Search

American cities vary considerably in the degree to which they pursue sustainability. What explains this variation? One plausible cause of such differences is that sustainability may be more appealing to high-income cities than to more economically challenged cities. Yet such strict economic determinism seems simplistic and removes politics from an inherently political process. The hypothesis here is that any such relationship between income and commitment to sustainability is conditioned by a city's level of environmental advocacy. The data utilized in this analysis are derived from two large-scale data sources. One is a comprehensive inventory of sustainability programs and policies in 50 large American cities. The other is a set of surveys in those same 50 cities. The multivariate model supports the hypothesis. Controlling for income growth and the predisposition of policymakers to be supportive of sustainability (as well as other alternative explanations), a city's commitment to sustainability is strongly linked to the advocacy of environmental and sustainability groups in the policymaking process. The example of Sustainable Seattle is used to illustrate the linkages that would seem to underlie the statistical analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are approximately 800,000 501(c)(3) nonprofits large enough to register with the federal government. Add churches, foundations, and nonprofits too small to register, and the number is far higher than that. The potential for nonprofits to engage their clients and members in community affairs and public policy making is, in theory, enormous. Yet, perversely, nonprofits are regulated by the federal government in such a way that discourages the involvement of their followers in the public policymaking process. This is a problem, not simply because we social scientists believe civic engagement is a good thing, but because these regulatory standards sharply skew public participation. Although middle- and upper-class individuals have many organizations that engage and mobilize them, nonprofits usually are the only organizations that work on behalf of the poor, those without health insurance, immigrants, the disabled, and most other marginalized constituencies. Put bluntly, federal law works against the participation of the most disadvantaged in society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigates alternative regulatory reform proposals which could lead to greater citizens group control over regulatory policy making. Citizens groups' problems of maintaining largescale lobbying efforts; Long-term rewards for accomplishing deregulation; Unwillingness to play the Congressional logrolling game; Cost and benefits of citizen group organizations; Expected expansion of citizen participation programs.