The relationship between urban design and economic activity is seldom studied through empirical studies with a large number of cases due, in part, to the implicit and intangible nature of design. This study was intended to understand, analyze, and evaluate the complex relationship between the design and the economic revitalization of downtown districts with reference to the 78 active Texas Main Street Program districts. First, the design, promotion, organization, and economic restructuring components of the Main Street Program's comprehensive four-point approach were investigated. Next, the economic changes that occurred within those districts were analyzed from 1997-2001. Finally, employment, the number of jobs, the number of business establishments, the number of sales tax permits, the retail sales volume, and the commercial property values were compared for the same time period among three categories of cities: those active in the Main Street Program, those formerly active but now inactive, and those who have not participated. Findings revealed that several positive changes occurred in design, promotion, organization, and economic restructuring components of the four-point approach within the active Texas Main Street districts. It appears that these changes produced several positive outcomes for the physical, social, and economical environment of the active Main Street districts. Moreover, the findings suggests that these changes in the Main Street districts resulted in an increased economic activity, not only within the Main Street district by generating jobs, or producing private and/or public investment, but also across the Main Street city by creating community wide economic activity in most of the variables that were under investigation. The results indicate that the Texas Main Street Program, part of which is urban design oriented, is having a positive effect on economic activity within the active Main Street districts.

Without change, stagnation is inevitable. Never has this truth been more obvious than during the current epoch of industrial decline in North America. This research provides two economic narratives that exemplify the struggles of industrial communities as they strive to regenerate. The research involves a comparative analysis of the transformation of two steel cities, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Hamilton, Ontario, from 1970 to 2008. For cities in which one major industry has formed the foundation of the local economy, job losses can result in massive dislocation and devastating consequences for individuals, families, and communities. Pittsburgh and Hamilton are among many cities striving to diversify and strengthen their economies as manufacturing diminishes and Western sunset industries rise in the East. Transformation has been much more extensive in Pittsburgh than in many cities because Pittsburgh was so largely dominated by the steel industry and faced a virtual collapse of that industry. Hamilton has also experienced a steep decline in steel and related manufacturing jobs. Based on 55 interviews with city leaders, including a pilot study in Welland, Ontario, this research examines eight critical factors that collectively influence development: transformational leadership, strategic development planning, civic engagement, education and research, labor, capital, infrastructure, and quality of life. The study looks at how city leaders drive these factors in the context of global economic forces to revitalize their communities. Together, these elements combine to create the new economy of cities. To achieve successful transformation, the elements must function as part of an integrated system─a community economic activity system (CEAS). This research is grounded in MacGregor-Burn’s (1978; 2003) transformational leadership theory and positions local leadership as the central driver of economic regeneration. It highlights the importance of enduring social relations among leaders for creating an organized, yet dynamic, base of power that is necessary to mobilize resources and execute development policies to achieve qualitative change. Moreover, it points to the importance of inclusiveness and openness in engaging local citizen groups in order to build trust and confidence that recovery will happen. Pittsburgh and Hamilton offer many examples of successful partnerships that increasingly involve public-private-nonprofit-academic collaboratives.

Without change, stagnation is inevitable. Never has this truth been more obvious than during the current epoch of industrial decline in North America. This research provides two economic narratives that exemplify the struggles of industrial communities as they strive to regenerate. The research involves a comparative analysis of the transformation of two steel cities, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Hamilton, Ontario, from 1970 to 2008. For cities in which one major industry has formed the foundation of the local economy, job losses can result in massive dislocation and devastating consequences for individuals, families, and communities. Pittsburgh and Hamilton are among many cities striving to diversify and strengthen their economies as manufacturing diminishes and Western sunset industries rise in the East. Transformation has been much more extensive in Pittsburgh than in many cities because Pittsburgh was so largely dominated by the steel industry and faced a virtual collapse of that industry. Hamilton has also experienced a steep decline in steel and related manufacturing jobs. Based on 55 interviews with city leaders, including a pilot study in Welland, Ontario, this research examines eight critical factors that collectively influence development: transformational leadership, strategic development planning, civic engagement, education and research, labor, capital, infrastructure, and quality of life. The study looks at how city leaders drive these factors in the context of global economic forces to revitalize their communities. Together, these elements combine to create the new economy of cities. To achieve successful transformation, the elements must function as part of an integrated system─a community economic activity system (CEAS). This research is grounded in MacGregor-Burn’s (1978; 2003) transformational leadership theory and positions local leadership as the central driver of economic regeneration. It highlights the importance of enduring social relations among leaders for creating an organized, yet dynamic, base of power that is necessary to mobilize resources and execute development policies to achieve qualitative change. Moreover, it points to the importance of inclusiveness and openness in engaging local citizen groups in order to build trust and confidence that recovery will happen. Pittsburgh and Hamilton offer many examples of successful partnerships that increasingly involve public-private-nonprofit-academic collaboratives.