54, 977–1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreyfus, H. L., & Rabinow, P. (1982). Michel Foucault. Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edmondson, R., & Nullmeier, F. (1997). Knowledge, rhetoric, and political action in context. In R. Edmondson (Ed.), The political context of collective action: Power, argumentation, and democracy (pp. 210–238). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Elkin, S. L. (1987). City and regime in the American republic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy. Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (Eds.). (1993). The argumentative turn in policy-analysis and planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F., & Gottweis, H. (Eds.). (2012). The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
   Google Scholar
• Gehring, P., & Großmann, A. (2014). Constructing discursive differences: Towards a “logic” of cities. Historical Social Research, 39, 103–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M., & Duncan, S. (1986). The local state and local economic policy: Political mobilisation or economic regeneration. Capital and Class, 9, 14–36.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M., Duncan, S., & Halford, S. (1993). Regulation theory, the local state and transition of urban politics. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 11, 67–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregory, D., & Urry, J. (Eds.). (1985). Social relations and spatial structures. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2002). On creating the “city” as a collective resource. Urban Studies, 39, 1777–1792.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy, P. (1986). Interpretive policy inquiry: A response to the limitation of the received view. Policy Sciences, 19, 381–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann, S. L. (2009). Policy debates on reprogenetics: The problematisation of new research in Great Britain and Germany. Frankfurt: Campus.
   Google Scholar
• Hibbert, C. (1969). London: The biography of a city. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Hibbert, C. (1985). Rome: The biography of a city. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Hibbert, C. (1993). Florence: Biography of a city. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Hoppe, R. (2011). The governance of problems: Puzzling, powering, participation. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howarth, D. (2000). Discourse. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howarth, D. (2010). Power, discourse, and policy: Articulating a hegemony approach to critical policy studies. Critical Policy Studies, 3, 309–335.
   Google Scholar
• Howarth, D., & Stavrakakis, Y. (2000). Introducing discourse theory and political analysis. In D. Howarth, A. Norval, & Y. Stavrakakis (Eds.), Discourse theory and political analysis: Identities, hegemonies and social change (pp. 1–37). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Imbroscio, D. L. (2003). Overcoming the neglect of economics in urban regime theory. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25, 271–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, K. (2006). Discourse analysis and its utility for urban policy research. Urban Policy and Research, 24, 39–52.
   Google Scholar
• Jeffares, S. (2007). Why public policy ideas catch on: Empty signifiers and flourishing neighbourhoods. Birmingham: Institute of Local Government Studies, University of Birmingham.
   Google Scholar
• Jessop, B. (1997). A neo-Gramscian approach to the regulation of urban regimes: Accumulation strategies, hegemonic projects, and governance. In M. Lauria (Ed.), Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy (pp. 51–73). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• John, P., & Cole, A. (2000). When do institutions, policy sectors, and cities matter? Comparing networks of local policy makers in Britain and France. Comparative Political Studies, 33, 248–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Galès, P. (2002). European cities: Social conflicts and governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lindner, R. (2006). The gestalt of the urban imaginary. European Studies, 23, 35–42.
   Google Scholar
• Loseke, D. R. (2003). Thinking about social problems: An introduction to constructionist perspectives. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Löw, M. (2012). The intrinsic logic of cities: Towards a new theory on urbanism. Urban Research and Practice, 5, 303–315.
   Google Scholar
• Löw, M. (2013). The city as experiential space: The production of shared meaning. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37, 894–908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukes, S. (2005 [1974]). Power: A radical view. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Education.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, K. (1984). Reconsidering the image of the city. In L. Rodwin & R. M. Hollister (Eds.), Cities of the mind (pp. 151–161). New York: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Matthiesen, U., & Reisinger, E. (2011). The zone of knowledge transactions: Recent tendencies in knowledge production, knowledge sharing and the trading of knowledge from a socio-spatial perspective. In R. Atkinson, G. Terizakis, & K. Zimmermann (Eds.), Sustainability in European environmental policy: Challenges of governance and knowledge (pp. 94–114). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Molotch, H. (1976). The city as a growth machine: Toward a political economy of place. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 309–332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molotch, H., Freudenburg, W., & Paulsen, K. E. (2000). History repeats itself, but how? City character, urban tradition, and the accomplishment of place. American Sociological Review, 65, 791–823.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierre, J. (2005). Comparative urban governance: Uncovering complex causalities. Urban Affairs Review, 40, 446–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, T., & Jensen, O. B. (2003). Linking discourse and space: Towards a cultural sociology of space in analysing spatial policy discourses. Urban Studies, 40, 7–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (1993). Problem definition, agenda access, and policy choice. Policy Studies Journal, 21, 56–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savage, M., Barlow, J., Duncan, S., & Saunders, P. (1987). Locality research: The Sussex Program on Economic Restructuring, social change and the locality. Quarterly Journal of Social Affairs, 3, 27–51.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab-Trapp, M. (2004). Methodische Aspekte der Diskursanalyse. Probleme der Analyse diskursiver Auseinandersetzungen am Beispiel der deutschen Diskussion über den Kosovokrieg. In R. Keller, A. Hirseland, W. Schneider, & W. Viehöver (Eds.), Handbuch Sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse. Vol. 2: Forschungspraxis. 2. edition (pp. 169–195). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz-Shea, P., & Yanow, D. (2012). Interpretive research design: Concepts and processes. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, C. N. (1989). Regime politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946–1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, C. N. (2004a). It’s more than the economy after all: Continuing the debate about urban regimes. Journal of Urban Affairs, 26, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, C. N. (2004b). Rejoinder: Multiple imperatives, or some thoughts about governance in a loosely coupled but stratified society. Journal of Urban Affairs, 26, 35–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104, 281–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. (1997). Neither global nor local: “Glocalization” and the politics of scale. In K. R. Cox (Ed.), Spaces of globalization: Reasserting the power of the local (pp. 137–166). New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J., Evans, K., & Fraser, P. (1996). A tale of two cities: Global change, local feeling, and everyday life in the north of England: A study in Manchester and Sheffield. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Throgmorton, J. A. (1991). The rhetorics of policy analysis. Policy Sciences, 24, 153–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Hulst, M. J. (2008). Quite an experience: Using ethnography to study local governance. Critical Policy Analysis, 2, 143–159.
   Google Scholar
• Wagenaar, H. (2011). Meaning in action: Interpretation and dialogue in policy analysis. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. (1952). Philosophische Untersuchungen. In Werkausgabe in 8 Bänden. Vol. 1. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretive policy analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, K. (2012). Eigenlogik of cities: Introduction to the themed section. Urban Research and Practice, 5, 299–302.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, K., Barbehön, M., & Münch, S. (2014). Eigenlogik der Städte: Ein fachdisziplinärer Beitrag zur Diskussion. Leviathan, 42, 163–173.
   Google Scholar