The Internet is injecting new energy into many U.S. cities as public, private, and nonprofit institutions realize that a powerful new communications tool can transform the traditional roles of government and business.\u00a0 In social terms, this promises a closer, more interactive relationship between a community and its citizens. To a city\u2019s business community, it offers the dream of a local or regional economy transformed, Silicon Valley-style, by high-tech success.<\/p>\n\n
This report examines how institutions in five cities are adapting to the Internet. Its main focus is on economic and community development organizations in those cities that have sought to use the Internet to improve performance or broadly benefit the community.\u00a0 The cities studied are Austin, Texas; Cleveland, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; Portland, Oregon, and Washington, D.C.<\/p>\n\n
In exploring how institutions in these cities are using the Internet, this research asks whether the Internet is serving as a catalyst to change the \u201crules of the game\u201d that shape social capital\u2014the informal norms and customs that grease the wheels of urban life.\u00a0 It also looks at how communities themselves may shape the Internet by developing Internet content to serve their needs in specific ways.\u00a0 And by comparing what is happening in all five cities, the report makes recommendations on best practices for cities seeking to take advantage of the Internet.<\/p>\n\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n The Internet as a catalyst <\/strong><\/p>\n\n \u00a0<\/p>\n\n In searching for ways to exploit the Internet, a common theme in all five cities is to develop physical places where social networks can be nurtured.\u00a0 In those places, community members establish relationships that the Internet can subsequently strengthen. This applies just as much to entrepreneurs networking in hopes of finding venture capital in Austin as it does to Internet neophytes attending computer boot camps in low-income neighborhoods Cleveland.<\/p>\n\n In the economic development community<\/i><\/b>, the recognition that the New Economy rewards entrepreneurship has led to a fundamental change in economic development strategies in the cities studied.\u00a0 Whereas economic development officials used to spend much of their time \u201csmokestack shopping,\u201d or trying to lure companies from outside the region, more and more they use a social network strategy to encourage entrepreneurs.\u00a0 This usually means establishing networks of entrepreneurs to exchange ideas and look for business contacts.\u00a0 It also includes \u201cangel finance networks,\u201d that is, groups of wealthy individuals in a community who are willing to provide start-up capital for entrepreneurs.\u00a0 Each of the cities studied has employed a social networking strategy of some sort to foster entrepreneurship.<\/p>\n\n Among community activists<\/i><\/b>, the social network strategy consciously uses the Internet to change how people interact with community development organizations.\u00a0 That is, community organizations are using Internet access as a way to draw new people in the doors.\u00a0 This approach has been especially prominent in Cleveland, where activists have successfully lobbied city government to provide funds to expand community Internet access.\u00a0 In some cases, Internet access is seen as an end in itself, which means the organization provides access and the minimum training necessary to allow people to surf the Web and send email.\u00a0 In others, the goal is job training that will expand people\u2019s economic opportunities and, in the cases of Portland, Austin, and Washington, alleviate regional worker shortages in the technology sector.\u00a0 Whatever the motivation, an outcome of these initiatives is additional social interaction among residents of neighborhoods.<\/p>\n\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n Content Development: The Effect on the Internet <\/strong><\/p>\n\n \u00a0<\/p>\n\n In several cities, the catalytic effect of the Internet has also resulted in the development of Internet content to serve community needs.\u00a0 In other words, people have developed Web-based portals for home-based businesses or nonprofits to improve service delivery.<\/p>\n\n In terms of neighborhood and community content<\/i>, <\/b>this report profiles a case in Portland in which a community listserv helped shape and deliver a message to the city that stopped a development plan.\u00a0 In another instance in Portland, a community nonprofit prompted the development of a Web site for artisans to sell their work, thus expanding the size of their market beyond their neighborhood and region.\u00a0 Content development for nonprofits has been a prominent theme in the cities studied.\u00a0 Nonprofit organizations devoted to providing affordable housing in Cleveland and Portland are using the Web to connect providers of housing to clients, as well as using the Web to more efficiently schedule maintenance of units.\u00a0 Austin and Nashville are using public funds to enable nonprofits to develop Web content.<\/p>\n\n Content development in the business sector<\/i> <\/b>is difficult to pin down, since a measure of that would be the ease of starting an Internet-based business.\u00a0 The flow of information on how to start a business, the existence of supporting services in the area, and, of course, the availability of capital are all ingredients for starting a dot-com business.\u00a0 In the present environment, however, little capital is available to start or even sustain dot-coms.\u00a0 Nonetheless, several cities are embarking on strategies to provide physical locations for businesses that want to develop Internet content.\u00a0 Portland is refurbishing an office building to provide space for multimedia entrepreneurs and other electronic-content businesses.\u00a0 Washington, D.C., Nashville, and Austin, in different ways, are encouraging the development of downtown districts inviting enough to serve as a hotbed of New Economy creativity.\u00a0 Much of this is tied to the notion that \u201camenities\u201d\u2014the things that make a city a desirable place to live\u2014drive economic growth; the specific growth objectives generally encourage businesses that rely on the Internet.<\/p>\n\n Best Practices, Best Cities <\/strong><\/p>\n\n In adapting to the Internet, it is no surprise that different cities\u2014and different parts of cities\u2014move at varying rates.\u00a0 Austin, which is one of America\u2019s most wired cities and a center of high-tech innovation, is ahead of Nashville in most ways.\u00a0 Cleveland, by contrast, though it is not known as a center of Internet innovation, is surprisingly advanced in using the Internet for community purposes.\u00a0 Taking into account performance across different dimensions, economic, social, and governmental, here is a summary of what cities are doing best in exploiting the Internet.<\/p>\n\n 1) <\/b> Portland<\/b>: Of the five cities studied, Portland emerges as the leader because its strengths cut across many dimensions.\u00a0 Its combination of technological sophistication, economic vitality, commitment to regional planning, and community engagement, and its existing infrastructure of community nonprofits, make it the city most likely to effectively exploit the Internet for economic and social purposes.\u00a0 Community use of the Internet in Portland extends widely, from neighborhood listservs to community development corporations that are reaching out to low-income people.\u00a0 The business community\u2019s active network of angel financiers and entrepreneurs, added to the city\u2019s commitment to a new, downtown high-tech center, puts Portland in a good position to compete in the information economy.<\/p>\n\n 2) <\/b> Austin<\/b>: Austin has a strong track record of community activism in providing Internet access to low-income areas, and a great deal of technical literacy, wealth and economic vitality.\u00a0 Local government supports community Internet initiatives, and Austin is at the forefront nationally in exploiting the Internet\u2019s economic and social possibilities.\u00a0 Unlike Portland, Austin does not have a well-developed network of community-based organizations that could channel Internet initiatives deeply into the community.\u00a0 For that reason, Austin rates just behind Portland among the cities profiled.<\/p>\n\n 3) <\/b> Cleveland<\/b>: Although the city is not known as a hub for high-tech entrepreneurship, Cleveland rates well among the five cities because of innovative coalition building by a group called Digital Vision that encourages Internet access in the low-income community.\u00a0 Activists\u2019 success in obtaining city funding for community Internet projects is a distinguishing feature, and civic leaders are actively cultivating an entrepreneurial environment for the city.\u00a0 No dot-com successes have occurred, but city leaders are focusing on business-to-business ecommerce–a sensible long-term strategy to exploit the Web for a city that understands manufacturing.\u00a0 Cleveland also enjoys an abundance of broadband infrastructure in the downtown area, which makes it attractive to many telecommunications carriers.<\/p>\n\n 4) <\/b> Washington<\/b>: The District is a latecomer with promise when it comes to using the Internet for social and development purposes.\u00a0 A package of incentives to attract high-tech firms downtown and the development of NoMa, a downtown district for creative high-tech people, could spur a tech boom in the District.\u00a0 But these programs are in their early stages.\u00a0 At the community level, there are several Internet access initiatives aimed at low-income people, but they would benefit from greater coordination and more support from city government.<\/p>\n\n 5) <\/b> Nashville<\/b>: Nashville lags far behind the other cities in projects that provide Internet access to low-income citizens.\u00a0 The federally funded \u201cDesigning a Community Online\u201d project indicates some promise for the future on this front, as does the mayor\u2019s commitment to the use of information technology in city government and outreach to neighborhoods.\u00a0 But Nashville is late to the table relative to the other cities in this study.\u00a0 On the economic front, Nashville\u2019s entrepreneurial culture suggests it can effectively exploit the Internet, and several initiatives show that Nashville is aggressively trying to become a player in the New Economy.<\/p>\n\n Sustaining the Effects of the Internet<\/strong><\/p>\n\n With the downturn in the dot-com economy and the constant challenges of maintaining funding for community development projects, sustaining the Internet\u2019s early positive effects will be difficult.\u00a0 However, lessons from the five cities point to ways in which early success can be built upon:<\/p>\n\n Encourage bottom-up initiatives<\/b>: Almost invariably, Internet projects in the five cities started because interested people in the community took the initiative.\u00a0 This underscores the fact that successful programs tend to be driven by demand rather than pushed by technology. Community-computing programs do not come from the top down.<\/p>\n\n Encourage catalysts<\/b>: The bottom-up nature of most of the Internet initiatives has come about because committed individuals in the community have served as catalysts.\u00a0 Just because these people have taken the initiative does not mean that they and their initiatives do not need nurturing.\u00a0 Financial support is the most obvious, and probably most useful, form of encouragement, but publicity is another.\u00a0 The media could do a community service by focusing on how community groups are using the Internet for social purposes<\/p>\n\n Encourage public funding<\/b>: The coffers of local governments have played an important role in several cities.\u00a0 Cleveland and Austin have programs that channel public funds to community technology projects, although it is important to underline that the programs came about only after community technology activists had been running technology programs in the cities for some time.\u00a0 But as demand in the community for publicly available Internet access and training expands, local government help is needed to meet it.\u00a0 Additionally, federal funding, in the form of grants from the Technology Opportunities Program of the U.S. Department of Commerce, often is crucial to getting projects off the ground.\u00a0 There is still considerable demand for community computing programs and great need to wire local governments for better service delivery.\u00a0 It is appropriate to maintain or expand federal, state, or local programs that provide public funds for community technology.<\/p>\n\n Encourage \u201cbridging\u201d among groups<\/b>: In several cities, coalitions have been formed to bring advocates of low-income people into contact with people from the technology sector for community development.\u00a0 Such initiatives hold significant promise, but the existence of them should not be seen as ends in themselves.\u00a0 The partners in these coalitions have differing outlooks and goals.\u00a0 Business leaders may see community-computing programs as a quick way to increase the supply of skilled workers.\u00a0 Community activists may see the partnerships as part of a long-term strategy to improve people\u2019s lives and foster civic engagement among forgotten members of the community.\u00a0 Recognizing these differences early is key to making bridging work.<\/p>\n\n Encourage experimentation<\/b>: Across the five cities, there are a number of different models for using the Internet for community purposes.\u00a0 Some are new organizations that provide access and training.\u00a0 Others are new organizations that partner with existing community groups.\u00a0 Still others are existing organizations that have integrated the Internet into their missions.\u00a0 There is no single solution to exploiting the Internet\u2019s potential and community leaders and policymakers should be aware of this.\u00a0 A willingness to tolerate multiple approaches should also be accompanied by a willingness to tolerate fits and starts in programs, and even failure.\u00a0 The lessons learned in the process can be as valuable as successful models that are often showcased.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This report examines how institutions in five cities (Austin, Texas; Cleveland, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; Portland, Oregon and Washington, D.C.) are adapting to the Internet as an economic development and community-building tool. The experiences in these communities suggests that the Internet is best used to encourage bottom-up initiatives, encourage and nurture catalytic individuals in communities, encourage public funding for technology programs, encourage \u201cbridging\u201d among groups, and encourage experimentation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":294,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"sub_headline":"","sub_title":"","_prc_public_revisions":[],"_ppp_expiration_hours":0,"_ppp_enabled":false,"ai_generated_summary":"","_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"relatedPosts":[],"reportMaterials":[],"multiSectionReport":[{"key":"_migrate_0","postId":97472},{"key":"_migrate_1","postId":97481},{"key":"_migrate_2","postId":97335},{"key":"_migrate_3","postId":97347},{"key":"_migrate_4","postId":97356},{"key":"_migrate_5","postId":97367},{"key":"_migrate_6","postId":97379},{"key":"_migrate_7","postId":97385},{"key":"_migrate_8","postId":97391}],"package_parts__enabled":false,"package_parts":[],"datacite_doi":"","datacite_doi_citation":"","_prc_seo_qr_attachment_id":0,"spoken_article_player_enabled":true,"displayBylines":true,"footnotes":"","prc_watchers":[],"_prc_fork_parent":0,"_prc_fork_status":"","_prc_active_fork":0,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[234,335,305,58,274,410,307,83],"tags":[2289],"bylines":[],"collection":[],"datasets":[],"level_of_effort":[],"primary_audience":[],"information_type":[],"_post_visibility":[],"formats":[458],"_fund_pool":[],"languages":[],"regions-countries":[],"research-teams":[526],"workflow-status":[],"class_list":["post-97463","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-business-workplace","category-local-news","category-platforms-services","category-politics-media-2","category-politics-online","category-rural-urban-suburban-communities","category-social-media","category-state_local_government","tag-communities","formats-report","research-teams-internet"],"label":false,"post_parent":0,"word_count":2038,"canonical_url":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet\/","art_direction":false,"_embeds":[],"watchers":[],"table_of_contents":[{"id":97463,"title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","slug":"cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet\/","is_active":true},{"id":97472,"title":"Part 1: Introduction","slug":"part-1-introduction-16","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-1-introduction-16\/","is_active":false},{"id":97481,"title":"Part 2: Portland","slug":"part-2-portland","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-2-portland\/","is_active":false},{"id":97335,"title":"Part 3: Austin","slug":"part-3-austin","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-3-austin\/","is_active":false},{"id":97347,"title":"Part 4: Cleveland","slug":"part-4-cleveland","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-4-cleveland\/","is_active":false},{"id":97356,"title":"Part 5: Washington, D.C.","slug":"part-5-washington-d-c","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-5-washington-d-c\/","is_active":false},{"id":97367,"title":"Part 6: Nashville","slug":"part-6-nashville","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-6-nashville\/","is_active":false},{"id":97379,"title":"The Internet, Cities, and Social Capital","slug":"the-internet-cities-and-social-capital","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/the-internet-cities-and-social-capital\/","is_active":false},{"id":97385,"title":"Appendix A: Economic Profile of the Five Cities","slug":"appendix-a-economic-profile-of-the-five-cities","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/appendix-a-economic-profile-of-the-five-cities\/","is_active":false},{"id":97391,"title":"Appendix B","slug":"appendix-b-2-2","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/appendix-b-2-2\/","is_active":false}],"report_materials":"","report_pagination":{"current_post":{"id":97463,"title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","slug":"cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet\/","is_active":true,"page_num":1},"next_post":{"id":97472,"title":"Part 1: Introduction","slug":"part-1-introduction-16","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-1-introduction-16\/","is_active":false,"page_num":2},"previous_post":null,"pagination_items":[{"id":97463,"title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","slug":"cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/cities-online-urban-development-and-the-internet\/","is_active":true,"page_num":1},{"id":97472,"title":"Part 1: Introduction","slug":"part-1-introduction-16","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-1-introduction-16\/","is_active":false,"page_num":2},{"id":97481,"title":"Part 2: Portland","slug":"part-2-portland","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-2-portland\/","is_active":false,"page_num":3},{"id":97335,"title":"Part 3: Austin","slug":"part-3-austin","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-3-austin\/","is_active":false,"page_num":4},{"id":97347,"title":"Part 4: Cleveland","slug":"part-4-cleveland","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-4-cleveland\/","is_active":false,"page_num":5},{"id":97356,"title":"Part 5: Washington, D.C.","slug":"part-5-washington-d-c","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-5-washington-d-c\/","is_active":false,"page_num":6},{"id":97367,"title":"Part 6: Nashville","slug":"part-6-nashville","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/part-6-nashville\/","is_active":false,"page_num":7},{"id":97379,"title":"The Internet, Cities, and Social Capital","slug":"the-internet-cities-and-social-capital","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/the-internet-cities-and-social-capital\/","is_active":false,"page_num":8},{"id":97385,"title":"Appendix A: Economic Profile of the Five Cities","slug":"appendix-a-economic-profile-of-the-five-cities","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/appendix-a-economic-profile-of-the-five-cities\/","is_active":false,"page_num":9},{"id":97391,"title":"Appendix B","slug":"appendix-b-2-2","link":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/internet\/2001\/11\/20\/appendix-b-2-2\/","is_active":false,"page_num":10}]},"parent_info":{"parent_title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","parent_id":97463},"materialsOrdered":[],"chaptersOrdered":[{"key":"_migrate_0","postId":97472},{"key":"_migrate_1","postId":97481},{"key":"_migrate_2","postId":97335},{"key":"_migrate_3","postId":97347},{"key":"_migrate_4","postId":97356},{"key":"_migrate_5","postId":97367},{"key":"_migrate_6","postId":97379},{"key":"_migrate_7","postId":97385},{"key":"_migrate_8","postId":97391}],"partsOrdered":[],"partsEnabled":false,"datacite_doi":"","prc_seo_data":{"title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","description":"This report examines how institutions in five cities (Austin, Texas; Cleveland, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; Portland, Oregon and Washington, D.C.) are adapting to the Internet as an economic development and community-building tool. The experiences in these communities suggests that the Internet is best used to encourage bottom-up initiatives, encourage and nurture catalytic individuals in communities, encourage public funding for technology programs, encourage \u201cbridging\u201d among groups, and encourage experimentation.","og_title":"Cities Online: Urban Development and the Internet","og_description":"This report examines how institutions in five cities (Austin, Texas; Cleveland, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; Portland, Oregon and Washington, D.C.) are adapting to the Internet as an economic development and community-building tool. The experiences in these communities suggests that the Internet is best used to encourage bottom-up initiatives, encourage and nurture catalytic individuals in communities, encourage public funding for technology programs, encourage \u201cbridging\u201d among groups, and encourage experimentation.","schema_type":"Article","noindex":false,"canonical_url":"","primary_terms":[],"custom_schema":[],"og_image":0,"indexnow_submitted_at":null,"gsc_index_status":null},"prepublish_checks":{"prc-image-alt-text":{"status":"complete","message":"No image blocks in content.","data":null},"prc-about-this-research":{"status":"incomplete","message":"Add an \"About this research\" details block.","data":null},"prc-paragraph-count":{"status":"complete","message":"Found 25 paragraphs.","data":{"count":25}},"prc-internal-link":{"status":"incomplete","message":"Add at least one internal link.","data":{"count":0}}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"relatedPostsOrdered":[],"bylinesOrdered":[],"acknowledgementsOrdered":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97463","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/294"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=97463"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97463\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":137132,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97463\/revisions\/137132"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97463"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"bylines","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/bylines?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"collection","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/collection?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"datasets","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/datasets?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"level_of_effort","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/level_of_effort?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"primary_audience","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/primary_audience?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"information_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/information_type?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"_post_visibility","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/_post_visibility?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"formats","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/formats?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"_fund_pool","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/_fund_pool?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"languages","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/languages?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"regions-countries","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/regions-countries?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"research-teams","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/research-teams?post=97463"},{"taxonomy":"workflow-status","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alpha.pewresearch.org\/pewresearch-org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/workflow-status?post=97463"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n\n
\n\n
\n\n
\n\n