Appendix 1: Phase One Bibliography of Major References

CoNCEPTUALISING COMMUNITY AS A SOCIAL FIX

1

CoNCEPTUALISING COMMUNITY AS A SOCIAL FIX

Introduction

This document contains the appendices referred to in the AHRC report: Conceptualising community as a social fix, argument and persuasion in health, housing and local governance. The appendices are as follows:

Appendix 1: Phase One Bibliography of Major References

Appendix 2: Method and Search Profile

Appendix 3: Rhetorical Discourse Analysis Policy Documents

Appendix 4: Flyer for Practitioner Event

Appendix 5: Hermeneutical Table: Summary of Stories

Appendix 6: Hermeneutical Story Summaries from Policy Documents

Appendix 7: Local Interpretations of Community

Appendix 8: Contestation in Policy Documents

Appendix 1: Phase One Bibliography of Major References

Amin, A., 2005. Local community on trial. Economy and Society 34, 612-633.

Andrews, R., Cowell, R., Downe, J., Martin, S., Turner, D., 2008. Supporting effective citizenship in local government: engaging, educating and empowering local citizens. Local Government Studies 34, 489-507.

Atkinson, R., 1999. Discourses of partnership and empowerment in contemporary British Urban Regeneration. Urban Studies 36, 59-72.

Atkinson, R., 2000. Narratives of policy: the construction of urban problems and urban policy in the official discourse of British government 1968-1998. Critical Social Policy 20, 211-232.

Atkinson, R., 2003. Addressing urban social exclusion through community involvement in urban regeneration, in: Raco, M., Imrie, R., 2003. Urban renaissance?: New Labour, community and urban policy. Policy Press, Bristol. pp. 109-119.

Bache, I., Catney, P., 2008. Embryonic associationalism: New labour and urban governance. Public Administration 86, 411-428.

Bailey, N., 2003. Local strategic partnerships in England: the continuing search for collaborative advantage, leadership and strategy in urban governance. Planning Theory & Practice 4, 443-457.

Bailey, N., 2010. Understanding community empowerment in urban regeneration and planning in england: Putting policy and practice in context. Planning Practice and Research 25, 317-332.

Barnes, M., 1999. Users as Citizens: Collective Action and the Local Governance of Welfare. Social Policy & Administration 33, 73-90.

Bauld, L., Judge, K., Barnes, M., Benzeval, M., MacKenzie, M., Sullivan, H., 2005. Promoting social change: The experience of health action zones in England. Journal of Social Policy 34, 427-445.

Berkeley, D., Springett, J., 2006a. From rhetoric to reality: Barriers faced by Health For All initiatives. Social Science and Medicine 63, 179-188.

Berkeley, D., Springett, J., 2006b. From rhetoric to reality: a systemic approach to understanding the constraints faced by Health For All initiatives in England. Social Science and Medicine 63, 2877-2889.

Bridgen, P., 2004. Evaluating the empowering potential of community-based health schemes: The case of community health policies in the UK since 1997. Community Development Journal 39, 289-302.

Bridgen, P., 2006. Social capital, community empowerment and public health: Policy developments in the UK since 1997. Policy and Politics 34, 27-50.

Brownill, S., 2007. New labour’s evolving regeneration policy: The transition from the single regeneration budget to the single pot in Oxford. Local Economy 22, 261-278.

Brownill, S., Carpenter, J., 2009. Governance and “integrated” planning: The case of sustainable communities in the ThamesGateway, England. Urban Studies 46, 251-274.

Campbell, H., Marshall, R., 2000. Public involvement and planning: Looking beyond the one to the many. International Planning Studies 5, 321-344.

Carlisle, S., 2010. Tackling health inequalities and social exclusion through partnership and community engagement? A reality check for policy and practice aspirations from a Social Inclusion Partnership in Scotland. Critical Public Health 20, 117-127.

Carpenter, J., Brownill, S., 2008. Approaches to democratic involvement: Widening community engagement in the English planning system. Planning Theory and Practice 9, 227-248.

Chahan, G., 2002. Searching for Solid Foundations: Community Involvement in Urban Policy, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. London.

Clark, D., Southern, R., Beer, J., 2007. Rural governance, community empowerment and the new institutionalism: A case study of the Isle of Wight. Journal of Rural Studies 23, 254-266.

Cochrane, A., 2010. Exploring the regional politics of “sustainability”: Making up sustainable communities in the South-East of England. Environmental Policy and Governance 20, 370-381.

Cole, I., Etherington, D., 2005. Neighbourhood renewal policy and spatial differentiation in housing markets: Recent trends in England and Denmark. European Journal of Housing Policy 5, 77-97.

Cole, I., Goodchild, B., 2000. Social mix and the “balanced community” in British housing policy - a tale of two epochs. Geojournal 51, 351-360.

Colomb, C., 2006. Towards an urban renaissance in new labour’s Britain: Fragmentation or sustainable reurbanisation of British cities? Archiv fur Sozialgeschichte 46, 389-794.

Colomb, C., 2007. Unpacking new labour’s “Urban Renaissance” agenda: Towards a socially sustainable reurbanization of British cities? Planning Practice and Research 22, 1-24.

Craig, G., 2007. Community capacity-building: Something old, something new...? Critical Social Policy 27, 335-359.

Crawshaw, P., Bunton, R., Gillen, K., 2003. Health Action Zones and the problem of community. Health and Social Care in the Community 11, 36-44.

Damer, S. , Hague, C.,1971. Public Participation in Planning: A Review. Town Planning Review 43, 219-232.

Dargan, L., 2009. Participation and local urban regeneration: The case of the New Deal for Communities (NDC) in the UK. Regional Studies 43, 305-317.

Davies, J.S., 2005. The social exclusion debate: Strategies, controversies and dilemmas. Policy Studies 26, 3-27.

Davies, J.S., 2007a. The limits of partnership: An exit-action strategy for local democratic inclusion. Political Studies 55, 779-800.

Davies, J.S., 2009. The limits of joined-up government: Towards a political analysis. Public Administration 87, 80-96.

Davies, W., 2007b. The governmentality of new labour. Public Policy Research 13, 249-256.

Davis, H., Daly, G., 2004. From community government to communitarian partnership? Approaches to devolution in Birmingham. Local Government Studies 30, 182-195.

Deacon, A., 2004. Justifying conditionality: the case of anti-social tenants. Housing studies 19, 911-926.

Diamond, J., 2004. Local regeneration initiatives and capacity building: Whose “capacity” and “building” for what? Community Development Journal 39, 177-189.

Diamond, J., 2008. Capacity building in the voluntary and community sectors: Towards relative independence - Limits and possibilities. Public Policy and Administration 23, 153-166.

Dinham, A., 2005. Empowered or over-powered? The real experiences of local participation in the UK’s New Deal for Communities. Community Development Journal 40, 301-312.

Duffy, K., Hutchinson, J., 1997. Urban policy and the turn to community. Town Planning Review 68, 347-362.

Durose, C., Lowndes, V., 2010. Neighbourhood governance: Contested rationales within a multi-level setting - a study of Manchester. Local Government Studies 36, 341-359.

Emmel, N., Conn, C., Nuffield Institute for, H., 2004. Towards community involvement : strategies for health and social care providers. Nuffield Institute for Health, Leeds.

Flint, J., 2006. Maintaining an Arm’s Length? Housing, Community Governance and the Management of “Problematic” Populations. Housing Studies 21, 171-186.

Foley, P., Martin, S., 2000. A new deal for the community? Public participation in regeneration and local service delivery. Policy and Politics 28, 479-492.

Fremeaux, I., 2005. New Labour’s appropriation of the concept of community: a critique. Community Development Journal 40, 265-274.

Fuller, C., Geddes, M., 2008. Urban governance under neoliberalism: New labour and the restructuring of state-space. Antipode 40, 252-282.

Furbey, R., 1999. Urban “regeneration”: reflections on a metaphor. Critical Social Policy 19, 419-45.

Geddes, M., 2006. Partnership and the limits to local governance in England: Institutionalist analysis and neoliberalism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 30, 76-97.

Goodlad, R., Burton, P., Croft, J., 2005. Effectiveness at what? The processes and impact of community involvement in area-based initiatives. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 23, 923-938.

Gray, J., 1995. Hollowing out the core, The Guardian, 8 March, 7.

Hall, S., 2003. The “third way” revisited: ’New labour, spatial policy and the national strategy for neighbourhood renewal. Planning Practice and Research 18, 265-277.

Harris, J., 2002. Caring for citizenship. British Journal of Social Work 32, 267-281.

Haughton, G., While, A., 1999. From Corporate City to CitizensCity? Urban Affairs Review 35, 3.

Henderson, S., Bowlby, S., M, R., 2007. Refashioning local government and inner-city regeneration: The Salford experience. Urban Studies 44, 1441-1463.

Hickman, P.G., 2006. Approaches to tenant participation in the English local authority sector. Housing Studies 21, 209-225.

Hodkinson, S., 2011. Housing Regeneration and the Private Finance Initiative in England: Unstitching the Neoliberal Urban Straitjacket. Antipode 43, 358-383.

Houghton, B., 2011. Poverty, power and policy dilemmas: lessons from the citizen engagement programme in England. Journal of Urban and Regional Renewal 4, 207-217.

Jewkes, R., Murcott, A., 1998. Community representatives: Representing the “community”? Social Science and Medicine 46, 843-858.

John, P., 2009. Citizen Governance: Where it came from, where it’s going. In: Durose, C., Greasley, S., Richardson, L., 2009.Changing Local Governance, Changing Local Citizens.Bristol. Policy Press.

Judge, K., Bauld, L., 2006. Learning from policy failure? Health action zones in England. European Journal of Public Health 16, 341-3.

Kearns, A., Parkinson, M., Galster, G., Forrest, R., Butler, T., Robson, G., Wallace, M., Meegan, R., Mitchell, A., Allen, J., Cars, G., Purdue, D., Docherty, I., Goodlad, R., Paddison, R., Buck, N., Atkinson, R., Kintrea, K., Ellaway, A., MacIntyre, S., 2003. Urban neighbourhoods. Urban studies 38, 2103-2316.

Kearns, A., Tannahill, C., Bond, L., 2009. Regeneration and health: Conceptualising the connections. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal 3, 56-76.

Keddie, J., Tonkiss, F., 2010. The market and the plan: Housing, urban renewal and socio-economic change in London. City, Culture and Society 1, 57-67.

Lawless, P., 2004. Locating and explaining area-based urban initiatives: New Deal for Communities in England. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 22, 383-399.

Lawless, P., 2006. Area-based urban interventions: Rationale and outcomes: The new deal for communities programme in England. Urban Studies 43, 1991-2011.

Lawless, P., Foden, M., Wilson, I., Beatty, C., 2010. Understanding area-based regeneration: The new deal for communities programme in England. Urban Studies 47, 257-275.

Leary, M.E., 2008. Gin and tonic or oil and water: The entrepreneurial city and sustainable managerial regeneration in Manchester. Local Economy 23, 222-233.

Lees, L., 2003. Visions of “urban renaissance”: the Urban Task Force report and the Urban White Paper, in: Raco, M., Imrie, R. (Eds.), Urban Renaissance? : New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Policy Press, Bristol, pp. 61-82.

Loney, M., 1983. Community against government: the British Community Development Project, 1968-78, a study of government incompetence. Heinemann Educational, London.

Long, J., Bramham, P., 2006. Joining up policy discourses and fragmented practices: The precarious contribution of cultural projects to social inclusion? Policy and Politics 34, 133-151.

Lowndes, V., Pratchett, L., Stoker, G., Institute for Public Policy, R., 2006. Locality matters: making participation count in local politics. IPPR, [London].

Lowndes, V., Sullivan, H., 2008. How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance. Public Administration 86, 53-74.

Lupton, R., Fuller, C., 2009. Mixed communities: a new approach to spatially concentrated poverty in England. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33, 1014-1028.

Lupton, R., Tunstall, R., 2008. Neighbourhood regeneration through mixed communities: A “social justice dilemma”? Journal of Education Policy 23, 105-117.

Lupton, R., Turok, I., 2004.Anti-Poverty Policies in Britain: Area-Based and People-Based Approachesin: Walther, U-J., Mensch, K., (eds) 2004.Armut und Ausgrenzung in der ‘Sozialen Stadt’, Darmstadt: Schader-Stiftung, pp.188-208.

MacLeavy, J., 2008. Neoliberalising subjects: The legacy of New Labour’s construction of social exclusion in local governance. Geoforum 39, 1657-1666.

MacLeavy, J., 2009. (Re) analysing community empowerment: Rationalities and technologies of government in Bristol’s new deal for communities. Urban Studies 46, 849-875.

Madden, A., 2010. The community leadership and place-shaping roles of English local government: synergy or tension? Public Policy and Administration 25, 175-193.

Maginn, P.J., 2007. Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: The potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography. Qualitative Research 7, 25-43.

Marinetto, M., 2003. Who wants to be an active citizen? The politics and practice of community involvement. Sociology 37, 103-120.

Matka, E., Barnes, M., Sullivan, H., 2002. Health Action Zones: “creating alliances to achieve change”. Policy Studies 23, 97-106.

Matthews, P., 2010. Mind the gap? The persistence of pathological discourses in Urban regeneration policy. Housing, Theory and Society 27, 221-240.

McAreavey, R., 2009. Community regeneration: An elite or a “Real” community space? International Planning Studies 14, 311-327.

McIntyre, Z., McKee, K., 2009. Creating sustainable communities through tenure-mix: the responsibilisation of marginal homeowners in Scotland. GeoJournal 1-13.

McKee, K., 2007. Community ownership in Glasgow: The devolution of ownership and control, or a centralizing process? European Journal of Housing Policy 7, 319-336.

McKee, K., Cooper, V., 2008. The paradox of tenant empowerment: Regulatory and liberatory possibilities. Housing, Theory and Society 25, 132-146.

Milewa, T., Valentine, J., Calnan, M., 1998. Managerialism and active citizenship in Britain’s reformed health service: Power and community in an era of decentralisation. Social Science and Medicine 47, 507-517.

National Audit Office., 1990.Regenerating the inner cities. London, HMSO.

Pearce, G., Mawson, J. b, 2003. Delivering devolved approaches to local governance. Policy and Politics 31, 51-67.

Pinto, R., 1995. Revitalising communities: a moment of opportunity for local authorities. Local Government Policy Making 21, 30-41.

Powell, M., Moon, G., 2001. Health Action Zones: the “third way” of a new area-based policy? Health and Social Care in the Community 9, 43-50.

Raco, M., 2005. Sustainable development, rolled-out neoliberalism and sustainable communities. Antipode 37, 324-347.

Raco, M., Flint, J., 2001. Communities, places and institutional relations: Assessing the role of area-based community representation in local governance. Political Geography 20, 585-612.

Raco, M., Imrie, R., (eds) 2003. Urban renaissance?: New Labour, community and urban policy. Policy Press, Bristol.

Raco, M., Parker, G., Doak, J., 2006. Reshaping spaces of local governance? Community strategies and the modernisation of local government in England. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 24, 475-496.

Reddel, T., 2004. Third Way social governance: Where is the state? Australian Journal of Social Issues 39, 129-142.

Robinson, D., 2005. The search for community cohesion: key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy agenda. Urban studies 42, 1411-1427.

Rose, N., 1996. The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government. Economy and Society25, 327-356.

Rose, N., 2000. Community, Citizenship, and the third Way. American Behavioral Scientist 43, 1395-1411.

Rowe, J., 2000. The Local Agenda 21 Issue Commission in Bath and North-East Somerset: review of a community consultation exercise towards sustainability. Local Government Studies 26, 71-92.

Rowe, M., Devanney, C., 2003. Partnership and the governance of regeneration. Critical Social Policy 23, 375-397.

Schofield, B., 2002. Partner’s in Power: Governing the Self-Sustaining Community. Sociology 36, 663-683.

Scott, M., 2011. Reflections on the big society. Community Development Journal 46, 132-137.

Scourfield, P., 2007. Helping older people in residential care remain full citizens. British Journal of Social Work 37, 1135-1152.

Shaw, K., Robinson, F., 2010. UK urban regeneration policies in the early twenty-first century: continuity or change? Town Planning Review 81, 123-150.

Smith, D., 2008. The politics of studentification and “(un)balanced” urban populations: Lessons for gentrification and sustainable communities? Urban Studies 45, 2541-2564.

Smith, G., 2004. Faith in community and communities of faith? government rhetoric and religious identity in Urban Britain. Journal of Contemporary Religion 19, 185-204.

Somerville, P., 2011. Understanding community: politics, policy and practice.Bristol, Policy Press.

Sprigings, N., Allen, C., 2005. The communities we are regaining but need to lose: A critical commentary on community building in beyond-place societies. Community, Work and Family 8, 389-411.

Sullivan, H., 2001. Modernisation , Democratisation and Community Governance. Local Government Studies 27, 1-24.

Sullivan, H., 2003. New forms of local accountability: coming to terms with “many hands”? Policy & Politics 31, 353-369.

Sullivan, H., Downe, J., Entwistle, T., Sweeting, D., 2006. The three challenges of community leadership. Local Government Studies 32, 489-508.

Sullivan, H., Stewart, M., 2006. Who owns the theory of change? Evaluation 12, 179-199.

Syrett S., N.D., 2010. between economic competitiveness and social inclusion: new labour and the economic revival of deprived neighbourhoods. Local Economy 25, 476-493.

Taylor, M., (2003) Public Policy in the Community. London, Palgrave

Tooke, J., 2003. Spaces for community involvement: Processes of disciplining and appropriation. Space and Polity 7, 233-246.

Turner, D., Martin, S., 2004. Managerialism meets community development: Contracting for social inclusion? Policy and Politics 32, 21-32.

Wallace, A., 2010. New neighbourhoods, new citizens? Challenging “community” as a framework for social and moral regeneration under new labour in the UK. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34, 805-819.

Walker, M. 1995. Community Spirit. The Guardian,13 March, p.10/11.

Whitehead, M., 2007. The architecture of partnerships: Urban communities in the shadow of hierarchy. Policy and Politics 35, 3-23.

Williams, P., 1995. Housing management and community development models in the UK. Housing Review 44, 52-56.

Wistow, G., 2001. Modernisation, the NHS Plan and healthy communities. Journal of Management in Medicine 15, 334-351.

Appendix 2: Method and Search Profile

Phase One

A literature search of constructions of ‘community’ across three policy areas in the UK since the 1960s, was undertaken to produce hermeneutical accounts underpinning phase two (see table below). Content analysis was used to identify discursive shifts at national level to contextualise local documents and to understand how local policy-makers are able to rearticulate dominant national understandings.

SEARCH PROFILE
Title:
Conceptualising community as a social fix, argument and persuasion in health, housing and local governance
Scope of Search:
Databases: SCOPUS, EBSCO (ASP), ASSIA, IBSS, Social Sciences Citation Index (to follow up useful references)
Websites: JRF, Kings Fund, Nuffield, Direct Gov
Newspapers: The Guardian (1960-), The Independent (1984-), The Times (1960-)
Articles on community in health, housing, local governance/local government, in academic literature published in sociology, public policy, politics and social policy from 1960s onwards to understand changes across the timeline.
Read title, abstract and keywords to identify key papers. Follow up key references.
Local policy: identify through search of local archives, catalogues of East Midland’s universities and British Library catalogue.
Parameters:
Date: 1960 to date
Languages: English
Country: UK – focus on policy in England to account for policy difference around devolution.
Format: journal articles, reports, books
Key Words:
Community, local policy, local governance, local government, public health, health, housing, conceptualisation, discourse.
Known References:Somerville (2010); Taylor (2003); Jewkes and Murcott (1998)

Note: The general aim was to look at constructions of community in order to understand more about the contestation and negotiation of the term over time in relation to poverty. The project adopted an inductive approach to refining search categories/analytical components in relation to the problem. By using content analysis of policy discussions in secondary sources in the first stage, we built on this inductive approach, in order to define our categories more closely in relation to our operationalisation of rhetorical discourse analysis, and subsequent analysis.

Phase Two

Having found that national discourses were adequately covered in phase one it was decided to focus the RDA on local policy documents selected from various East Midland’s councils. The region covers a range of socio-economic features by which community could be defined in relation to the problem of poverty. Fifteen documents were selected using the following criteria: