This article argues that the meta-narrative of ‘newness’ promoted by the current New Labour government embodies numerous assumptions, or theories of change, which add to, rather than reduce, the complexity of working within public sector-led regeneration partnership structures. In particular, it will argue that embedded ways of working within the public sector are also fundamental in explaining the relative success of ‘new’ partnerships and that the overall aim of governance transformation is inherently beset by conflict and hidden power-relations and is not as easy to achieve as policy guidance suggests. Using this conceptualframe, and drawing on the experiences from a number of pieces of action research in England on regeneration partnerships, this paper offers a critical assessment of the rationale behind such implicit, or explicit, claims that such policy interventions are indeed ‘new’ or innovative in terms of facilitating the transfer of knowledge or collaboration within or between partnerships.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allemdinger, P. and Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2000), ‘New Labour, New Planning? The trajectory of Planning in Blair's Britain’ , Urban Studies, Vol 37, No 8, pp. 1379-1402 .
Bailey, N. (2003), ‘Local Strategic Partnerships in England. The continuing search for collaborative advantage, leadership and strategy in urban governance’ , Planning Theory and Practice, Vol 4, No 4, pp. 443-457 .
4.
Bentley, T. and Wilsdon, J. (2003), The Adaptive State: Strategies for personalising the public realm, ( London: DEMOS ).
5.
Bloomfield, D. , Collins, K. , Fry, C. and Munton, R. (2001), ‘Deliberation and inclusion: vehicles for trust in UK public governance’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol 19, pp.501-513.
6.
Boddy, M. and Fudge, C. (eds) (1984), Local Socialism?, ( London: Macmillan ).
7.
Cabinet Office (2000), Reaching out: the role of central government at regional and local level, ( London: Performance and Innovation Unit ).
8.
Chatterton, P. and Bradley, D. (2000), ‘Bringing Britain Together? The limitations of area-based regeneration policies in addressing deprivation’ , Local Economy Vol 15, No 2, pp. 98-111 .
9.
Coaffee, J. (2004), ‘Re-scaling regeneration - experiences of merging area-based and city-wide partnerships in urban policy’ , The International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol 17, No 5, pp. 443-461 .
10.
Coaffee, J. (2005), ‘New Localism and the management of regeneration’ , International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol 18, No 2, pp. 108-113 .
11.
Coaffee, J. and Healey, P. (2003), ‘My Voice My Place: Tracking Transformations in Urban Governance’ , Urban Studies, Vol 40, No 10, pp. 1960-1978 .
12.
Coaffee, J. and Johnston, L. (2005), ‘The Management of Local Government Modernisation - Area Decentralisation and Pragmatic Localism’ , International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol 18, No 2, pp. 164-177 .
13.
Corpus, C. (2003), ‘Re-engaging citizens and council. The importance of the councillor to enhanced citizen involvement’ , Local Government Studies, Vol 29, No 2, pp. 32-51 .
14.
Corrigan, P. (2000), Starting to modernise: local solutions: a practical guide to neighbourhoodforums and area committees, ( London: NLGN ).
15.
Corry, D. and Stoker, G. (2002), New Localism refashioning the centre-local relationship, ( London: NLGN ).
16.
Corry, D. , Hatter, W. , Parker, I. , Randle, A. and Stoker, G. (2003), Joining-up local democracy - governance systems for a new localism, ( London: NLGN ).
17.
Coulson, A. (2005), ‘A plague on all your partnership: theory and practice in regeneration’ , International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol 18, No 2, pp. 151-163 .
18.
Davies, J. (2004), ‘Conjuncture or disjuncture? An institutional analysis of local regeneration partnerships in the UK’ , International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol 28, No 3, pp. 570-585 .
19.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Region (DETR) (1998), Modern Local Government: in touch with the people, ( London: HMSO ).
20.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Region (DETR) (1999), Towards and Urban Renaissance, ( London: E & FN Spon )
21.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Region (DETR) (2000a), Coordination or area-based initiatives - research working paper, ( London: HMSO ).
22.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Region (DETR) (2000b), Collaboration and Coordination in area-based initiatives - second research working paper, ( London: HMSO ).
23.
Department of Transport, Local Government and the Region (DTLR) (2001), Local Strategic Partnerships - Government Guidance, ( London, DETR )
24.
Department of Transport, Local Government and the Region (DTLR) (2002), Collaboration and Coordination in Area Based Initiatives, ( London: Neighbourhood Renewal Unit ).
25.
Diamond, J. (2001), ‘Managing change or coping with conflict? - Mapping the experience of a local regeneration partnership’ , Local Economy, Vol 16, No 4, pp. 272-285 .
26.
Diamond, J. (2004), ‘First it was “going local” in the 1980s and now its “localism” - what have we learnt and why does it matter’, in The Challenges of Localism, ( London: Regional Studies Association ), pp. 18-21.
27.
Docherty, I. , Goodland, R. and Paddison, R. (2001), ‘Civic Culture, Community and Citizen Participation in Contrasting Neighbourhood’ , Urban Studies, Vol 38, No 1, pp. 2225-2250 .
28.
Downer, S. (2004), ‘Prescott looks to free NDCs from councils’ interference’, New Start, 11 February.
29.
Fernie, K. and McCarthy, J. (2001), ‘Partnership and community involvement: institutional morphing in Dundee’ , Local Economy, Vol 16, No 4, pp. 299-311 .
30.
Foley, P. and Martin, S. (2000), ‘A new deal for community? Public Participation in regeneration and local service delivery’ , Policy and Politics, Vol 28, No 4, pp. 479-491 .
31.
Glendinning, S. , Powell, M. and Rummery, K. (eds) (2002), Partnerships, New Labour and the Governance of Welfare, ( Cambridge: Policy Press ).
32.
Gold, J.R. (1997), The Experience of modernism - modern Architects and the Future city 1928-1953, ( London: E and FN SPON ).
33.
Hall, S. (2003), ‘The Third Way revisited: New labour, spatial policy and the National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal’ , Planning, Practice and Research, Vol 18, No 4, pp. 265-277
34.
Harvey, D. (2000), Spaces of Hope, ( Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press ).
35.
Harward, E. (2003), ‘Rows and staff turnover blight NDCs’ good work’, New Start, October 22.
36.
Healey, P. (1997), Mandarins, City fathers and Neighbours: crossing old divides in new partnerships. Cities in Transfornation: Transformation in Cities. O. Kalltorp, I. Elander, O. Ericsson and M. Franzen, ( Aldershot: Avebury ), pp.266-288.
37.
Healey, P. (1999), ‘Institutionalist analysis, communicative planning and shaping places’ , Journal of Planning and Environment Research, Vol 19, No 2, pp. 111-122 .
38.
Hibbitt, K. , Jones, P. and Meegan, R. (2001), ‘Tackling social exclusion: the role of social capital in urban regeneration on Merseyside - From Mistrust to Trust’ , European Planning Studies, Vol 9, No 2, pp. 141-161 .
39.
Hillier, J. (2002), Direct action and agonism in democratic planning practice, in P. Allmendinger and M. Tewdwr-Jones (eds), Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory, ( London: Routledge ), pp.110-135
40.
Holden, A. and Iveson, K. (2003), ‘Designs on the urban: New Labour's urban renaissance and the spaces of citizenship’ , City, Vol 7, No 1, pp. 57-72 .
41.
Hughes, R (1980), Shock of the new - art and a century of change, ( London: Knopf ).
42.
Huxham, C. (1996), Advantage or inertia: Making collaboration work, in Paton, R. , Clark, G. , Jones, G. and Quintas, P. (eds) The New Management Reader, ( London: Routledge ), pp.238-254.
43.
Huxham, C. and Vangen, S. (2000), ‘Leadership in the shaping and implementing of collaborative agendas: how things happen in a (not quite) joined-up world’ , Academy of Management Journal, Vol 43, No 6, pp. 1159-1175 .
44.
Huxham, C. and Vangen, S. (2003), ‘Doing things collaboratively, realizing the advantage or succumbing to inertia?’, University of Strathclyde, Graduate Business School, working paper series, Paper Number 2003-11.
45.
Huxham, C. and Vangen, S. (2005), Managing to collaborate - The theory and practice of collaborative advantage, ( London: Routledge ).
46.
Innes, J. (1995), ‘Planning theory's emerging paradigm: communicative action and interactive practice’ , Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol 14, No 4, pp. 183-189 .
47.
Jessop, B. (2002), ‘Institutional re(tums) and the strategic-relational approach’ , Environment and Planning A, Vol 33, No 7, pp. 1213-1235 .
48.
Johnston, C. (2005), ‘Strategic superboards: improved network management processes for regeneration’ , International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol 18, No 2, pp. 139-150 .
49.
Johnston, L. and Coaffee, J. (2005), Managing Change, Complexity and Pragmatism in Local Government Modemisation - Experiences of Area Decentralisation, in Regeneration Management: Essays on Working with Complexity, ( Manchester: Centre for Local Economic Strategies ), pp.31-36.
50.
Lawless, P. (2004), ‘Locating and explaining area-based urban initiatives: New Deal for Communities in England’ , Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol 22, pp. 383-399 .
51.
Leach, S. and Wingfield, M. (2003), ‘Public Participation and the democratic renewal agenda: prioritisation or marginalisation?’ , Local Government Studies, Vol 25, No 4, pp. 46-69 .
52.
Lowndes, V. and Wilson, D. (2003), ‘Balancing revisability and Robustness? A new intuitionalist perspective on local government modernization’ , Public Administration, Vol 81, No 2, pp. 275-298 .
53.
Lukes, S. (1974), Power: a radical view, ( London: Macmillan ).
54.
McGuick, P.M. (2004), ‘State, strategy, and scale in the competitive city: a neo Gramscian analysis of the governance of global Sydney’, Environment and Planning A, Vol 36, pp.1019-1043.
55.
Minter, R. (2002), ‘The struggle to spend’, Regeneration and Renewal, May 3, pp.16-17
56.
Muir, J. (2004), ‘Public Participation in area-based regeneration programmes , Housing Studies’, Vol 19, No 6, pp. 947-966
57.
North, P. (2000), ‘Is there space for organisation from below within the UK Government's Action Zones? A test of ‘collaborative planning’ , Urban Studies, Vol 37, No 8, pp. 1261-1278 .
58.
Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2003a), New Dealfor Communities - Annual Review 2001/2, ( London: Neighbourhood Renewal Unit ).
59.
Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (OPDPM) (2003b), The learning Curve - developing skills and knowledge for Neighbourhood Renewal, ( London: Neighbourhood Renewal Unit ).
60.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2003c), Sustainable Communities: Building for the future, ( London: HMSO ).
61.
Painter, J. and Goodwin, M. (2000), ‘Local Government after Fordism’, in G. Stoker (ed.), The New Politics of British Local Governance, ( Basingstoke: Macmillan ), pp.33-53.
62.
Powell, M. and Glendinning, S. (2002), Introduction, in Glendinning, S. , Powell, M. and Rummery, K. (2002), Partnerships, New Labour and the Governance of Welfare, ( Cambridge: Policy Press , pp.1-14.
63.
Pratchett, L. (2004), ‘Local Autonomy, Local Democracy and the New Localism’, Political Studies, Vol 52, pp.358-375.
64.
Robson, T. (2000), The State and Community action, ( London: Pluto Press ).
65.
Rowe, M. (2004), ‘Abusive partnerships’, in Regeneration Management: Essays on Working with Complexity, ( Manchester: Centre for Local Economic Strategies ), pp.27-30.
66.
Rowe, M. and Devanney, C. (2003), ‘Partnership and the governance of regeneration’ , Critical Social Policy, Vol 23, No 3, pp. 375-397 .
67.
Sako, M. (1998), ‘Does trust improve business performance?’, in C. Lane and R. Bachman (eds), Trust within and between Organisations: conceptual issues and empirical applications, ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), pp.88-117.
68.
Smith Institute (ed. ) (2004), Making sense of localism, ( London: The Smith Institute ).
69.
Smith, T. (2003), ‘Something old, something new, Something borrowed, something blue: Themes of Tony Blair and his Government’, Parliamentary Affairs, Vol 56, pp.80-96.
70.
Social Exclusion Unit (1998), Bringing Britain Together: A new strategy for neighbourhood renewal, ( London: Command Paper 4045, Cabinet Office ).
71.
Social Exclusion Unit (2001), A New Commitment to Neighbourhood Renewal: National Strategy Action Plan, ( London: HMSO ).
72.
Southern, A. (2001), ‘What matters is what works? The management of regeneration’ , Local Economy, Vol 16, No 4, pp. 264-271 .
73.
Southern, R. (2002), ‘Understanding multi-sectoral regeneration partnership as a forum of local governance’ , Local Government Studies, Vol 28, No 2, pp. 16-32 .
74.
Stoker, G. (2004a), ‘New Localism, Progressive Politics and Democracy’, in Gamble, A. and Wright, T. (eds), Restating the State, ( Oxford: Blackwell ), pp.117-129.
75.
Stoker, G. (2004b), Transforming local government - from Thatcherism to New Labour, ( Basingstoke: Palgrave ).
76.
Sullivan, H. , Smith, M. , Root, A. and Moran, D. (2001), Area Committees and Neighbourhood Management: increasing democratic participation and social inclusion, ( London: Local Government Information Unit ).
77.
Syrett, S. (1997), ‘The politics of partnership’ , European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol 4, No 2, pp. 99-114
78.
Taylor, M. (2000a), Top down meets Bottom up: Neighbourhood Management, ( York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation ).
79.
Taylor, M. (2000b), ‘Communities in the Lead: power, organisational capacity and social capital’ , Urban Studies, Vol 37, No 5-6, pp. 1019-1035 .
80.
Tooke, J. (2003), ‘Spaces for community involvement: Processes of disciplining and appropriation’ , Space and Polity, Vol 7, No 3, pp. 233-246 .
81.
Vangen, S. and Huxham, C. (2003), ‘Enacting leadership for collaborative advantage: dilemmas of ideology and pragmatism in the activities of partnership managers’ , British Journal of Management, Vol 14, pp. 61-76 .
82.
Weaver, M. (2000), ‘What's the big idea in the end?’, The Observer, July 7.
83.
Weaver, M. (2001), ‘Delivery to take priority over policy’, Guardian Unlimited (Society section), June 8.
84.
Weaver, M. (2002), ‘Friction slows down New Deal’, The Guardian (Society section), February 20.
85.
Wilkinson, M. and Craig, G. (2002), New roles for old: Local Authority members and partnership working, ( York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation ).
86.
Wilson, D. and Game, C. (Third Edition) (2002), Local Government in the United Kingdom.
