Introduction

Across the globe, studies show alarmingly low levels of trust in government institutions.¹ In the United States, low levels of trust have most commonly manifested in voters’ lack of interest in politics, low feelings of efficacy, and low participation in elections.

But getting people to vote, while a crucial right, does not need to be the only way to foster feelings of political efficacy. While elections are usually perceived as the primary mode of citizen engagement with government, in the medium-range future, collaborative policy models can be a critical component of how people engage. Municipal and local leaders have an opportunity to integrate ways for residents to engage that go beyond the voting booth.

As urbanist Jane Jacobs argued in the 1960s, cities foster genuine public and civic spaces, because they “have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.”² Cities, where people play in the same parks and take the same public transit, can act as a testing ground for people to try to find solutions together, especially against the backdrop of our increasingly polarized national politics. Several cities are gaining nationwide attention because of their bold and inclusive approaches to incorporating civic engagement into people’s daily lives on a sustainable basis. Part of the excitement of studying civic engagement in Philadelphia is its place within the broader conversation occurring in the U.S. around the notions of “progressive federalism,”³ American renewal, and the concept of communities as “laboratories of democracy.”

Cities, where people play in the same parks and take the same public transit, can act as a testing ground for people to try to find solutions together, especially against the backdrop of our increasingly polarized national politics.