| Chapter 1: | Studying Urban Governance |
|
|
By focusing this analysis on the concept of public entrepreneurship, I am leaving aside other powerful explanations for government performance. In 1993, Robert Putnam, for instance, developed the notion of social capital to answer the critical question of why some governments are more successful than others. His important study about the performance of regional governments in Italy concluded that a greater degree of civic involvement, measured by levels of community association, interpersonal trust, and cooperation, accounts for better governance strategies. Another compelling explanation of government success—economic development—received support from Robert Fried and Francine Rabinovitz, who concluded that “of all of the theories to explain the performance difference, the most powerful one is modernization.”12 Although I do not question these explanations, my focus on government attributes is the result of my thinking that despite the importance of civil society organizations, governments do matter. In fact, it is possible to think in terms of the reverse relationship: improvements in governance can lead to higher levels of civic engagement. To some extent, as I observed in Curitiba, better governance strategies have the power to mobilize society. Government action toward improvements in the delivery of public services and public campaigns to promote citizens’ rights created a new mentality focusing on urban enhancements and led residents to demand better governments.