Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America

Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Improved Metropolitan Area Governance

Alan Altshuler, William Morrill, Harold Wolman, and Faith Mitchell, Editors

Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

Transportation Research Board

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Improved Metropolitan Area Governance Alan Altshuler, William Morrill, Harold Wolman, and Faith Mitchell, Editors Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Transportation Research Board National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by the National Research Council. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Governance and opportunity in Metropolitan America / Alan Altshuler [et al.] editors ; Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Improved Metropolitan Area Governance, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-309-06553-4 1. Metropolitan government—United States. 2. State-local relations—United States. 3. Cities and towns—United States. I. Altshuler, Alan A., 1936- II. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Metropolitan Area Governance. JS422 .G68 1999 352.14′0973—dc21  99-6607 Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press , 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Printed in the United States of America Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

OCR for page R1
Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Improved Metropolitan Area Governance 1996-1999 ALAN ALTSHULER (Co-Chair), Taubman Center for State and Local Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University WILLIAM MORRILL (Co-Chair), Mathtech, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey LAWRENCE DAHMS, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Oakland, California MARTHA DERTHICK, Woodrow Wilson Department of Government and Foreign Affairs, University of Virginia ANTHONY DOWNS, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC JAMES GIBSON, DC Agenda and the Urban Institute, Washington, DC GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, School of Policy, Planning and Urban Development, University of Southern California HARRY HOLZER, U.S. Department of Labor and Department of Economics, Michigan State University CHRISTOPHER LEINBERGER, Arcadia Land Company and Robert Charles Lesser and Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico MYRON ORFIELD, Minnesota House of Representatives, St. Paul, Minnesota NEAL PEIRCE, Syndicated Columnist, Washington, DC PAUL PETERSON, Program on Education, Policy and Governance, Harvard University DEBORAH STONE, Intergovernmental Affairs, Cook County, Chicago, Illinois CATHERINE WITHERSPOON, Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, California JULIAN WOLPERT, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University FAITH MITCHELL, Director, Division on Social and Economic Studies, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education STEVEN GODWIN, Director, Studies and Information Services Division, Transportation Research Board JANINE BILYEU, Division Administrative Associate, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (through July 1998) MARGO CULLEN, Division Administrative Associate, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (from August 1998) HAROLD WOLMAN, Consultant

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in. accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS Preface   vii Part I: Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America         Executive Summary   3 1   Introduction   13 2   Central Cities, Suburbs, and Metropolitan-Area Problems   22 3   Disparities in Outcomes   40 4   Strategies for Reducing Disparities   79 5   Recommendations for Research and Policy Choices   116     References   135

OCR for page R1
Part II: In-Depth Perspectives         Does the American Way of Zoning Cause the Suburbs of Metropolitan Areas to be too Spread Out? William A. Fischel   151     Spatial Stratification Within U.S. Metropolitan Areas Ingrid Gould Ellen   192     The Geography of Economic and Social Opportunity in Metropolitan Areas Keith R. Ihlanfeldt   213     Metropolitan Limits: Intrametropolitan Disparities and Governance in U.S. Laboratories of Democracy Michael A. Pagano   253     Regionalism in Transportation and Air Quality: History, Interpretation, and Insights for Regional Governance Martin Wachs and Jennifer Dill   296     Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff   324 Index   331

OCR for page R1
PREFACE The Committee on Improving the Future of U.S. Cities Through Improved Metropolitan Area Governance was charged with examining metropolitan problems and their relationship to metropolitan governance. Determining that the future of U.S. cities merited serious attention by the Academy, the Three Presidents' Committee of the National Research Council (NRC), composed of the presidents of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine, provided funds to support the study. The committee gratefully acknowledges additional support received from the Rockefeller Foundation for its information-gathering activities. The committee's original scope of work and plan of action envisioned a focus on a small number of "problems of metropolitan areas" (transportation, environmental regulation, and residential segregation were suggested); the unifying concern was to be "the extent to which current governance structures contribute to improvements in these areas or exacerbate the problems." The committee's task was thus a logical extension of two previous NRC reports: Urban Change and Poverty (1988) was concerned with demographic and economic trends affecting urban areas and their central cities, and Inner-City Poverty in the United States (1990) focused more intensively on the extent and location of neighborhood poverty and the question of neighborhood effects. Following the original charge, the committee began by making clear that its conception of urban was metropolitan in scope, and therefore we took urban problems to mean metropolitan-area problems. Metropolitan problems were defined as problems affecting the entire metropolitan area or significant parts of it or problems caused by the characteristics of metropolitan areas.

OCR for page R1
It is important to be clear about how the committee formulated its task and what this report attempts and does not attempt to do. The National Research Council provided a general mandate to the committee, with the goal of opening up a new topic for examination that is socially important and could also lay the groundwork for further work in this area. Because the study was internally funded, the committee had considerable flexibility in interpreting this mandate. Charged to develop recommendations directed to the problems of American urban areas in relation to the question of governance, the committee made an early judgment to focus on inequality of opportunity in metropolitan areas, the disparities that result, the causes of these disparities, and the role of governance and the government system in contributing to and, potentially, in solving these problems. The committee's report addresses these problems of inequality of opportunity in metropolitan areas through a review of existing research and knowledge, an assessment of the logic of alternative strategies that have been proposed, a review of research evaluating those that have been tried, and a set of recommendations for research and policy options that reflect its assessment of existing knowledge. The intended audience is the community of scholars and researchers concerned with urban areas and their functioning and informed policy makers who grapple with these issues. The committee is composed of scholars and practitioners from a variety of relevant fields, including economics, political science, education, land use, transportation, the environment, and government. To inform its deliberations, the committee commissioned papers, held workshops, and participated in discussions with its Working Group on Race, Civic Consciousness, and Governance. The committee benefited greatly from a set of papers it commissioned, which served as background for its discussions. These papers, by Ingrid Gould Ellen, William A. Fischel, Keith R. Ihlanfeldt, Michael A. Pagano, and Martin Wachs and Jennifer Dill, constitute the second part of this report. The committee was also assisted by a number of people who attended its workshops. David Burwell, Rails to Trails Conservancy; Elmer Johnson, Kirkland and Ellis; Roger Parks, Indiana University; and David Walker, University of Connecticut, participated in a workshop held in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Participants in the two meetings of the Working Group on Race, Civic Consciousness, and Governance included: Camille Cates Barnett, Research Triangle Institute; Sheri Dunn Berry, National Community Building Network; Angela Blackwell, Rockefeller Foundation; Larry Bobo, University of California, Los Angeles; Dayna Cunningham, Rockefeller Foundation; Michael Dawson, University of Chicago; Ingrid Ellen, Brookings Institution; Christopher Gates, National Civic League; Marilyn Gittell, City University of New York; Otis Johnson, Youth Futures Authority; Keith Lawrence, Rockefeller Foundation; Charles Lee, United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice; Robert Liberty, 1000 Friends of Oregon; Clyde Murphy, Chicago Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Manuel Pastor, Jr., University of California, Santa Cruz; Eduardo

OCR for page R1
Reyes, Office of Council Member Mike Hernandez, Los Angeles; Catherine Ross, Georgia Tech University; Todd Swanstrom, State University of New York, Albany; Katherine Tate, Ohio State University; Phil Thompson, Barnard College; and Margaret Weir, Brookings Institution. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of Part I of this report: John S. Adams, Department of Geography, University of Minnesota; Roy Bahl, School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University; Brian J.L. Berry, School of Social Sciences, University of Texas, Dallas; Ester R. Fuchs, Center for Urban Policy, Barnard College and Columbia University; Royce Hanson, School of Social Sciences, University of Texas, Dallas; Robert P. Inman, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; Laurence Lynn, School of Social Services Administration, University of Chicago; Douglas Massey, Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania; Elinor Ostrom, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University; and Clarence N. Stone, Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland. Although the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, it must be emphasized that responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. ALAN ALTSHULER WILLIAM MORRILL COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.