What do we know about urban sustainability? A research synthesis and nonparametric assessment

Public Administration Review

Hatch

Stokan

2020

Self Cite

COVID‐19 is exposing a nexus between communities disproportionately suffering from underlying health conditions, policy‐reinforced disparities, and susceptibility to the disease. As the virus spreads, policy responses will need to shift from focusing on surveillance and mitigation to recovery and prevention. Local governments, with their histories of mutual aid and familiarity with local communities, are capable of meeting these challenges. However, funding must flow in a flexible enough fashion for local governments to tailor their efforts to preserve vital services and rebuild local economies. The authors argue that the Community Development Block Grant and the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant programs are mechanisms for providing funds in a manner that is adaptable to local context while also focusing on increasing social equity. Administrators must emphasize the fourth pillar of public administration—social equity—in framing government responses to the pandemic.

Section: Federal Government Fiscal Stimulus and Social Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

How Can Local Governments Address Pandemic Inequities?

Public Administration Review

Hatch

Stokan

2020

Self Cite

“…Some local government scholars argue city officials gradually adopted more of an interest in sustainability, in terms of balancing economic development motives with environmental and social equity concerns, due to federal inaction on issues such as climate change, the growing salience of problems, as well as the potential for reputational gains, or better "branding" for their communities (Fiorino 2018;Hughes 2019;Portney 2013). This awakening has coincided with greater public awareness and concern with social equity and environmental sustainability, as well as recognition that sustainability presents the potential for substantial, internalizable co-benefits within communities (Krause 2011;Swann and Deslatte 2019;Wang et al 2012). For example, investments in activities with positive community spillovers, such as job training, small-business loans or grants, community development programs, energy audits, or other environmental sustainability initiatives, have become more desirable in recent years (Berry and Portney 2013;Opp and Saunders 2013;Yi, Krause, and Feiock 2017).…”

Section: Factors Driving Differential Economic Development Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Trade-Offs Local Governments Make in the Pursuit of Economic Growth and Equity

Stokan

Hatch

2020

Urban Affairs Review

Self Cite

Economic development at the municipal level often necessitates that local governments make trade-offs between firm- and locality-based strategies. In recent decades, economic development researchers have described these efforts over time as exhibiting certain patterns and metaphors: as a series of waves, as embodying a type of lock-in effect, and as a policy layering process; however, the mechanisms behind these patterns remain unclear. This article draws upon 30 years of economic development policy decision making across the United States to understand what leads local governments to prioritize growth- or equity-oriented policies. We find that equity-enhancing economic development policies are more likely when local governments face less competitive pressure, have greater resource capacities, and experience greater intergovernmental involvement in the economic development planning process. Leveraging these factors can aid governments as they struggle to navigate a more sustainable path toward growth and equity.

“…Questions about whether our federal system is up to the challenge are only going to grow louder as these threats multiply (Adolph et al, 2020; Haffajee & Mello, 2020; Perez & Ross, 2020b). Although thousands of local governments around the world, and hundreds within the United States, have started engaging in climate action, resilience or sustainability planning (Deslatte & Swann, 2020; Hawkins et al, 2016; Swann & Deslatte, 2019; Yi et al, 2017), hardly any of them attempts to identify social vulnerabilities within their jurisdictions. This is despite readily available tools such as the CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index.…”

Section: Discussion and Conclusion: Speaking Truth To Power And Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

The Erosion of Trust During a Global Pandemic and How Public Administrators Should Counter It

The American Review of Public Administration

2020

Self Cite

This article argues that public administrators must advance a more equity-based assessment of vulnerabilities in American communities and more risk-based communication strategies. It provides an overview of partisan motivated reasoning, how this has influenced the response to the coronavirus pandemic. Experimental evidence then demonstrates how the framing of the pandemic can influence trust in various public messengers. The coronavirus pandemic is merely one of the many exigent threats humanity faces today. Public administrators are the planners, engineers, analysts, auditors, lawyers, and managers on the front lines of these existential crises. It is their job to sift through the information environment and—however boundedly—tackle problems. For the sake of the American democracy, public administrators need to regain the people’s trust. They could start by leveling with them about the challenges ahead.