Suchergebnisse

This thesis explores the ways in which neoliberal governance takes place in Hartford, CT, particularly as the city struggles to make ends meet. It looks at the Hartford's dependence on corporations, and its growing political and economic alignment with universities. This research examines the effects of urban renewal on the city, and how post-war policies and development shape the inequalities that exist in Hartford today. Lastly, this thesis examines the inequalities and spatial dynamics in Hartford's Southside neighborhood, Frog Hollow, and between Trinity College and Frog Hollow in particular.

Local governments around the world are exploring different strategies to become smarter: more efficient, sustainable, and highly interconnected. However, many actors outside government need to be involved too. For instance, public libraries have the potential to play a very important role in the development of smart and connected communities, due to their strong legitimacy in the eyes of citizens and the types of services and programs they are already providing, which in many cases go well beyond what could be considered traditional library services. This paper analyzes innovative practices in public libraries and argue that they already show the potential of public libraries to become catalysts for smart and connected communities. Together, these innovations represent an opportunity for governments and communities to engage and a new way to think about public libraries as very important actors in smart community initiatives.

This article examines the role of anchor institutions in the urban revitalization process. We use case study analysis to understand how concerns about residential displacement are addressed by anchor institutions in the urban planning process. This analysis is designed to build upon William Worthy's critique of anchor-based development during the 1960s and 1970s. Our analysis examines the degree to which his concept of "institutional rape" applies to contemporary urban revitalization efforts. The article focuses on university and medical campus expansion in Buffalo, NY. We describe how the planned expansion of the Buffalo-Niagara Medical Campus has raised concerns about the displacement of residents living in a neighboring subsidized housing development. We conclude that despite incremental improvements in the planning process designed to facilitate coordination between anchor institutions and grassroots interests, resident empowerment has not been fully realized. Instead, the planning process continues to be dominated by institutional interests with limited community input. Consequently, residents worked through grassroots organizations, local government, and the media to resist anchor-based development. In light of these findings, we recommend that the role of residents in the planning process for neighborhood revitalization become more institutionalized through the negotiation of community benefit agreements and other linkages.

In a year that has featured a global health pandemic, a racial justice political-social movement, and a divisive political election that stretches democratic principles, the topic of faith and community engagement may seem more prescient than ever. The exploration of the intersection of faith and community engagement at anchor institutions, though, began prior to all of these events. Yet, the topics that emerge in this special issue of Metropolitan Universities journal are even more relevant in our current context, as scholars, practitioners, and community partner co-authors explore the relationship between faith traditions and engagement in the community. As we framed this special issue as an editorial team, faith initiatives were initially broadly interpreted and all faith traditions were encouraged and considered (including, but not limited to, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu). Faith was loosely defined as a religious historical tradition and set of beliefs centered on a higher power. Faith-based organizations were generally communicated as religiously-affiliated colleges and universities, while faith-based initiatives included programs that were religiously affiliated. This special issue focuses on the intersection of faith and community engagement, specifically how they inform each other and the relationship between them at anchor institutions.

Based on ethnographic fieldwork and 39 formal interviews with 42 participants, we examine the influence of higher education institutions on a transitional, revitalizing neighborhood in Central Baltimore: Station North, a state-designated Arts and Entertainment District. This case study applies new urban regime theory to the development strategies of two universities near the neighborhood, Maryland Institute College of Art and Johns Hopkins University. We find the confluence of revitalization strategies in this declining city, as anchor institutions and the creative arts and entertainment–based economy attempt to revitalize neighborhoods as attractive places to live and visit. Yet these revitalization strategies may not address the quality of life issues that current or future residents most value, nor are they necessarily enacted with transparency or neighborhood stakeholder reciprocity. Furthermore, as neoliberal government relinquishes the task of neighborhood redevelopment to private institutions, neighborhood stakeholders question how the neighborhood will change and for whom.

Place-based initiatives, such as the federal Promise Neighborhoods grant, attempt to coordinate interventions, supports, and services with a myriad of organizations to targeted communities. Although Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), inclusive of academic medical institutions, are among the most overall researched anchor institution, Non-Institutions of Higher Education (NIHEs) have led more Promise Neighborhood grants since the inception of the program in 2010. Therefore, this study compared the revitalization efforts proposed by IHEs ( n = 5) and NIHE ( n = 5) in their applications for Promise Neighborhoods grants awarded between 2016 and 2018. Although similarities existed within and across the applications from NIHEs and IHEs, namely focused on improving academics and health/wellness, the specific interventions, supports, and services proposed by each lead institution largely reflected the individual needs of the targeted communities. The findings from this study illustrate how IHEs and NIHEs are similarly positioned to effectuate change within their communities. Implementing place-based initiatives requires anchor institutions to allocate considerable time and resources in order to adapt to the current needs of the community in real time. Therefore, future lead agents of Promise Neighborhoods should seek to promote an environment that fosters on-going collaboration and mutual trust across and within multiple stakeholders, while also exploring sustainability efforts to extend gains made beyond the duration of the grant.

Universities are increasingly faced with central city decline; anchored by their assets—primarily real estate—and, sometimes, institutional missions, many have felt threatened by neighborhood deterioration. In response, several universities have intervened in neighborhood decline over the last two decades, initiating revitalization and physical improvement strategies. Since 1996, the University of Pennsylvania has been a leader in this work, investing in the West Philadelphia Initiatives (WPI) to address safety, vacancy, and disinvestment concerns. This study utilizes Census data to evaluate changes in the character of University City between 1990 and 2010. Analysis suggests that, contrary to popular belief, the neighborhood improved but did not gentrify. The story, however, does not end there. While the neighborhood did not gentrify as a whole, the portion served by the Penn-sponsored public K-8 school experienced drastic change. As the blocks inside the school's catchment grew wealthier, more homogeneous, and more educated, these upward trends masked continued socioeconomic decline in the remainder of the neighborhood.

Hospitals have the ability to serve as anchor institutions that not only provide clinical care but make important community investments through employment, and outreach, and engagement efforts that address the social determinants of health. In doing so, hospitals may partner with community members and community-based organizations, but the extent to which local residents participate in directing local investments varies across organizations. This study looks at the role of hospitals as anchor institutions and the best practices for leveraging community participation in planning investments to improve social and economic health in communities. We used an inductive, qualitative approach to understand the incentives hospitals have to anchor themselves within their communities and how best practices can be leveraged. We conducted 28 in-depth interviews with 27 hospital leaders and personnel, and one interview with a member of a for-profit hospital advocacy organization. Drawing on thematic analysis, three primary themes were identified as critical to leveraging community-driven anchor activities: strong and intentional community-oriented leadership; direct community involvement; and non-regulatory incentives, including incentive programs. The more institutions, organizations, communities, and individuals expect community-oriented anchor activities from hospitals, the more likely they are to engage in such activities. Critical to this work is ensuring that community members themselves are able to help direct the investments of hospitals in alignment with community health needs. Community stakeholders, including elected officials, public health offices, and policymakers, have important leverage in creating expectations for hospitals to engage in anchor activities and facilitate community-based partnerships as a part of this process.

Achieving the Anchor Promise offers insight into ways anchor community institutions such as hospitals or universities can measure the impact or key areas where they can play an effective role in bettering the welfare of their communities. Funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, this research report highlights more than 75 in-depth interviews with individuals from a broad range of institutions including non-profit leaders, community activists, hospital and university administrators and federal officials. "Best Practices" as well as challenges are reviewed with the goal aimed at helping Anchor Institutions to move from programs to impact and ultimately to delivering benefits to low-income families and communities