Assessing the Effect of Area Based Initiatives on Local Area Outcomes: Some Thoughts Based on the National Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget in England
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2005
Assessing the Effect of Area Based Initiatives on Local Area Outcomes: Some Thoughts Based on the National Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget in England
During the past 25 years, there has been an extensive use of Area Based Initiatives (ABIs) to regenerate run-down areas in many countries. However, despite their increased popularity, evidence on their success in helping to turn around depressed areas remains elusive. The evidence base has been constrained by inadequate understanding of the theory of change behind the policy intervention, insufficient development of evaluation theory and method and a lack of information about the impact of the interventions on the key outcomes that they are designed to affect. This article seeks to address the third of these limitations-namely, a focus on the impact of ABIs on key outcomes that reflect the quality of life of the people who live in depressed areas. However, it also considers issues relating to the other two key factors. The article illustrates how the impacts of ABIs on key outcomes might be assessed by drawing upon recent findings that have emerged from an evaluation of one of the largest ABI programmes that has been deployed in England, that of the Single Regeneration Budget.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. (2001) Disentangling area effects: evidence from deprived and non-deprived neighbourhoods, UrbanStudies, 38(12), pp. 2277-2298.
2.
Brennan, A., Rhodes, J. and Tyler, P. (2000) The nature of local area social exclusion in England and the role of the labour market, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 16(1), pp. 129-146.
3.
Connell, J.P., Kubisch, A.C., Schorr, L.B. and Weiss, C.H. (Eds) (1995) New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Vol. 1. Concepts, Methods, and Contexts. New York: Aspen Institute.
4.
Dabinett, G., Lawless, P., Rhodes, J. and Tyler, P. (2001) A review of the evidence base for regeneration and practice. London: DETR.
5.
Department Of Land Economy (1997) The SRB evaluation framework. Discussion Article 83, Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge.
6.
Detr (Department Of Environment, Transport And The Regions) (1998) Evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget Challenge Fund-A Partnership for Regeneration: An Interim Evaluation . London: HMSO.
7.
Detr (1999) New Deal for Communities Phase 1 Proposals Guidance for Applicants. London: DETR.
8.
Detr (2000a) New Deal for Communities Support and Advice. London: DETR .
9.
Detr (2000b) National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal: Report of Policy Action Team 17: Joining it up Locally. London: DETR.
10.
Dtlr (Department Of Transport, Local Government And Regions) (2000) National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal: Report of Policy Action Team 18-Better Information. London: The Stationery Office.
11.
Dtlr (2002) Neighbourhood Regeneration: Lessons and Evaluation Evidence from 10 SRB Case Studies—Mid Term Report. London: HMSO.
12.
Duffy, B., Rhodes, J., Tyler, P. ET AL. (2002) Answering the really difficult questions: the role of local social surveys in assessing the impact of regeneration initiatives . Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge .
13.
Ellaway, A., Macintyre, S. and Kearns, A. (2001) Perceptions of place and health in socially contrasting neighbourhoods, UrbanStudies, 38(12), pp. 2299-2316.
14.
Evans, M., Noble, M., Wright, G. ET AL. (2002) Growing Together or Growing Apart? Geographic Patterns of Change of Income Support and Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance of Claimants in England between 1995 and 2000. Bristol : The Policy Press.
15.
Gordon, I. (1999) Targeting a Leaky Bucket. London : IPPR.
16.
Hinds, K., Pickering, K. and Park, A. (2000) Design for a Study of Neighbourhoods in Scotland . Edinburgh: Scottish Homes.
17.
HM Treasury (1995) A Framework for the Evaluation of Regeneration Projects and Programmes (EGRUP). London: HM Treasury.
18.
Kleinman, M. (1999) 'There goes the neighbourhood': area policies and social exclusion, New Economy, 6(4), pp. 188-192.
19.
Lawless, P. (2003) Evaluating the New Deal for Communities. Research mimeograph, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research. Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield.
20.
Odpm (Office Of The Deputy Prime Minister) ( 2003) Review of Area Based Initiatives, Impacts and Outcomes . London: ODPM.
21.
Odpm (2004) Assessing the Impact of Spatial Interventions. Regeneration, Renewal and Regional Development. The 3Rs Guidance. London: ODPM.
22.
Pawson, R. (1997) Realistic Evaluation. London : Sage Publications.
23.
Rhodes, J., Tyler, P. and Brennan, A. (2003) New developments in area based initiatives in England: the experience of the single regeneration budget, UrbanStudies , 40(8), pp. 1399-1426.
24.
Seu (Social Exclusion Unit) (1998) Bringing Britain Together: A National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal. London: SEU.
25.
SEU (2001) A New Commitment to Neighbourhood Renewal. A National Strategy Action Plan . London: The Cabinet Office.
26.
Wallace, M. (2001) A new approach to neighbourhood renewal in England, UrbanStudies, 38(12), pp. 2163-2166.
