Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorJason Jackson.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSrinivasakrishnan, Tanaya.en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-15T22:06:54Z
dc.date.available2020-09-15T22:06:54Z
dc.date.copyright2020en_US
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/127626
dc.descriptionThesis: M.C.P., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, May, 2020en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from the official PDF of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 78-84).en_US
dc.description.abstractCity benchmarks -- in the form of rankings, ratings, and other comparisons and commendations represented in different formats and (ostensibly) objectively derived --en_US
dc.description.abstracthave rapidly proliferated, such that the concepts they measure have grown in complexity, but not necessarily in sophistication. What began as genuine efforts to capture the essences (and essential differences) of places to inform those at a distance has evolved into an abstract endeavor to understand what makes a quality urban life. This thesis aims to problematize the practice of city benchmarking, understand their persistence despite evident flaws, and identify what is at stake given their widespread and continued use, especially by and for city government actors. By tracing the evolution of city benchmarks through the lens of different institutional purveyors, I identify who values benchmarks and how they are valued before locating their measurement flaws in the literature.en_US
dc.description.abstractSuch flaws include that benchmarks are too reliant on technocratic expertise, valorize transparency as an unmitigated good, and ultimately deliver a flattened and decontextualized partial perspective to audiences. And yet, city actors continue to rely on them to inform various decision-making processes, as confirmed by a series of interviews I conduct with a set of urban actors primarily working in mid-tier American cities. I use these interviews, informed by the Foucauldian analytics of governmentality and discipline, to theorize about the effects and consequences of city benchmarks as governing agents. As governing agents, city benchmarks rationalize the practice of governance as one that is highly technical, specify spheres of concern for cities, transform city identities based on the statuses they bestow, and neutrally promote utopian ideals without declaring any normative commitments.en_US
dc.description.abstractI argue that the power of city benchmarks is disciplinary in nature, which is a cause for concern as city actors internalize their logics through both seductive and resistant forces.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Tanaya Srinivasakrishnan.en_US
dc.format.extent84 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsMIT theses may be protected by copyright. Please reuse MIT thesis content according to the MIT Libraries Permissions Policy, which is available through the URL provided.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titleCalculating governance : city benchmarking & its discontentsen_US
dc.title.alternativeCalculating governance : city benchmarking and its discontentsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeM.C.P.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planningen_US
dc.identifier.oclc1193560465en_US
dc.description.collectionM.C.P. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planningen_US
dspace.imported2020-09-15T22:06:53Zen_US
mit.thesis.degreeMasteren_US
mit.thesis.departmentUrbStuden_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record