Searching for a Public Transit 'Fix': A Multi-Scalar Study of Public Transit Policy in Ottawa and Waterloo Region
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In recent years, Canadian governments have embraced transit-led planning strategies as a solution to problems of unsustainable urbanism.With this shift, investments in public transit systems have increased dramatically.This thesis explores the development of public transit policy agendas in two urban contexts, the City of Ottawa and Waterloo Region.It evaluates the priorities underlying particular visions of transit-oriented reform and points to the challenge of equitable transit planning under conditions of growth-first governance.The emergence of transit-oriented reform agendas has taken place as part of a broader project of sustainable city-building.Despite post-political appeals to holistic or triple-bottom-line policymaking, sustainable urbanism is a contested process that seeks to renegotiate ongoing tensions between the perceived exigencies of growth-first neoliberalism and the conditions of collective reproduction in the city.This negotiation has been characterized as a search for a 'sustainability fix' (While et al. 2004).In this thesis, I examine how public transit policymaking helps to constitute this search for a stable political and institutional 'fix'.In this thesis, urban policymaking is analyzed as a multi-scalar process.Transit policy is constituted across federal, provincial, regional, and municipal scales of governance.The thesis explores this multi-scalar process using an ideational-institutional approach.It analyzes the ways in which actors interpret and represent institutional contexts, as well as the ways in which institutional contexts filter and structure political demands.Transit policy agendas are negotiated across scales, but are also shaped by Canada's distinctive institutional form of urban governance.to provide a corrective to Regime's narrow empirical focus on local politics.The first draws from the 'new institutionalism' in political science and analyses cross-national variation in forms of urban governance.What this literature shows is that the practice of local politics is conditioned in important ways by state-specific institutional forms, including the institutions of federalism, cultural traditions and norms, national and regional urban policies, and electoral systems.The second literature is rooted in a political economy of scale and situates changing modes of urban governance in relation to processes of state-spatial restructuring.For scale theorists, the concerns of the New Urban Politics can only be understood as part of a larger process of institutional transformation associated with the collapse of national regimes of Keynesian-Fordism.These two forms of state theory are clearly distinct.I argue, however, that they are ultimately complementary.In contrast to the new urban institutionalism, the political economy of scale embraces a much more radical socio-spatial conception of the state.It conceives of the state not only as spatially malleable, prone to occasional periods of geographical restructuring, but it connects such transformations to the state's role in regulating the contradictions of a crisis-prone capitalist political economy.Importantly, though, authors like Neil Brenner have emphasized the path-dependent nature of state-spatial restructuring.New institutional geographies are layered on top of existing architectures and thus reflect historical conditions in all manner of ways.On my reading, then, the political economy of scale entails a radicalization of the new urban institutionalism, explaining competitive city politics as place-specific manifestations of after-Fordist state restructuring strategies.This state theoretic account provides an important corrective to the localism of the Regime Approach by situating local politics within their proper multi-scalar institutional context.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».