Understanding Business Improvement Districts: A New Governance Framework

Abstract

What is the current state of research on business improvement districts (BIDs)? What is an appropriate framework for analysis? What are key questions for advancing future BID research? BIDs can be understood best within a network governance framework. The research shows, first, a blurring of the line between the public and private spheres as a result of BIDs; second, BIDs are increasingly important actors in urban governance; third, BIDs engage in collaborative, conflictual, and co‐optative relations with local and state governments; and fourth, difficult accountability and management problems are created by their interdependent relationships with local governments. Future research needs to focus on understanding the role of BIDs in urban governance and assessing their impacts on metropolitan areas, as well as their inherently complicated public accountability and management challenges.

Hizmet İyileştirme Bölgeleri: Türk Yerel Yönetim Sisteminde Uygulama

“…Yukarıda da belirtildiği gibi, HİB yönetimlerinin tek başlarına değil, belediyeler, diğer yönetim birimleri ve bölgelerindeki özel kuruluşlar ile birlikte çalışmaları, yapılan işlerde kimin ne kadar sorumlu olduğunu karmaşıklaştırmaktadır. Morçöl ve Wolf (2010) Gün geçtikçe artan ve gittikçe karmaşıklaşan çağdaş kent sorunlarını belediyelerin, esnafın, esnaf derneklerinin ya da kâr gözet-meyen diğer kuruluşların tek başlarına çözmeleri mümkün değildir. Yeni mekanizmalara ve yeni ortaklıklara ihtiyaç vardır.…”

New Forms of Urban Governance: Business Improvement Districts and the Challenges of Their Introduction in Spain

“…This change poses a huge challenge from the point of view of local governance as it requires tight collaboration between public and private agents, which demands clearly defined and designated powers and responsibilities (Villarejo, 2014). A new model of governance that incorporates these challenges is therefore needed (Morçöl & Wolf, 2010). A new form of public-private collaboration within the sphere of local government has been proliferating in North American cities for over four decades, from where it has spread to many other countries.…”

Resource Orchestration as a Source of a Competitive Advantage for Cities

“…In response, researchers have analyzed the Different Perspectives on City Competitiveness 36 expanded relations of BIDs to their local governments (e.g., Morçöl & Wolf, 2010;Wolf, 2008). These studies indicate that BIDs are both autonomous and interdependent with governments, and suggest that governments are becoming more dependent on BIDs with them taking over more responsibilities for service delivery, and the legal and de facto governmental authority they exercise (Mitchell, 2008).…”

“…The prevalence of collaboration in BID-government relationships might not be surprising, because quite often the two parties share the common purpose of economic revitalization. However, the few studies that have analyzed BID-government relationships usually neglect the public side and focus on the private dimension of the partnership (S. Grossman, 2008 paradigms that examine all for-profit and nonprofit organizations involved in public policy making and service delivery to offer a better understanding of the type of relationships and power differentials among BIDs, between government and BIDs, and the centrality of BIDs in relation to other actors (Lewis, 2010;Morçöl & Patrick, 2006;Morçöl, Vasavada & Kim, 2014;Morçöl & Wolf, 2010;Morçöl & Zimmermann, 2006). Morçöl et al (2014) found in their longitudinal case study in downtown Philadelphia that the director of the BID, the city council, and mayors were the most central actors in the governance network, with the BID director being more central than other legally sanctioned actors.…”

“…Morçöl et al (2014) distinguish: (1) BIDs as tools of governmental policies, i.e., they are merely instruments of government actors, being charged with the implementation of one or more public policy goals (Justice & Goldsmith, 2008); (2) BIDs as private governments, i.e. their commercial interests and power rivals those of local governments because it is usually private organizations, such as chambers of commerce, that create and directly manage them (Baer & Feiock, 2005;Lavery, 1995);or (3) BIDs are actors in urban governance networks shaping collective action and determining public policy goals as one actor in a more complex polycentric system of governance (Morçöl & Wolf, 2010).…”