Living in one of the wealthiest cities of the world seems to be a dream, but not for everyone, as Toronto, the economic center of Canada, is surprisingly hostile for racial minorities. According to the recent census data, the neighborhoods with the highest percentage of minorities have the lowest income per household rate, while the areas populated mostly by white Canadians thrive (“Wellbeing Toronto”, 2018). When going from an impoverished neighborhood where black Torontonians live to a wealthy district inhabited by white people, one can visually observe the difference – shabbiness is replaced by luxurious housing, and more economic activity is noticeable. This disparity is a marker of a complex set of issues caused by racial bias, including unequal opportunities, low quality of education, and discrimination. Such a variety of problems cannot be solved by the efforts of the municipal government only and thus requires the meaningful participation of multiple stakeholders. That is why the urban regime as a model of political power can be applied to address the issue by creating coalitions to tackle the problem and create opportunities for marginalized groups of society.
The urban regime suggests the cooperation of local actors and government that generates coalitional power to solve mutual problems. Its implications in the case of post-war Atlanta proved to be successful in rebuilding the city. Scholars believe that the regime has the potential to expand opportunities for the lower-class population, and thus, it is applicable to confront social disparities (Mossberger, 2016). However, it is also argued that this approach addresses only economic issues and fails to notice racial discrimination “as a structuring factor in cities” (Seamster, 2015, p. 1053). Nevertheless, urban theorists believe that coalitions still form the core of urban politics (Rast, 2015, p. 139). While in the case of Toronto, the economic disparity is directly connected to institutional racism, thus there is a potential of revisiting urban regime and applying it in city governance.
One aspect that speaks in favor of the urban regime is the way how power is constructed in the city. Although it is different today from post-war Atlanta due to the increased role of governance in addressing social issues, the city council still cannot achieve significant goals without the support of local actors. In Toronto, the council is responsible for policing, education policies, and it is also a major employer, therefore, it can significantly improve the situation in different areas (“Toronto Action Plan”, 2017). Nevertheless, the municipal government cannot impose its will on private actors, highlighting the need for their willing participation in tackling anti-black racism. Moreover, governments require support and collaboration with other actors, including local press, to transform public opinion (Kim, 2012). As unequal economic opportunities provoke social disparity, prioritizing racial minorities in employment can help to solve many problems of the public sector. For example, the lack of jobs leads to marginalization and stigma caused by racial bias, which, in turn, provoke school dropout, unemployment, and criminalization (Herbert, 2017, p. 144). Thus, the collaborative model of the urban regime can be applied in the solution of social problems.
Furthermore, these coalitions can not only solve the problems of the city but also create a better environment for businesses. Although many private actors prefer not to notice social issues, they will benefit from the changes in a long-term perspective. The economic development of neighborhoods can create new markets and increase the overall consumer capacity of the citizens. Moreover, the improvements in the education system and social wellbeing of racialized groups can improve workforce quality. As private actors often do not put effort into pursuing such goals, additional motivation from the government is recommended, including subsidies for diversity hiring. Nevertheless, many actions can be taken by each of them to confront anti-black racism without waiting for the city’s help. In the future, the transformation of neighborhoods will maximize the attractiveness of the city, which will benefit each individual.
Interconnections of social and economic factors in Toronto prove that private actors can fight racial segregation in the city when working in the urban regime. Moreover, such collaboration with the government in pursuit of mutual goals will serve their interests in a long-term run. There are steps that take minimum costs but require understanding and awareness of the problem, such as preference in hiring and renting to black people, expressing more trust, and less stigmatization. Many people believe that the risk of hiring or renting to people of a racial minority is higher because they experience lower economic security. The truth is, however, that acting according to this belief will increase the social gap, while trust will help to minimize it. Even if it does not seem that the problem concerns you personally or your business, working on the improvement of the urban environment will benefit everyone who is a part of this city.
Bibliography
Herbert, Chanel. 2017. “Viewing the Toronto Education System through an Anti-Racist Framework.” In New Framings on Anti-Racism and Resistance, edited by Ayan Abdulle and Anne Nelun Obeyesekere, 143-59. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Kim, Rose M. 2012. “Sa-I-Gu, Twenty Years Later: I Still Love L.A.” Amerasia Journal 38 (1): 62-83.
Mossberger, Karen. 2016. “Urban Regime Analysis.” In Theories of Urban Politics, edited by Jonathan S. Davies and David L. Imbroscio, 40-51. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Rast, Joel. 2015. “Urban Regime Theory and the Problem of Change.” Urban Affairs Review 51 (1): 138-49.
Seamster, Louise. 2015. “The White City: Race and Urban Politics.” Sociology Compass 9 (12): 1049-65.
“Toronto Action Plan to Confront Anti-Black Racism.” 2017. Toronto City Council. Web.
“Wellbeing Toronto.” 2018. Toronto City Council. Web.