¹ See inter alia, Hall, Peter, The World Cities, 3rd edn (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984), chap. 1Google Scholar; Pickvance, Chris and Preteceille, Edmond, State Restructuring and Local Power: A Comparative Analysis (London: Pinter, 1991), chap. 8Google Scholar; Wolman, Harold and Ledebur, L., The National Context for Urban Economic Development, Urban Working Paper No. 1 (Paris: OECD, 1985).Google Scholar

² These are the conclusions of Pickvance, Chris and Preteceille, Edmond, State Restructuring and Local Power, p. 214.Google Scholar

³ Hall, Peter, ‘Urban Growth and Decline in Western Europe’, in Dogan, Mattei and Kasard, John D., The Metropolitan Era, Vol. I: A World of Giant Cities (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1984), pp. 114–23Google Scholar; see also, Hall, Peter and Hay, Dennis, Growth Centres in the European Urban System (London: Heinemann, 1980).Google Scholar

⁴ In particular, Chesire, Paul, Hay, Dennis and Carbonaro, Gianni, ‘A Survey of Urban Areas in the EEC: Problems of Decline and Growth, 1971–75–81 (Interim Report No. 3.i, Joint Centre for Land Development Studies, Faculty of Urban and Regional Studies, University of Reading, 1984).Google Scholar

⁵ Hall, , ‘Urban Growth and Decline’, Table 4.3.Google Scholar

⁶ Hall, , ‘Urban Growth and Decline’, Table 4.3.Google Scholar

⁷ See, in particular, Chesire, Paul, Carbonara, Gianni and Hay, Dennis, ‘Problems of Urban Decline and Growth in EEC Countries: Or Measuring Degrees of Elephantness’, Urban Studies, 23 (1986), 131–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chesire, Paul, ‘Explaining the Recent Performance of the European Community's Urban Regions’, Urban Studies, 27 (1990), 311–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Chesire, , Carbonara, and Hay, , ‘Problems of Urban Decline’, pp. 135–9.Google Scholar

⁹ Chesire, , Carbonara, and Hay, , ‘Problems of Urban Decline’, Fig. 2. p. 141.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See, in particular, Chesire, , ‘Explaining the Recent Performance of the European Community’s Major Urban Regions’.Google Scholar

¹¹ Between 1963 and 1981 West Germany's population increased from 55.4 million to 61.7 million; Britain's increased from 53.6 million to 56.2 million in the same period (United Nations, United Nations Statistical Yearbook (Geneva: UN, various years)).Google Scholar

¹² Claval, Paul, ‘Reflections on the Cultural Geography of the European City’, in Agnew, John, Mercer, John and Sopher, David, eds, The City in Cultural Context (London: Allen & Unwin, 1984), pp. 44–45Google Scholar. Although Claval puts Britain in the same category as Northern Europe (including Scandinavia), there is little evidence that any claimed ‘anti-urban’ sentiment in Northern Europe outside Britain has resulted in a rise in urban problems (for Northern Germany and the Netherlands, see Figure 1). Comparable data are not available for the Scandinavian countries, but impressionistic evidence suggests that they too have not developed serious core city problems. For a review of the government of Scandinavian cities, see Page, Edward C. and Goldsmith, Michael J., eds, Central and Local Government Relationships in Western Europe (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1987)Google Scholar, chapters on Sweden, Norway and Denmark.

¹³ See Wolman, Harold and Goldsmith, Michael, Urban Politics and Policy: A Comparative Approach (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), chap. 4 and sources cited.Google Scholar

¹⁴ From the 1990 Census (see US Census of Population and Housing, 1990, Summary (Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census, 1991), Table 7).Google Scholar

¹⁵ City census data are a better measure of central city performance in the older cities of the North and Mid-West. Western cities, and especially South-Western cities, tend to have a lower level of jurisdictional fragmentation. City data represent a larger proportion of the metropolitan area, therefore.

¹⁶ See Duncan, James S. and Duncan, Nancy G., ‘A Cultural Analysis of Urban Residential Landscapes in North America: The Case of the Anglophile Elite’Google Scholar, in Agnew, et al. , eds, The City in Cultural Context, pp. 12–276Google Scholar; White, M. and White, L., The Intellectual Versus the City (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962)Google Scholar; Beauregard, Robert A., ‘Representing Urban Decline: Postwar Cities as Narrative Objects’, Urban Affairs Quarterly, 29 (1993), 187–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Beauregard, , ‘Representing the Urban Decline’, p. 194.Google Scholar

¹⁸ In Figure 2 average city size (rounded to the nearest 1,000) is 414,000 in the upper left quadrant, 707,000 in the upper right (493,000 excluding Los Angeles), 810,000 in the lower right quadrant (568,000 excluding New York), and 531,000 in the lower left quadrant.

¹⁹ Average city size for the United Kingdom (in 1980) rounded to the nearest thousand, was 477,000, for France 332,000, Italy 535,000 and Germany 540,000. Average size of cities in the upper left quadrant is 362,000, lower left 551,000, upper right 502,000 and lower right 353,000.

²⁰ Scotland is a hybrid case, for although it displays urban problems as bad as or worse than the rest of the United Kingdom, living in the city centre has remained desirable for the middle and upper classes, especially in Edinburgh.

²¹ Chesire, , ‘Explaining the Recent Performance’, p. 311.Google Scholar

²² See inter alia, Birnbaum, Pierre, ‘State, Centre, and Bureaucracy’, Government and Opposition, 6 (1978), 57–77Google Scholar; Katzenstein, Peter J., ed., Between Power and Plenty (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978)Google Scholar; Skocpol, Theda, States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²³ Ashford, Douglas E., British Dogmatism and French Pragmatism (London: Allen & Unwin, 1982), chap. 2Google Scholar; Birnbaum, , ‘State, Center, and Bureaucracy’Google Scholar; Goldsmith, Michael, ‘Local Autonomy: Theory and Practice’, in King, Desmond S. and Pierre, Jon, Challenges to Local Government (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1990), pp. 15–36.Google Scholar

²⁴ See Ashford, , British Dogmatism and French PragmatismGoogle Scholar; Lowndes, Vivien, ‘The Other Governments of Britain: Local Politics and Delegated Administrations’, in Budge, Ian and McKay, David, eds, The Developing British Political System (London: Longman, 1993), pp. 125–50.Google Scholar

²⁵ Ashford, Douglas, ‘British Dogmatism and French Pragmatism Revisited’, in Crouch, Colin and Marquand, David, eds, The New Centralism: Britain Out of Step with Europe? (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), pp. 80–1.Google Scholar

²⁶ Gutkind, E. A., Urban Development in Western Europe: Vol. 6, The Netherlands and Great Britain (New York: The Free Press, 1971), pp. 289–299Google Scholar; Sutcliffe, Anthony, Towards the Planned City: Germany, Britain, the United States and France, 1780–1914 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981), pp. 48–53Google Scholar, and sources cited.

²⁷ Gutkind, , Urban Development in Western Europe, Vol. 6, p. 295.Google Scholar

²⁸ Michael Goldsmith points out that today the term ‘municipal’ has all but passed from the political vocabulary (Goldsmith, , ‘Local Autonomy: Theory and Practice’, p. 19).Google Scholar

²⁹ Sharpe, L. J., ‘The Labour Party and the Geography of Equality: A Puzzle’, in Kavanagh, Dennis, ed., The Politics of the Labour Party (London, Allen & Unwin, 1982), pp. 135–41.Google Scholar

³⁰ See Ranney, Austin, Pathways to Parliament (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965).Google Scholar

³¹ For a comprehensive analysis of this point, see Bulpitt, Jim, Territory and Power in the United Kingdom (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1983), chap. 3.Google Scholar

³² As secretary for the environment, Michael Heseltine helped create Urban Development Corporations to revitalize inner cities. See Lawless, Paul, Britain's Inner Cities, 2nd edn (London: Paul Chapman, 1989)Google Scholar. Richard Crossman notes the ways in which his permanent secretary at the Ministry of Local Government, Dame Evelyn Sharp, defended local governments (see Crossman, Richard H. S., Diaries of a Cabinet Minister, Vol. I (London: Hamilton and Cape, 1976)Google Scholar. On the role of local authority associations, see Rhodes, R. A. W., Beyond Westminster and Whitehall (London: Unwin Hyman, 1988).Google Scholar

³³ See Rhodes, , Between Westminster and Whitehall.Google Scholar

³⁴ For an analysis of the impact of the metropolitan authorities, see Gyford, John, Leach, S. and Game, Chris, The Changing Politics of Local Government (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989), chaps. 2–5.Google Scholar

³⁵ On this general theme, see Crouch, and Marquand, , eds, The New Centralism.Google Scholar

³⁶ See EC Commission, The Regions in the 1990s (Fourth Periodic Report on the Social and Economic Situation and Development of the Regions of the Community, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1991).Google Scholar

³⁷ Hartz, Louis, The Liberal Tradition in America (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1955).Google Scholar

³⁸ Brownell, Blaire A., ‘The Idea of the City in the American South’, in Fraser, Derek and Sutcliffe, Anthony, eds, The Pursuit of Urban History (London: Edward Arnold, 1983), p. 146Google Scholar. On boosterism generally, see Friedel, Frank, ‘Boosters, Intellectuals and the American City’, in Handlin, Oscar and Burchard, John, eds, The Historian in the City (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966).Google Scholar

³⁹ During the decade of the 1970s, St Louis suffered the greatest percentage population decline of any American city. On this and attempts to revive the city, see Glassberg, Andrew D., ‘St Louis: Racial Transition and Economic Development’, in Savitch, H. V. and Thomas, John Clayton, Big City Politics in Transition: Urban Affairs Annual Review, Vol. 38 (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1991), pp. 86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁰ See Massey, Douglas S. and Denton, Nancy A., American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1989), chap. 2.Google Scholar

⁴¹ On US intergovernmental networks, see Beer, Samuel H., ‘Federalism, Nationalism, and Democracy in America’, American Political Science Review, 72 (1978), 9–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wright, Deil S., Understanding Intergovernmental Relations (Belmont, Calif.: Brooks Cole, 1988).Google Scholar

⁴² On this theme, see Page, Benjamin I., Who Gets What From Government (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983).Google Scholar

⁴³ See Page, , Who Gets What From GovernmentGoogle Scholar; also, Wolman, Harold and Teitlebaum, Fred, ‘Interest Groups and the Reagan Presidency’, in Salamon, Lester A. and Lund, Michael S., eds, The Reagan Presidency and the Governing of America (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1984).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ For a good summary of this literature, see the collection edited by Savitch, and Thomas, , Big City Politics in Transition.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ This is a common theme in what is a large literature on the political economy of American cities. For a summary, see Johnston, R. J., Residential Segregation, the State and Constitutional Conflict in American Urban Areas (New York: Academic Press, 1984).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ One of the first (and best) studies of the primacy of economics in American urban growth is Molotch, Harvey, ‘The City as a Growth Machine’, American Journal of Sociology, 82 (1976), 309–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁷ See references at fn. 19; also Moore, Barrington Jr, The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin, 1967), chap. 1.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Figures from Hohenberg, Paul M. and Lees, Lynn Holen, The Making of Urban Europe (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), p. 227.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For France, see Tarrow, Sydney, Between Centre and Periphery (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar; also Mény, Yves and Wright, Vincent, Centre-Periphery in Western Europe (London: Allen & Unwin, 1985).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ On Germany, see Bulmer, Simon, ‘Territorial Government in West Germany’, in Smith, Gordon, Patterson, William E. and Merkl, Peter H., Developments in West German Politics (London: Macmillan, 1989), pp. 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ Sutcliffe, , Towards the Planned City, p. 10.Google Scholar

⁵² Sutcliffe, , Towards the Planned City, pp. 13–16.Google Scholar

⁵³ Sutcliffe, , Towards the Planned City, p. 17Google Scholar. See also Sheehan, James H., ‘Liberalism and the City in Nineteenth Century Germany’, Past and Present, 51 (1971), 116–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵⁴ Bulmer, , ‘Territorial Government in West Germany’Google Scholar; see also, Jeffrey, Charles and Sauvigeor, Peter, German Federation Today (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991), chap. 1.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Sutcliffe, , Towards the Planned City, p. 128Google Scholar. For a comprehensive account on the role of government in the physical development of French cities, see Gutkind, E. A., Urban Development in Western Europe: Vol. 5, France and Belgium (New York: The Free Press, 1971), pp. 74–139.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ On the historical evolution of the role of the prefect in French government, see Machin, Howard, The Prefect in French Public Administration (London: Croom Helm, 1977).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ See Tarrow, , Between Center and Periphery, Part 3Google Scholar; For a general summary see Ashford, , British Dogmatism and French Pragmatism, chap. 2.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Tarrow, , Between Center and Periphery, p. 162.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ For a summary of how different countries have attempted local government reforms, see McKay, David, ed., Planning and Politics in Western Europe (London: Macmillan, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Page, and Goldsmith, , eds, Central and Local Relationships in Western Europe.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Interestingly, the cities of Southern Italy may be an exception to this general pattern. Certainly, Robert Putnam's study of civic traditions in Italy suggests that southern Italian regions, unlike the north, failed to find a communal solution to their ‘Hobbesian dilemmas’ during the medieval period. As a result, they failed to acquire a civic tradition and to provide either minimum standards of government or public goods. While Putnam's study does have a spatial dimension by region, it does not distinguish patterns of government within urban and metropolitan areas (Putnam, Robert D., Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993)).Google Scholar

⁶¹ North, Douglass C., Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶² Putnam, , Making Democracy Work, chap. 6Google Scholar; North, , Institutions, Institutional Change.Google Scholar

⁶³ Webman, Jerry, Reviving the Industrial City: Urban Renewal in Birmingham and Lyons (London: Croom Helm, 1985).Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Gale, Patrick Le, ‘Local Economic Policies, the State and City Councils: Coventry and Rennes’Google Scholar, in King, and Pierre, , eds, Challenges to Local Government, p. 143.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ This is the conclusion of a large and varied literature. For a summary, see Peterson, Paul, City Limits (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), chap. 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁶ On Atlanta politics, see Stone, Clarence C., Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1946–1988 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1989)Google Scholar. For an account of the economic imperatives at work in American downtown development, see Frieden, Bernard J. and Sagalyn, Lynne B., Downtown Inc.: How America Rebuilds Cities (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1989).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Wolman, Harold L., Ford, Coit Cook III and Hill, Edward, ‘Evaluating the Success of Urban Success Stories,’ Urban Studies, 31 (1994), 835–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar