| In older, industrialized countries (OICs) such as the U.S., since 1973 and sometimes earlier, community leaders have been confronted by significant economic change, sometimes in the form of plant closings and white collar job cuts, sometimes by the growth of firms in “sunrise” industries such as microelectronics and business services, and often through a combination of the two trends. The civic sectors of cities have changed as well, with the creation of new nonprofit organizations, and shifts in the patterns of support for established local institutions. This research explores the links between economic globalization and local institutional development. Using qualitative methods, I show that nonprofit organizations and multinational corporations in Rochester, New York have a history of interdependence, and are maintaining their relationships during the current period of economic restructuring. Rooted, local organizations choose among several strategies for continuing development—they have not been uniformly “crushed” by the effects of corporate downsizing, for example, nor do they only “spring to life” with growth in new industrial sectors and companies. What mediates between capitalist firms and nonprofits is local civic culture. That is, actors and organizations in the two sectors interact, with each other and with others, in ways that influence the development of both. In my analysis I use critical urban theory to expose the limitations of the globalization perspective. Specifically, I show that the recent actions of the leadership of local nonprofit organizations are related to the complexities of corporate involvement in a community where many residents have long participated in local civic affairs, and where the companies themselves have deep roots. For their part, the executives at the multinational corporations, while increasingly committed to international development, continue to support local organizations which serve company needs. In short, the behavior of the leaders of corporations and nonprofits is not entirely determined by worldwide trends in technological development, political and/or economic evolution, or the choices of corporate and/or local elites. Finally, the actions of smaller firms and other committed organizations, groups and individuals matter as the largest companies renegotiate their place-based involvements. |
