Navigating the regionalism–public choice divide in regional studies
分析了美国城市区域边界争论中区域主义与公共选择两种视角的局限，指出双方需通过妥协和社区参与来突破概念僵局，对区域政策制定者和城市研究者有参考价值。
While city-regions take on increasingly important social and economic roles, analytical perspectives on their political boundaries remain fragmentary. This paper considers the evolving debates over city-region boundaries in the United States, arguing that the two predominant perspectives (regionalism and public choice) each provide partial accounts of political fragmentation in city-regions. Regionalists and public choice theorists frame the urban question differently, leading to mismatched priorities that are ultimately self-defeating for both camps. Surmounting the conceptual impasse regarding regional boundary change will involve compromise and engagement with the communities who live there, and reflect the practical politics of specific city-regions.