• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of TUScholarShareCommunitiesDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenresThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenres

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutPeoplePoliciesHelp for DepositorsData DepositFAQs

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Elite Networks and The Redevelopment of The Cecil B. Moore Neighborhood

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Schrider_temple_0225E_15117.pdf
    Size:
    1.093Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Genre
    Thesis/Dissertation
    Date
    2023
    Author
    Schrider, David David
    Advisor
    Levine, Judith A
    Wagmiller, Robert
    Committee member
    Levine, Judith A
    Wagmiller, Robert
    Zhang, Lu
    Hyde, Cheryl A
    Department
    Sociology
    Subject
    Sociology
    Anti-development networks
    Football stadium
    Pro-development networks
    Permanent link to this record
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/8481
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/8445
    Abstract
    This dissertation project explores how three distinct networks worked for and in opposition to the proposed construction of three Temple University athletic facilities all located within the Northern Philadelphia neighborhood of Cecil B Moore. Specifically, I conduct a network analysis of the three networks of elites who advocated for the construction of Pearson and McGonigle Hall athletic facility in the late 1960s, the Liacouras Center in the mid-nineties, and the contemporary proposed construction of a new football stadium in order to gain a deeper understanding of how these pro- development networks operate, promote urban development, and to explore how these pro-development networks have evolved over time. I do the same for the networks of activists who have attempted to halt these development projects. I employ a mixed method approach which combines ethnographic field observations, in-depth interviews, and a quantitative investigation. I answer the following research questions: 1) How have the demographic characteristics of actors who were members of the Pearson and McGonigle Hall, Liacouras Center, and the Football Pro and Anti-Development Networks changed over time? 2) What strategies were employed by the Pro-Stadium Network to promote Temple development and why were these strategies unsuccessful? 3) What strategies were employed by the Stomper Network to oppose Temple development and why were these strategies successful? I find that while across development eras pro-development networks remain majority White, Democrat, Male, and most network members were working in the educational field, there are noteworthy changes in network demographics. I find there is less consistency in the demographics of anti-development networks over time. Although these networks remain majority Black and Democrat, there is a noteworthy increase in Female network members and White network members over time. In my analysis of how the Pro-Stadium Network promoted Temple development, I examine the strategies employed by the Pro-Stadium Network, focusing specifically on the network's public outreach strategy. I address why the network was not successful at convincing residents and politicians to support the building of a football stadium in Cecil B Moore. I find that the Pro-Stadium Network did not provide basic details about the project, and this was an obvious omission. I also address why the Pro-Stadium Network might have been more successful if it attempted to establish a dialogue with residents prior to announcing the plans for the stadium. However, it is not clear that even with a detailed plan the Pro-Stadium Network would have been successful. It is possible that the political currents had shifted since the last period of Temple development. In my analysis of how the Stomper Network opposed Temple development I examine the strategies employed by the Stomper Network, focusing specifically on the network's public outreach strategy. I find the Stomper Network attempted to establish a dialogue with residents immediately after the network became active. The Stomper Network was also able to check the effectiveness of its messaging with residents and to counter the claims of the Pro-Stadium Network. This contributed to the Stomper Network's ability to exploit the shortcomings of the Pro-Stadium Network's outreach strategy. I hypothesize that the possibility that a growing negative view of urban development in Cecil B Moore made the construction of the football stadium impossible. I focus some of this discussion on how the Pro-Stadium Network has received more scrutiny than the two historical pro-development networks. In doing so, I hypothesize that this growing public scrutiny of Temple development projects in Cecil B Moore and an emerging negative view of urban development may have hampered the Pro-Stadium Network's attempts to build a football stadium in Cecil B Moore. I find theories of urban growth and elite theory fit the development processes for both the Pearson and McGonigle Hall and the Liacouras Center. However, the attempt to construct a football stadium in Cecil B Moore is not consistent with theories of urban growth and elite theory. The struggle over Temple's proposed football stadium is more consistent with pluralist theory and Henri Lefebvre’s right to the city.
    ADA compliance
    For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
    Collections
    Theses and Dissertations

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Temple University Libraries | 1900 N. 13th Street | Philadelphia, PA 19122
    (215) 204-8212 | scholarshare@temple.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.