No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Rational Capitalism and Municipal Government: The Progressive Era
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2016
Extract
Municipal administration was changed dramatically in the United States during the Progressive Era. Most explanations of this transformation have been society centered rather than state centered. Society-centered explanations, based on such factors as social movements, ethnicity, religion, social class, occupational composition, and population size have not provided a coherent account of the range and nature of the transformations in municipal administration in the Progressive Era. For example, democracy was expanded through municipal autonomy delegated by state legislatures and contracted by limiting ward representation, business practices were copied organizationally and challenged legally, and municipal administration was decentralized in proprietary functions and centralized in bureaucracy. Most importantly, society-centered factors have not accounted for the legal shaping of the state, in particular in framing the municipality’s administration and proprietary transactions. Empirical relationships between such state-centered changes as court-mandated contract responsibilities and, for example, social class or ethnicity have not been established—nor can they be cogently argued.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Social Science History Association 1989
References
Allswang, John M. (1977) Bosses, Machines, and Urban Voters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Bauman, John F. (1977) “The Philadelphia Housing Commission and scientific efficiency, 1909-1916,” in Ebner, Michael H. and Tobin, Eugene M. (eds.) The Age of Urban Reform: New Perspectives on the Progressive Era. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press: 117–130.Google Scholar
Berman, Harold J. (1983) Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Blassingame, Lurton W. (1972) “Frank Goodnow: Progressive urban reformer.” North Dakota Quarterly 40: 22–30.Google Scholar
Brownell, Blaine A. and Stickle, Warren E. (1973) [eds.] Bosses and Reformers: Urban Politics in America, 1880-1920. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers (1984) The Limits of Rationality: An Essay on the Social and Moral Thought of Max Weber. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Burns, Tom R. and Ram, Helena (1987) The Shaping of Social Organization: Social Rule System Theory with Applications. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Chambers, John Whiteclay (1980) The Tyranny of Change: America in the Progressive Era, 1900-1917. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Randall (1986a) Max Weber: A Skeleton Key. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Collins, Randall (1986b) Weberian Sociological Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daintith, Terence and Teubner, Gunther (1986) “Sociological jurisprudence and legal economics: Risks and rewards,” in Daintith, Terence and Teubner, Gunther (eds.) Contract and Organisation: Legal Analysis in the Light of Economic and Social Theory. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter: 3–22.Google Scholar
DeWitt, Benjamin Parke (1915) The Progressive Movement: A Non-partisan, Comprehensive Discussion of Current Tendencies in American Politics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dillon, John F. (1890) Commentaries on the Law of Municipal Corporations. 4th ed., Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Filene, Peter (1970) “An obituary for ‘the Progressive Movement.’” American Quarterly 22: 20–34.Google Scholar
Fox, Kenneth (1977) Better City Government: Innovation in American Urban Politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Goodnow, Frank J. (1897) Municipal Home Rule: A Study in Administration. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gould, Lewis L. (1974) [ed.] The Progressive era. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Griffith, Ernest S. (1974) A History of American City Government: The Conspicuous Failure, 1870-1900. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Haber, Samuel (1964) Efficiency and Uplift: Scientific Management in the Progressive Era, 1890-1920. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hobson, Wayne K. (1977) “Professionals, progressives, and bureaucratization: A reassessment.” Historica 39: 639–658.Google Scholar
Howe, Frederic C. (1915) The Modern City and Its Problems. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Knoke, David (1982) “The spread of municipal reform: Temporal, spatial, and social dynamics.” American Journal of Sociology 87: 1314–1339.Google Scholar
Kopf, Edward J. (1977) “The environments of reform: Economics, culture, and the Chelsea Board of Control, 1908-1914,” in Ebner, Michael H. and Tobin, Eugene M. (eds.) The Age of Urban Reform: New Perspectives on the Progressive Era. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press: 13-27.Google Scholar
Lubove, Roy (1973) “The twentieth century city: The progressive as municipal reformer,” in Brownell, Blaine A. and Stickle, Warren E. (eds.) Bosses and Reformers: Urban Politics in America, 1880-1920. Boston: Houghton Mifflin: 82–96.Google Scholar
Miller, Richard C. (1975) “Fort Worth and the Progressive Era: The movement for charter revision, 1899-1907,” in Oaks, Robert F. et al. (eds.) Essays on Urban America. Austin: University of Texas Press: 89–125.Google Scholar
Noble, David W. (1981) The Progressive Mind, 1890-1917. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Orloff, Ann Shola and Skocpol, Theda (1984) “Why not equal protection? Explaining the politics of public spending in Britain, 1900-1911, and the United States, 1880S-1920.” American Sociological Review 49: 726–750.Google Scholar
Platt, Harold L. (1977) “City-building and progressive reform: The modernization of an urban polity, Houston, 1892-1905,” in Ebner, Michael H. and Tobin, Eugene M. (eds.) The Age of Urban Reform: New Perspectives on the Progressive Era. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press: 28–42.Google Scholar
Rhyne, Charles S. (1957) Municipal Law. Washington: National Institute of Municipal Law Officers.Google Scholar
Schiesl, Martin J. (1977) The Politics of Efficiency: Municipal Administration and Reform in America, 1800-1920. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shefter, Martin (1977) “Patronage and its opponents: A theory and some European cases,” Western Societies Program Occasional Paper No. 8, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Shefter, Martin (1978) “Party, bureaucracy, and political change in the United States,” in Maisel, Louis and Cooper, Joseph (eds.) Political Parties: Development and Decay. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage: 211–265.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda (1985) “Bringing the state back in: Strategies of analysis in current research,” in Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda (eds.) Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 3–37.Google Scholar
Steffens, Lincoln (1957) The Shame of the Cities (orig. 1904). New York: Sagamore Press.Google Scholar
Sumner, William G. (1982) “The absurd effort to make the world over” (orig. 1894), in Hofstadter, Richard and Hofstadter, Beatrice K. (eds.) Great Issues in American History: From Reconstruction to the Present Day, 1864-1981. New York: Vintage Books: 84–92.Google Scholar
Teaford, Jon C. (1984) The Unheralded Triumph: City Government in America, 1870-1900. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Wardell, Mark L. and Turner, Stephen P. (1986) Sociological Theory in Transition. Boston: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Weber, Max (1960) The City (orig. 1921). Don Martindale and Gertrud Neuwirth (trans, and eds.). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Delos F. (1904) The American City: A Problem in Democracy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar