Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wolman, H. L.
Right arrow Articles by Hill, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 31, No. 6, 835-850 (1994)
DOI: 10.1080/00420989420080701
© 1994 Urban Studies Journal Limited

Evaluating the Success of Urban Success Stories

Harold L. Wolman

College of Urban, Labor and Metropolitan Affairs, and the Department of Political Science, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202, USA

Coit Cook Ford

College of Urban, Labor and Metropolitan Affairs, and the Department of Political Science, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202, USA

Edward Hill

Department of Urban Studies, College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH 44115, USA

Arresting and reversing the condition of urban distress in America's cities represents one of the most challenging and perplexing problems confronting policy-makers. Indeed, urban distress in American cities has proved to be a stubborn and largely intractable phenomenon during the past two decades. Nevertheless, a number of cities that were experiencing distress at the beginning of the 1980s are now being acclaimed as 'urban success stories' or 'revitalised' cities. We evaluate the performance, between 1980 and 1990, of these supposedly 'revitalised' cities on objective indicators of the economic well-being of their residents and compare their performance to that other cities that were equally distressed in 1980. We conclude that with the exception of Atlanta, Baltimore and Boston, the purportedly 'revitalised' cities performed no better with respect to change in the economic well-being of their residents than did other cities that were equally distressed in 1980—and in many cases performed worse.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Economic Development QuarterlyHome page
G. A. Erickcek and H. McKinney
"Small Cities Blues:" Looking for Growth Factors in Small and Medium-Sized Cities
Economic Development Quarterly, August 1, 2006; 20(3): 232 - 258.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
M. Orr and D. M. West
Citizens' Views on Urban Revitalization: The Case of Providence, Rhode Island
Urban Affairs Review, January 1, 2002; 37(3): 397 - 419.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning LiteratureHome page
E. Talen
Do Plans Get Implemented? A Review of Evaluation in Planning
Journal of Planning Literature, February 1, 1996; 10(3): 248 - 259.
[Abstract]


Home page
Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
E. W. Hill, H. L. Wolman, and C. C. Ford III
Can Suburbs Survive without their Central Cities?: Examining the Suburban Dependence Hypothesis
Urban Affairs Review, November 1, 1995; 31(2): 147 - 174.
[Abstract]


Home page
Current SociologyHome page
References
Current Sociology, June 1, 1995; 43(1): 206 - 214.