Participatory Bias and Participatory Neighborhood Governance: Reanalyzing the Most-Likely Case of the Stockholm Neighborhood Renewal Program

7Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Strategies for revitalizing marginalized neighborhoods often include participatory innovations. According to the participatory bias argument, however, participatory governance arrangements benefit the privileged rather than the poor. In the present article, the validity of this argument is examined by analyzing how individual resources and social positions relates to recruitment to, participation within, and outcomes derived from participation in a most-likely case of bias in participatory neighborhood governance. Although the privileged were overrepresented in recruitment, the pattern was less clear regarding influence within the processes, and quite the opposite regarding certain outcomes of participation. Also in a most-likely case for bias, participatory neighborhood governance may induce empowerment among poor. Based on the observation that participants that differ with regard to available resources and social positions also have different motives for participation, a mechanism-based account regarding why and how bias in early phases under certain conditions may produce empowering outcomes is proposed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hertting, N. (2024). Participatory Bias and Participatory Neighborhood Governance: Reanalyzing the Most-Likely Case of the Stockholm Neighborhood Renewal Program. Urban Affairs Review, 60(2), 674–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874231203919

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free