IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v33y2015i2p289-304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the State Empower Communities through Localism? An Evaluation of Recent Approaches to Neighbourhood Governance in England

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Bailey

    (School of Architecture and The Built Environment, University of Westminster, 35 Marylebone Road, London NW1 5LS, England)

  • Madeleine Pill

    (Cardiff School of Planning and Geography, Cardiff University, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3WA, Wales)

Abstract

‘Empowerment’ is a term much used by policy makers with an interest in improving service delivery and promoting different forms of neighbourhood governance. But the term is ambiguous and has no generally accepted definition. Indeed, there is a growing paradox between the rhetoric of community empowerment and an apparent shift towards increased centralisation of power away from the neighbourhood in developed economies. In this paper we explore the literature relating to empowerment and identify two broad conceptions which reflect different emphases on neoliberalism. We go on to discuss two models illustrating different levels of state intervention at the neighbourhood level and set out evidence from two neighbourhood councils in Milton Keynes in central England. In conclusion, it is argued that those initiatives which are top-down, state-led policy initiatives tend to result in the least empowerment (as defined by government), whereas the bottom-up, self-help projects, which may be partly state enabled, at least provide an opportunity to create the spaces where there is some potential for varying degrees of transformation. Further empirical research is needed to test how far localist responses can challenge constraints on empowerment imposed by neoliberalism.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Bailey & Madeleine Pill, 2015. "Can the State Empower Communities through Localism? An Evaluation of Recent Approaches to Neighbourhood Governance in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(2), pages 289-304, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:33:y:2015:i:2:p:289-304
    DOI: 10.1068/c12331r
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c12331r
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c12331r?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margit Mayer, 2003. "The onward sweep of social capital: causes and consequences for understanding cities, communities and urban movements," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 110-132, March.
    2. Jamie Peck & Nik Theodore & Neil Brenner, 2013. "Neoliberal Urbanism Redux?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 1091-1099, May.
    3. Valeria Guarneros‐Meza & Mike Geddes, 2010. "Local Governance and Participation under Neoliberalism: Comparative Perspectives," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 115-129, March.
    4. Paul Lawless & Sarah Pearson, 2012. "Outcomes from Community Engagement in Urban Regeneration: Evidence from England's New Deal for Communities Programme," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 509-527, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mace, Alan & Holman, Nancy & Paccoud, Antoine & Sundaresan, Jayaraj, 2015. "Coordinating density; working through conviction, suspicion and pragmatism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 56768, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Jenny Muir, 2014. "Neoliberalising a divided society? The regeneration of Crumlin Road Gaol and Girdwood Park, North Belfast," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 29(1-2), pages 52-64, February.
    3. Esin Özdemir & Ayda Eraydin, 2017. "Fragmentation in Urban Movements: The Role of Urban Planning Processes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 727-748, September.
    4. Kleemann, Janina & Struve, Berenike & Spyra, Marcin, 2023. "Conflicts in urban peripheries in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    5. Andrew McCulloch & John Mohan & Peter Smith, 2012. "Patterns of Social Capital, Voluntary Activity, and Area Deprivation in England," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(5), pages 1130-1147, May.
    6. Talia Margalit & Adriana Kemp, 2019. "The uneven geographies of post-political planning: Objections to urban regeneration projects in peripheral and central Israeli cities," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(4), pages 931-949, June.
    7. Anders Lund Hansen & Henrik Gutzon Larsen & Adam Grydehoj & Eric Clark, 2015. "Financialisation of the built environment in Stockholm and Copenhagen," Working papers wpaper115, Financialisation, Economy, Society & Sustainable Development (FESSUD) Project.
    8. Bogdan Chiripuci & Mădălina Elena Deaconu & Marius Constantin & Albert Scrieciu, 2021. "East-West Disparities on the Romanian Labor Market under the Influence of Globalization and Entrepreneurship," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 24(80), pages 43-58, June.
    9. David Ley, 2008. "The Immigrant Church as an Urban Service Hub," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(10), pages 2057-2074, September.
    10. Monika Egerer & Elsa Anderson, 2020. "Social-Ecological Connectivity to Understand Ecosystem Service Provision across Networks in Urban Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-14, December.
    11. Marie-Hélène Bacqué & Carole Biewener, 2013. "Different Manifestations of the Concept of Empowerment: The Politics of Urban Renewal in the United States and the United Kingdom," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 2198-2213, November.
    12. Gillian Bristow & Tom Entwistle & Frances Hines & Steve Martin, 2008. "New Spaces for Inclusion? Lessons from the ‘Three‐Thirds’ Partnerships in Wales," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 903-921, December.
    13. Margalit, Talia & Mualam, Nir, 2020. "Selective rescaling, inequality and popular growth coalitions: The case of the Israeli national plan for earthquake preparedness," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Joe Crawford & Kim Mckee & Sharon Leahy, 2020. "The Right to Rent: Active Resistance to Evolving Geographies of State Regulation," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 415-428, May.
    15. Mangialardo, Alessia & Micelli, Ezio, 2021. "Grass-roots participation to enhance public real estate properties. Just a fad?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    16. RUTH McALISTER, 2010. "Putting the ‘Community’ into Community Planning: Assessing Community Inclusion in Northern Ireland," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 533-547, September.
    17. Benites-Lazaro, L.L. & Mello-Théry, N.A., 2019. "Empowering communities? Local stakeholders’ participation in the Clean Development Mechanism in Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-266.
    18. Jessica Tanghetti & Roberta Comunian & Tamsyn Dent, 2022. "‘Covid-19 opened the pandora box’ of the creative city: creative and cultural workers against precarity in Milan [A heterodox re-reading of creative work: the diverse economies of Danish visual art," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 15(3), pages 615-634.
    19. Brian W. Head, 2011. "Governance for sustainable regions: can government meet the innovation policy challenge?," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 219-230, August.
    20. Wouter van Gent & Cody Hochstenbach & Justus Uitermark, 2018. "Exclusion as urban policy: The Dutch ‘Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems’," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(11), pages 2337-2353, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:33:y:2015:i:2:p:289-304. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.