ancient cities

646 Regional Governance
Lauria, Mickey. 1996. Reconstructing Urban Regime
Theory: Regulating Urban Politics in a Global
Economy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mossberger, Karen and Gerry Stoker. 2001. “The
Evolution of Urban Regime Theory: The Challenge of
Conceptualization.” Urban Affairs Review
36(6):810–35.
Sites, William. 1997. “The Limits of Urban Regime
Theory: New York City under Koch, Dinkins, and
Giuliani.” Urban Affairs Review 32(4):536–57.
Stone, Clarence. 1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta,
1946–1988. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
———. 1993. “Urban Regimes and the Capacity to
Govern: A Political Economy Approach.” Journal of
Urban Affairs 15(1):1–28.
Re g i o n a l go v e R n a n c e
Regional governance comprises a system of structures,
institutions, and processes through which
groups organize and act to pursue purposes at the
regional scale. Broader than regional government,
with which it is sometimes confused, regional governance
involves actions by formal units of government,
such as municipalities, counties, states,
and provinces, and by private entities (e.g.,
individuals, firms, business associations) and
third-sector groups (e.g., nongovernmental organizations,
civic groups, labor, faith-based associations).
Often, this occurs through partnerships or
associations with one another. As a focus of urban
study, regional governance has garnered special
attention during several eras of metropolitan
change in the twentieth century and is currently a
subject of active interest and commentary in the
first decade of the twenty-first century.
Because region refers to a wide range of territories,
the scale of regional governance varies. The
label region may denote a small group of communities
(e.g., East Bay towns), a city and its surrounding
metropolitan area (the San Francisco
metropolitan area), a subnational territory (the
Pacific Coast region), or a multinational territory
(the Pacific Rim). In the context of urban studies,
regional governance usually refers to metropolitanscale
governance.
The need for regional governance originates in
the mismatch between the scale of policy issues
and the scale of formal political units to address
those issues. Many urban concerns—such as economic
development, environmental protection, traffic,
urban growth, public health, workforce training
and mobility, the quantity and distribution of
affordable housing, infrastructure development,
public safety, spreading poverty, and social equity—
transcend the borders of municipal government
and create impacts (“externalities”) that defy resolution
by a single unit of government.
For example, protection of a region-scale environmental
resource such as a watershed may occur
through the organization and action of multiple
groups, including local, state, provincial, and
national governments; special-purpose water
authorities or natural resources districts; nongovernmental
interest groups such as a local parks
conservancy or branch of an international environmental
organization, such as the Sierra Club; and
private interests, including individual property
owners, land developers, a fishing club, or homeowners
associations. Groups involved in regional
governance may operate together through formal
or informal agreements, or they may operate independently,
sometimes in opposition to one another.
Regional governance is also shaped by state and
federal policies, rules, and incentives that direct or
influence how regional actors operate. Also playing
a role in regional governance are media, whose
commentary on regional affairs shape popular
understanding and influence action.
Evolution of Regional Governance
Approaches to regional governance and problem
solving are as old as regions themselves. (The word
region, derived from the Latin root regere, meaning
to rule or guide, signifies an indefinite territory,
such as that under the command of a regent or
governor.) In the United States, because colonial
and early local governments from the 1600s
through the mid-1800s had relatively dispersed
districts and limited powers, the dominant approach
to addressing regional problems was laissez-faire
individualism. Notwithstanding instances of
regional structures to address regional problems—in
1790, for example, Philadelphia and its
neighboring suburbs formed a joint board of
prison inspectors and subsequently collaborated
on other regional boards for health, help for the