PEOPLE, PLACE, PROCESS: UNPACKING LOCAL EFFORTS TO PRODUCE SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY HANNAH LEBOVITS Bachelor of Arts in Political Science Touro College, Lander College for Women September 2014 Master of Public Administration Cleveland State University December 2015 Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN URBAN STUDIES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS at the CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY December 2020 We hereby approve this dissertation for Hannah Lebovits Candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree for the Department of Urban Studies And the CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY College of Graduate Studies by Rosie Tighe, Ph.D. Committee Chairperson Urban Studies, November 16, 2020 Meghan Rubado, Ph.D. Committee Member Urban Studies, November 16, 2020 Ashley Nickels, Ph.D. Committee Member Political Science, November 16, 2020 November 16, 2020 Student’s Date of Defense DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to Esther O. Law and Lula Gittings, the two women who gave me a voice and handed me a pen. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation committee for their constant support and guidance throughout this process. Even before the world turned upside down, my committee members clearly showed me that they supported my research interests and framing. When COVID-19 changed everything, and writing and defending a dissertation became even more difficult, they made sure that I finished strong. I would also like to thank several faculty members at the Levin College of Urban Affairs who helped me along my journey. These include: Dr. Bowen, Dr. Mikelbank, and Dr. Gleeson, who helped me refine my thoughts and think through my research interests. Dr. Guzman, who gave me important teaching and research experience. And Professor Joseph Mead, who so profoundly reshaped my research, teaching, and activism. To my friends, across all areas of my life, who have supported me in any way throughout this process—I love you and could not have done this without you. To my family, who gave me ample opportunities to repeat what it is I’m interested in—I hope some of this makes sense to you. To my husband, who did everything the ideal partner could possibly do over these past few years—I will never be able to thank you enough. And to my kids, who ultimately are the reason for everything I do—I hope you surpass me in every way. PEOPLE, PLACE, PROCESS: UNPACKING LOCAL EFFORTS TO PRODUCE SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY HANNAH LEBOVITS ABSTRACT This three-paper dissertation seeks to understand the factors that drive social sustainability in local contexts, giving attention to institutional efforts of local governments and nonprofit agencies as well as the interdependence between the built environment and collective action efforts. It marries two separate literatures, in public affairs and urban studies, by conceptualizing the relationships between the way spaces have been planned and designed to function and they ways they are lived in and governed. The first paper measures the relationship between modes of housing settlement within a city and the number of social sustainability policies a city adopts, finding a positive and statistically significant relationship between the dominance of single-family detached housing and the adoption of fewer policies. Paper two is a process tracing effort to understand the ways that a city that was historically designed to be dominated by single-family detached homes and automotive access can promote social sustainability through restorative justice efforts. Lastly, the third paper seeks to understand how members of a progressive nonprofit group who live in a region dominated by low-density housing and lack of public transit continue to engage in interactive, community building efforts. v Overall, this dissertation speaks to the existing literature on the relationship between spatial and social aspects of urban areas and adds to our understanding of how the production of social sustainability is tied to the physical landscape of an area. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ iix LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................x CHAPTER ...........................................................................................................................2 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................2 II. SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH POLICY ADOPTION ....................9 2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................9 2.2 Urban Social Sustainability and Residential Settlement..……..11 2.3 Connecting Settlement Patterns and Policy Making……....…..15 2.4 Methodology ...............................................................................21 2.5 Findings and Analysis .................................................................34 2.6 Conclusion and Future Research .................................................43 III. SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE………..….46 3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................46 3.2 Suburban Communities in Transition: Reconsidering Decline...50 3.3 Social Sustainability as a Focus on “Just Acquisition”……..…..54 3.4 A Restorative Justice Approach to Social Sustainability………58 vii 3.5 Methodology ................................................................................62 3.6 Findings and Analysis ..................................................................74 3.7 Conclusion ....................................................................................84 IV. ENABLING SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY WITH ASSOCIATIONS ................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................90 4.2 Background: Sustainability of Community ……….……………93 4.3 Conceptual Framing: Suburban Social Sustainability….……….96 4.4 Theorizing Efforts to Produce Social Sustainability …..……….99 4.5 Methodology ...............................................................................104 4.6 Findings and Analysis .................................................................113 4.7 Conclusion ....................................................................................130 V. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................134 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................143 APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................175 A. Comparative GLS and Poisson Models .................................................................176 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Dependent variables: Social sustainability additive indexes………………..22 II. Descriptive Statistics, summaries…………………………………………...26 III. Results of Linear and Poisson Regressions…………………………………35 IV. Source Materials for Case Study……………………………………………70 V. Key stakeholders……………………………………………………………74 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page I. Total Policy Actions………………………………………………………...27 II. Housing Policy Actions……………………………………………………..28 III. Transit Policy Actions………………………………………………………28 IV. Bike Policy Actions…………………………………………………………29 V. Children Policy Actions……………………………………………………..29 VI. Mayoral Form of Government………………………………………………31 VII. Margins Plot for Total Policy Actions………………………………………37 VIII. Conceptual Model of Social Sustainability as Just Acquisition…………….58 IX. A Visual Model of the Research Design Strategy…………………………..72 X. A Visual Overview of the Case Study Findings and Analysis………………83 XI. GIS map of Community Investment Index…………………………………115 x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Over the last several decades, sustainability- broadly defined as the capacity of a system to adapt without the threat of resource depletion- has developed as a key focus of local governance. The 1987 Bruntland report encouraged all levels of government across the world to prioritize the prevention of environmental and social degradation in light of the increasing trend towards rapid spatial development (WCED, 1987). The primary driver of these concerns is urban development, a process intended to maximize the economic utility of a given space, over time. Actions taken today should not present a threat to tomorrow’s viability and institutions of collective action can work to ensure the sustained existence of social and spatial systems, preventing the tragedy of the commons (Olson, 1965). Today, cities are where most human activities in the United States take place. Local governance systems are tasked with engaging in active efforts to protect the environmental, economic, and social life that occurs within them and they have absolutely taken on significant efforts to promote sustainable activities (Portney, 2013). Nevertheless, local governments can still 2 struggle to sufficiently prevent degradation, in large part due to their inability to perform the functions of larger, coordinated, and centralized units of government (Peterson, 1981). While they certainly can utilize their powers to service those within