Turning around the poorest neighbourhoods: learning the lessons from twenty years of neighbourhood-based regeneration strategies in England

In the past two decades governments in Britain have launched a series of initiatives designed to reduce the disparities between areas of affluence and deprivation. These initiatives were funded by central government and were delivered through a series of partnership boards operating at the neighbourhood level in areas with high levels of deprivation. Drawing on similar approaches in the US War on Poverty, the engagement of residents in the planning and delivery of projects was a major priority. This chapter draws on the national evaluations of three of these programmes in England: the Single Regeneration Budget, the New Deal for Communities and the Neighbourhood Management Pathfinders. The chapter begins by identifying the common characteristics of these programmes, known as area-based initiatives because they targeted areas of concentrated deprivation with a population of about 10,000 people each. It then goes on to discuss the three national programmes and summarises the main findings in relation to how far key indicators changed for the better. The final section sets out the ways in which policy objectives changed in 2010 after the election of a coalition government. This produced a shift to what was called the ‘Big Society’ where the rhetoric favoured a transfer of power away from central government towards the local, neighbourhood, level. This approach favoured self-help and a call to volunteering rather than channelling resources to the areas in greatest need. The chapter closes by reviewing the relatively modest achievements of this centralist, big-state approach to distressed neighbourhoods of 1990–2010.

The potential for neighbourhood regeneration in a period of austerity: changing forms of neighbourhood governance in two cities

Localism is an active political strategy, developed in a period of austerity by the UK's coalition government as a justification for the restructuring of state-civil society relationships. The deprived neighbourhood has long been a site for service delivery and a scale for intervention and action, giving rise to a variety of forms of neighbourhood governance. Prior international comparative research indicated convergence with the US given the rise of the self-help conjuncture and the decline of neighbourhood governance as a medium of regeneration. The subsequent shift in the UK paradigm from ‘big’ to ‘small state’ localism and deficit-reducing cuts to public expenditure confirm these trends, raising questions about the forms of neighbourhood governance currently being established, the role being played by local and central government, and the implications for neighbourhood regeneration. Two emerging forms of neighbourhood governance are examined in two urban local authorities and compared with prior forms examined in earlier research in the case study sites. The emerging forms differ significantly in their design and purpose, but as both are voluntary and receive no additional funding, better organised and more affluent communities are more likely to pursue their development. While it is still rather early to assess the capacity of these forms to promote neighbourhood regeneration, the potential in a period of austerity appears limited. Reduced funding for local services increases the imperative to self-help, while rights to local voice remain limited and the emerging forms provide little scope to influence (declining) local services and (still centralised) planning decisions, especially in neighbourhoods with regeneration needs which are likely to lack the requisite capacities, particularly stores of linking social capital. Initial conclusions suggest greater polarity and the further containment of deprived neighbourhoods.

The Big Society and the conjunction of crises: Justifying welfare reform and undermining social housing

This article considers the idea of the ‘Big Society’ as part of a long-standing debate about the regulation of housing. Situating the concept within governance theory, the article considers how the idea of the Big Society was used by the UK coalition government to justify a radical restructuring of welfare provision. The fundamental rationale for this transformation was that the UK was forced to respond to a conjunction of crises in morality, the state, ideology and economics. Representing a fundamental departure from earlier attempts at welfare reform, the government has undertaken a reform programme which has had a severe effect on the social housing sector. The article argues that the result has been a combination of libertarianism and authoritarianism, alongside an intentionally more destructive combination of stigmatization and fatalism. The consequence is to undermine the principle of social housing which will not only prove detrimental for residents but raises significant dilemmas for those working in the housing sector.

How Much Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts? Evaluating Interactions Between Complex Policies

This presentation focuses on methods for the evaluation of complex policies. In particular, it focuses on evaluating interactions between policies and the extent to which two or more interacting policies mutually reinforce or hinder one another, in the area of environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is increasingly gaining recognition as a complex policy area, requiring a more systemic perspective and approach (e.g. European Commission, 2011). Current trends in human levels of resource consumption are unsustainable, and single solutions which target isolated issues independently of the broader context have so far fallen short. Instead there is a growing call among both academics and policy practitioners for systemic change which acknowledges and engages with the complex interactions, barriers and opportunities across the different actors, sectors, and drivers of production and consumption. Policy mixes, and the combination and ordering of policies within, therefore become an important focus for those aspiring to design and manage transitions to sustainability. To this end, we need a better understanding of the interactions, synergies and conflicts between policies (Cunningham et al., 2013; Geels, 2014). As a contribution to this emerging field of research and to inform its next steps, I present a review on what methods are available to try to quantify the impacts of complex policy interactions, since there is no established method among practitioners, and I explore the merits or value of such attempts. The presentation builds on key works in the field of complexity science (e.g. Anderson, 1972), revisiting and combining these with more recent contributions in the emerging field of policy and complex systems, and evaluation (e.g. Johnstone et al., 2010). With a coalition of UK Government departments, agencies and Research Councils soon to announce the launch of a new internationally-leading centre to pioneer, test and promote innovative and inclusive methods for policy evaluation across the energy-environment-food nexus, the contribution is particularly timely.

Invited lectures from a spatial orientation symposium in honor of Frederick Guedry, Day 2

This report contains the invited lectures from day 2 of a Spatial Orientation Symposium in honor of the late Dr. Frederick Guedry, held at the Institute of Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC) in Pensacola, Florida in November of 2010. The conference was sponsored by the Coalition Warfare Program of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. It was organized by Drs. Angus Rupert and Ben Lawson (USAARL) and hosted by Drs. Anil Raj and Ken Ford (IHMC). The lectures from day 1 are in Lawson et al., 2014. Day 2 includes lectures by Drs. Scott, Ben Lawson, Angus Rupert, Owen Black, Karen Atkins, Kim Gottshall, Anil Raj, and Måns Magnusson. The lectures focus on the structure, function and reflexes of the vestibular system, orientation perceptions, motion sickness, adaptation, and rehabilitation. This report also features banquet talks given by Drs. Lawson and Rupert, in which they honor Dr. Fred Guedry. Also featured is an interview with Dr. Guedry, conducted by a Navy historian, in which the reader can catch a glimpse into Dr. Guedry's wartime experiences and early days as a researcher.