Urban Governance and Business Improvement Districts: The Washington, DC BIDs

Toronto’s Little Portugal: gentrification and social relations among local entrepreneurs

“…Didier, Morange, and Peyroux (2013) argued that BIAs are often evoked in debates on the reconfiguration of urban governance. Previous studies in this regard have been conducted from various theoretical perspectives ranging from new regionalism (Wolf, 2006) to network governance theory (Morçöl & Zimmerman, 2006); political economy (Ward, 2006), governmentality, and surveillance studies (Lippert, 2009) have also been conducted.…”

Understanding Business Improvement Districts: A New Governance Framework

“…Also, the sunset provisions in many state enabling laws require that BID charters be renewed by local governments periodically. Some local governments do use their oversight authorities seriously, but in most other cases, annual BID reports and sunset provisions are mere formalities that local governments ignore (Morçöl and Patrick 2008; Morçöl and Zimmermann 2008b; Wolf 2006). In some cases, BIDs use their legal reporting obligations to engage city governments and to put issues on their agendas (Wolf 2008).…”

The Business Improvement District Model: A Balanced Review of Contemporary Debates

“…While the specific provisions vary within the United States and internationally, some evidence of support by the property owners is generally a prerequisite for the establishment and continuation of BIDs. Moreover, BIDs are increasingly sharing role identities, operating strategies, and organizational cultures that indicate that they are becoming institutionalized at an international level (Gross 2005; Houstoun 2003; Hoyt 2006; Mitchell 2001; Wolf 2006). Finally, recent case studies demonstrate that the BID model is a successful intervention in a range of contexts.…”

“…Although the BID model is a topic of interest to scholars in a variety of disciplines ranging from geography, to urban planning, to public administration, tracing its origins and explaining its subsequent transfer is difficult due to the absence of standard naming conventions, the potpourri of BID and BID-like organizations, and the lack of systematic adoption patterns in countries like the United States where the model is most prevalent (Brooks 2006;Hoyt 2005c). Despite these challenges, urban scholars link the growth of American BIDs to several socioeconomic and political factors such as the decline of city centers and town centers; urban sprawl aided by the development of an extensive highway network; growth and proliferation of new retail forms and environments; inability of the local governments to meet organizational and financial challenges due to declining tax base; and a shift to the use of public-private partnerships for urban revitalization (Gopal-Agge and Hoyt 2007;Briffault 1999;Burayidi 2001;Greenblatt 2006;Houstoun 2003;Lloyd et al 2003;Wolf 2006). Similar explanations are used to describe the rise and proliferation of BIDs in Canada (Hernandez andJones 2005, 2007), the UK (Lloyd et al 2003;Page and Hardyman 1996;Reeve 2007), and other countries although the specific underlying sociopolitical and economic conditions causing decline varies from country to country (Hoyt 2006).…”