Regime Network Restructuring in Akron, Ohio, 1975–2009: A Longitudinal Social Network Analysis

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impacts of extra-local economic and political forces on the business community participants of the governing regime coalition in Akron, Ohio, and in turn, how other regime partners responded to and engaged with the changing constitution of Akron's business community. Unlike the UK where municipalities receive substantial fiscal support from regional and national governments, American cities are more readily forced into regime partnerships with other public and private actors for fiscal solvency, including, primarily, the local business community. In the case of Akron, the local business community experienced a prolonged and ongoing period of comprehensive deindustrialization and economic restructuring, forcing the city into partnerships with less traditional non-private sector actors as Akron's business community structure continues to transform. A secondary objective is to forward the utility of social network analysis in regime theory applications. Social network analysis offers a way to situate arguably the most influential actors in a regime coalition. Utilizing the directories of Standard and Poor's Index of Corporations and Directors from 1975 through 2006, social network analysis is performed on the interlocking network of corporations and civic organizations based in Akron for each decade, allowing a longitudinal view of the changing business community partners of Akron's governing coalition.A fter more than two decades of prominence, urban regime theory remains at the forefront in analyses of urban politics and urban political restructuring due in large part to its grounding in political economy, its ability to convey the complexities of urban politics, and its continuing emphases on coalition building and maintenance including examinations of the various constituent parts comprising urban coalitions (de

Explaining “Power to”

“…This process developed in three stages, which broadly recall the classic model of dispute emergence (Felstiner et al 1980): a naming process, which led to a clear perception of the critical situation of the city; a blaming process against the past urban politics, through which a narrative of the causes and responsibilities was framed; and a claiming process, which produced some core beliefs and some key purposes for a shared goal. These findings also offer empirical evidence on the theoretically and empirically underdeveloped issue of localism in urban regimes (De Socio 2012). In fact, the incubation process in Turin had clear localist traits, as the protagonists were local and the framing process was also focused on local dynamics.…”

E-Participation, Rural Regime, and Network Governance: A Case of Balien River Conservation

“…This method emphasizing the collaboration among different interests and actors is very similar to the concept RT and can visualize the power structure of a regime [9]. Recently, several RT studies have used social network analysis to analyze the power structure and the interaction among stakeholders because a regime is multilevel networks interlocking actors from the state, market, and civic institutions [9,39,40].…”