As society grows and expands generation after generation, is this growth better understood through Political Economy or Urban Ecology? Or more specifically, for lower income locations, is power exercised through Political Economy or Urban Ecology? When we focus specifically on lower income community and look at two examples: Boyle Heights and Chavez Ravine, we see a trend in the way power is exercised in these communities. Although both concepts have strong arguments that describe how our world works, in my opinion it is the concept of Political Economy that run the low income societies. Although both ideas have characteristics that reflect our world economy, it is very evident that the elite have an extremely large amount of power that control the concepts and trends of society, especially in the less developed areas of the United States. Although many ideas we see in society are reflected upon some aspects of both ideas, it is predominantly the idea of Political Economy that our low income society functions after as seen from the examples of Boyle Heights and Chavez Ravine. Therefore, in my opinion, Political Economy better explains the phenomenon of change in lower income communities.
Defining the Terms
Urban Ecology is the a theory that is based on the assumption that the society is operated as a living-like organism, where there is applied methodology of the study of ecology to the human society. When looking at the competition in Urban Ecology, there is a harmonious and natural concept is explained (Saito 2009). Furthermore, the events that occur in society come from a natural process, just like how living organisms function naturally as time goes by.
Political economy has a major focus on economic competition. This view was formed as a response to Urban Ecology and influenced by Darwin’s concept of “Survival of the fittest”. In this theory, the preferences and choices of individuals develop from a social context, this social context is fundamentally shaped by the market, which is ruled by capitalists and top managers in industrial and development corporations (Feagin, 2002). In other words, Political Economy touches on the idea that the wealthy and powerful are in control, and these people use their power to structure society as they favor their interest and tweek the focus of society to follow their interest due to the tremendous amount of power they have.
Applying These Theories
Two historical examples of lower income cities in the United States are Chavez Ravine and Boyle Heights. Both of these communities were of lower income individuals, in Southern California. Chavez Ravine was a mostly Latino community that had existed for more than a few generations. Extended families spent their lives in this close knit community and shared many close cultural values. However, in the eyes of the outside community, Chavez Ravine was still considered a “slum”. Nevertheless, the land was considered valuable and was ultimately forcefully taken by eminent domain. This once close knit community was seized via eminent domain and replaced by the Dodger Stadium, while Boyle Heights is a similar community that experienced unwanted change in their community they were unable to prevent.
The community of Boyle Heights is a great example of how the idea of Political Economy is able to control the transportation system running through the city, leaving the city with no official power to override the decision for the community. Due to lack of power as a lower income society, these lower income communities are often led to horrible situations such as gentrification, or excessive amount of highways crossing the neighbourhood in the case of Boyle heights. Furthermore, is it more to say that Urban Ecology shapes these changes, or is it the exercise of Political Economy that leads to these situations?
The origin of Urban Ecology comes from the study of relationships between organisms; it is based on the assumption that society itself is operated like a living organism. Therefore, when we look at the competition side of both concepts, we see that in Urban Ecology, a harmonious and natural concept is explained (Newcombe, 1976). However, this concept is not always the case for lower class citizens. As shown in Chavez Ravine, there is often more force and violence with these movements and changes for the lower class citizens as developments take place. Urban Ecology describes a harmony in urban planning, where there are sustainable and natural designs, this is something that may not always be the case for the lower class part of society. However, when we look at the idea of Political Economy, we see how there is the explanation that people use the concept of fighting between each other to achieve a certain goal. When linking this idea to these lower income societies, we see a closer reflection of this concept on these communities. As seen from the case of Chavez Ravine, there is often unwillingness for movement, and many conflicts in order for urban change to develop - often resulting in those who belong in the bottom of the social hierarchy to change and move according to the will of the privileged.
Before looking at which concept of power is exercised in low income societies and how it is exercised in these two communities, what exactly is Political Economy and how does it differ compared to Urban Ecology? The idea of Political Economy works toward the people who hold the majority of the wealth in society. It is focused on the wealthy individuals, who run businesses and hold a lot money. When we look on the contrary side, the concept of urban ecology incorporates the idea that there is a free market and people are driven by competition. Political Economy developed as a critique to Urban Ecology arguing that power operates in forms of institutions and are based on interests of the more privileged groups, in other words, people that stand on the top of the hierarchy chain (Saito, 2009). Now, when we relate these two concepts to our two focuses of low income communities: Chavez Ravine and Boyle Heights, we see a pattern in how these two cities were controlled and managed. Most of these lower class areas in the United States are changed or removed unwillingly due to the wants of the higher elite, which connects most closely to the concept of Political Economy.
Political Economy touches on the idea that the wealthy and powerful are in control and how these people use their power to structure society, they favor their interest and their interests are able to become the focus of society due to the tremendous amount of power they have (Molotch, 2013). Because of how much the wealthy can influence society, Political Economy argues against the idea of a free market at work in Urban Ecology, it uses this concept to explain that it is not a free market that members of a society have, but because of the power that the wealthy have over society, it is not a free market but one that can be manipulated by those with power. We see this concept in many parts of society today. Although the mass population believes they have a free market where they are able to make decisions freely, many do not see how manipulated the market is. For example, often times those who are involved in politics are the ones who are able to make political ideas lean on their end. And often times it is those who are in big corporations who are involved in such politics (Saito, 2009). From this example, we see how the wealthy are able to shift the focus of politics toward their interest, and while the mass society thinks that they are involved with these political ideas, they are overlooking the idea that all these political ideas have originated from the interests of the wealthy. And really, the mass population does not necessarily have this idea of a “free market”.
There are many examples on how a city shapes its situations through Political Economy, especially in the lower class areas. There are always people that are disadvantaged through the work of development, and usually the power elite get to control these situations. For example, the work of eminent domain has led many lower class individuals devastated through the work of the power elite. Looking at the city of Los Angeles, we often see this at work, where people are unwillingly forced to move out of their homes in order for a project proposed by the elite to develop. An example of this would be Chavez Ravine, where a close knit community is ripped apart through eminent domain - this is the price that society pays for urban renewal (Saito, 2009). There is always struggling for a part of society that many people may not see as society develops through urban renewal - struggles between power elites and those without as much power. This situation shows how Political Economy better addresses the situations in how a city shapes its social life, for people who are in the lower class, compared to Urban Ecology. There is tremendous amount of power that the elites have, and these institutions are what shapes the community. This makes the lower class citizens struggle as they try to survive through all the works of these urban developments (Levy, 2016). Through all these changes happening, it is evident that the lower class citizens are the ones who are put at a disadvantage. An example of such would be the works of eminent domain, where society favors the idea of building stadiums as cities develop, and removing the lower income communities that previously lived there.
When we compare two cities: Beverley Hills and Boyle Heights, we also see the idea of the wealthy controlling the society. In Beverley Hills, there is not a single highway running through the city. However, when looking at a lower income city: Boyle Heights, there are several highways running through this city (Saito, 2009). This is because of the difference in hierarchy between these two cities. One is a very wealthy and prominent city, where even tourists from all around the world visit, while the other contains the lower class citizens. This situation shows the power elite at work, where they are able to control how society is run - the city with higher class individuals have the power to express their wants of their city with no highways running through, while the lower class community has to satisfy the wants of the higher class community.
Through thorough analyzation of just these two lower class communities, it is evident that the idea of Political Economy is exercised in these neighbourhoods more strongly than the idea of Urban Ecology. It is through the regulations of the power elite on these lower class citizens that cause urban changes in society. In these two cases, eminent domain wiped out the entire community of Chavez Ravine and the power of the elite added numerous unwanted highways into the Boyle Heights community. These are all clear examples of the power elite controlling society and shaping it into the way they want (Clift, 2014). We see less of a natural process in Urban Ecology, but a more forced situation where the unprivileged have no power to stop any unfair regulations and situations happening to their community. This is why Political Economy has a more clear representation of what is revolving around the lower class communities in the United States.
References
Clift, Ben. “Comparative Political Economy: Lineages from Classical Political Economy,
Linkages to International Political Economy.” Comparative Political Economy, 2014, pp.
26–44., doi:10.1007/978-1-137-40600-2_2.
“Ecological Development in the U.S.” UrbanEcology.org, 20 Sept. 2018,
www.urbanecology.org/ecological-development-u-s/.
Feagin, Joe R. Building American Cities: The Urban Real Estate Game.
Hines, Thomas S. “Housing, Baseball, and Creeping Socialism.” Journal of Urban History, vol.
8, no. 2, 1982, pp. 123–143., doi:10.1177/009614428200800201.
Levy, John M. “Contemporary Urban Planning.” 2016, doi:10.4324/9781315619408.
Molotch, Harvey. “The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of
Place.”American Journal of Sociology, 2013, doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/2777096 .
Newcombe, K. “Environment, Ecology and Urban Organisation.” Urban Ecology, vol. 2, no. 1,
1976, pp. 91–92., doi:10.1016/0304-4009(76)90012-7.
Saito, Leland T. The Politics of Exclusion: the Failure of Race-Neutral Policies in Urban
America. Stanford University Press, 2009.
Comments