The continuing popularity of the neighbourhood and neighbourhood governance in the transition from the 'big state' to the 'big society' paradigm

The neighbourhood in both the UK and Europe continues to dominate thinking about the quality of life in local communities, representation and empowerment, and how local services can be delivered most effectively. For several decades a series of centrally funded programmes in neighbour- hood governance have targeted localities suffering deprivation and social exclusion in England. From these much can be learnt about the strengths and limitations of a local approach to achieving multiple objectives.We review the findings of a case study of neighbourhood governance in the City of Westminster and draw on evaluations of two national programmes. In the conclusions we discuss the problems arising from multiple objectives and examine the prospects for neighbourhood governance as the national paradigm moves away from `big state' solutions towards the less-well-defined `big society' approach and the reinvention of `localism'. While the rationale for neighbourhood governance may change, the `neighbourhood' as a site for service delivery and planning remains as important now as in the past.

Can the state empower communities through localism? An evaluation of recent approaches to neighbourhood governance in England

‘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. This article explores the literature relating to empowerment and identifies two broad conceptions which reflect different emphases on neo-liberalism. It goes on to discuss two models illustrating different levels of state intervention at the neighbourhood level and sets 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 neo-liberalism.

“An Absurdly Quiet Spot”: The Spatial Justice of WW1 Fraternizations

Recent research on WW1 shows that incidents of fraternization across enemy lines took place regularly. However, fraternization remains a taboo in many contexts. The fact that the 2005 film Joyeux Noel by Christian Caron, which explicitly deals with the subject, encountered resistance from the authorities, is an indication of the kind of difficulty associated with the issue. I am drawing my inspiration from the way fraternizations are depicted in the film and in the literature in order to explore the concept of spatial justice. I define spatial justice as the question that emerges when a body desires to occupy the same space at the same time as another body. Defined like this, the question of spatial justice opens up in the dread of No Man’s Land and in particular the exchange of affects, objects and narratives that went on during fraternizations. I trace the movement of spatial justice as one of withdrawal from the asphyxiating atmosphere of the war and the propaganda machine. This withdrawal is not one of unpatriotic stance but of a courageous and difficult detachment from the supposed legality of the war that could only function on the basis of hate and demonization. While fraternizations did not end the war, they allowed for the possibility of spatial justice to emerge, as an opportunity to reorient the space and the bodies within.