Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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 arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
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 Wood, A. M.
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. 41, No. 11, 2103-2118 (2004)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000268366

Domesticating Urban Theory? US Concepts, British Cities and the Limits of Cross-national Applications

Andrew M. Wood

Department of Geography, University of Oklahoma, 100 East Boyd Street, SEC 680, Norman, OK 73019-1007, USA. amwood{at}ou.edu.

The efficacy of the urban regime and growth machine concepts beyond the US remains a matter of considerable debate. Some argue that these frameworks retain considerable value so long as they are 'properly' applied and that recent concerns about the limits to these frameworks result from no more than their 'misapplication'. I critically examine this argument through a review of recent work on the mobilisation of business interests in British cities. The central claim is that, even when focused on the 'right' issues and questions, US frameworks quickly exhaust their explanatory capacity. In the context of a widening diversity of alternative approaches, I suggest that it is time to move squarely beyond growth coalition and regime accounts. The paper makes a number of suggestions for ways in which this new phase of theory building might proceed.


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
China InformationHome page
L. J. C. Ma
The State of the Field of Urban China: A Critical Multidisciplinary Overview of the Literature
China Information, November 1, 2006; 20(3): 363 - 389.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J ECON GEOGRHome page
N. A. Phelps and A. Wood
Lost in translation? Local interests, global actors and inward investment regimes
J. Econ. Geogr., August 1, 2006; 6(4): 493 - 515.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]