Regenerating Deprived Urban Areas: A Cross National Analysis of Area-Based Initiatives 9781447310792

Table of contents :
Regenerating deprived urban areas
Contents
List of figures, tables, boxes and appendices
List of abbreviations
Acknowledgements
1. Introduction
2. New Localism(s) in Europe: restructuring local state spaces and public-service delivery in England and Germany
Features of the New Localism(s)
Beyond the market and the local state: public-service delivery reforms in England
Coping with the local budget crises: reforming the local state administration in Germany
3. National urban policies for deprived urban areas: the birth of Area-Based Initiatives
Between central-government control and outsourcing: urban policies and development partnerships in England
Halting the downward spiral: urban policies and the birth of Area-Based Initiatives in Germany
Comparing Area-Based Initiatives: cross-national observations
4. Exploring the impacts of Area‑Based Initiatives through a neo-institutionalist perspective
The Institutional Capacity Building Framework: evaluating shared knowledge, new political spaces and inter-organisational relations
5. Lost in transformation: urban governance practices and the New Deal for Communities in Bristol
Spending the New Deal for Communities jackpot in Bristol Barton Hill
Between mainstreaming and the realities of institutionalisation: winding down the New Deal for Communities experiments
New Deal for Communities in Bristol: a flash in the pan
6. Local-government experiments to cope with structural change: the Social City Programme in Duisburg
The Social City Programme in Duisburg North: continuing local policies with central-government funding
Beliefs and practices of anchoring and mainstreaming: the fading legacy of the Social City Programme in Duisburg
The Social City Programme in Duisburg: a fading legacy
7. The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg: a cross-case comparison
The transformation of local state spaces
Area-Based Initiatives in comparison: same objectives in different regulatory frameworks
The transformation of local institutional capacities
Institutional change: processes of (de)institutionalisation
8. The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s) as an analytical window for comparative urbanism: concluding reflections
The value of neo-institutional frameworks for the study of contrasting pressures for institutional change
Comparing New Localism(s) across Europe
Methodological reflections for implementation of evaluation research
Prospects for area-based policies in Europe in times of financial austerity
Appendix I: Research design
Appendix II:Sociogram depicting inter-organisational trust among the New Deal for Communities partnership (n = 21)
Appendix III:Sociogram depicting inter-organisational trust among the Social City Programme partnership (n = 25)
Appendix IV:Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities Bristol between 2000 and 2010
Appendix V:Key project spending in New Deal for Communities Bristol, 2000–10
Appendix VI:Key project spending in Social City Programme Duisburg, 1996–2009
References
Index

Citation preview

Regenerating deprived urban areas A cross-national analysis of area-based initiatives

Rene Peter Hohmann

Regenerating deprived urban areas A cross-national analysis of Area‑Based Initiatives Rene Peter Hohmann

First published in Great Britain in 2013 by Policy Press University of Bristol Sixth Floor, Howard House Queen’s Avenue Clifton Bristol BS8 1SD UK Tel +44 (0)117 331 4054 Fax +44 (0)117 331 4093 e-mail [email protected] www.policypress.co.uk North American office: Policy Press c/o The University of Chicago Press 1427 East 60th Street Chicago, IL 60637, USA t: +1 773 702 7700 f: +1 773-702-9756 e:[email protected] www.press.uchicago.edu © Policy Press 2013 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested. ISBN 978 1 44731 078 5 hardcover The right of Rene Peter Hohmann to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. All rights reserved: no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of Policy Press. The statements and opinions contained within this publication are solely those of the authors and not of The University of Bristol or Policy Press. The University of Bristol and Policy Press disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any material published in this publication. Policy Press works to counter discrimination on grounds of gender, race, disability, age and sexuality. Cover design by Policy Press. Front cover: image kindly supplied by Rene Peter Hohmann

Printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group(UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Policy Press uses environmentally responsible print partners

The reasons for different political reactions in urban politics are based on the one hand on local traditions, economic legacies and geographies but also in particular on the formulation of local coalitions and overcoming of norms and values, derived from and stabilised by traditional development approaches. Häußermann, H., Laepple, D. and Siebel, W. (2008) Stadtpolitik, p 342

In remembrance of Hartmut Häußermann – a great scholar and mentor, who will be sadly missed.

Contents List of figures, tables, boxes and appendices viii List of abbreviations x Acknowledgements xi one Introduction two

three

four

New Localism(s) in Europe: restructuring local state spaces and public-service delivery in England and Germany Features of the New Localism(s) Feature 1: a changing role between national and local governments Feature 2: the rise of local development partnerships Feature 3: the rise of entrepreneurial management principles for the public sector Beyond the market and the local state: public-service delivery reforms in England Coping with the local budget crises: reforming the local state administration in Germany

1 7 7 8 10 13 15 18

National urban policies for deprived urban areas: the birth of Area-Based Initiatives Between central-government control and outsourcing: urban policies and development partnerships in England Halting the downward spiral: urban policies and the birth of Area-Based Initiatives in Germany Comparing Area-Based Initiatives: cross-national observations

23

Exploring the impacts of Area‑Based Initiatives through a neo-institutionalist perspective The Institutional Capacity Building Framework: evaluating shared knowledge, new political spaces and inter-organisational relations Knowledge resources as intellectual capital Mobilisation capacity as political capital Relational resources as social capital

41

25 30 37

46

48 50 51

v

Regenerating deprived urban areas five

six

seven

vi

Lost in transformation: urban governance practices and the New Deal for Communities in Bristol Spending the New Deal for Communities jackpot in Bristol Barton Hill Generating knowledge: Community at Heart as a knowledge broker and gatekeeper Formalising an arena for participation: the partnership board of Community at Heart Generating relational resources: inter-organisational relationships in the New Deal for Communities partnership Between mainstreaming and the realities of institutionalisation: winding down the New Deal for Communities experiments Something useful, something convenient, something useless: New Deal for Communities legacies in Bristol New Deal for Communities in Bristol: a flash in the pan

55

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change: the Social City Programme in Duisburg The Social City Programme in Duisburg North: continuing local policies with central-government funding Generating knowledge resources for the Duisburg City Council: the EGDU as the holder of institutional memories in urban regeneration Creating arenas for controlled interaction: area committees as closed shops for local councillors and the local administration Consolidating the political process: inter-organisational relationships in the Social City Programme partnership Beliefs and practices of anchoring and mainstreaming: the fading legacy of the Social City Programme in Duisburg Something useful, something convenient, something prohibitive: Social City Programme legacies in Duisburg The Social City Programme in Duisburg: a fading legacy

87

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg: a cross-case comparison The transformation of local state spaces Area-Based Initiatives in comparison: same objectives in different regulatory frameworks The transformation of local institutional capacities Institutional change: processes of (de)institutionalisation

60 64 68 71 74

78 84

91 95 95 99

104 109 111 118 121 121 125 126 130

Contents eight

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s) as an analytical window for comparative urbanism: concluding reflections The value of neo-institutional frameworks for the study of contrasting pressures for institutional change Comparing New Localism(s) across Europe Methodological reflections for implementation evaluation research Prospects for area-based policies in Europe in times of financial austerity

135

136 137 140 142

Appendices 147 References 173 Index 215

vii

List of figures, tables, boxes and appendices Figures 1.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6.1 6.2 6.3 A.1 A.2 A.3

Impact model and framework of change for the implementation of Area-Based Initiatives Organisational chart of Community at Heart Distribution of New Deal for Communities expenditure by working theme, 2000–10 (%) Organisational chart of membership of the New Deal for Communities partnership board, as found in 2008 Community at Heart as a buffer between the local administration and the area Organisational chart of the EGDU Governing bodies for the Social City Programme implementation in Duisburg North Reciprocal trust between organisations of Duisburg City Council and the EGDU Data collection and analysis Extract of the standardised questionnaire for the organisational survey Example of nodes and ties in a network analysis

4 63 64 69 73 94 100 106 147 149 150

Tables 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 5.1 6.1 6.2 7.1 7.2

viii

Key characteristics of the New Deal for Communities 31 Key characteristics of the Social City Programme 36 The legacy of Area-Based Initiatives in England and Germany 38 Selected dimensions of institutional capacity-building 49 Knowledge-generating activities in the New Deal for 66 Communities Bristol Social City Programme funding for Duisburg 95 Knowledge-generating activities in the Social City 96 Programme in Duisburg Turning points in the transformation of local state spaces in 122 Bristol and Duisburg Assessing the transformation of institutional capacities in 127 both case studies

List of figures, tables, boxes and appendices 7.3

Patterns of (de)institutionalisation of Area-Based Initiative activities in Bristol and Duisburg

133

Boxes 5.1 6.1

Profile of the New Deal for Communities area in Bristol Profile of the Social City Programme areas Marxloh and Bruckhausen in Duisburg North

61 92

Appendices I II III IV V VI

Research design Sociogram depicting inter-organisational trust among the New Deal for Communities partnership (n = 21) Sociogram depicting inter-organisational trust among the Social City Programme partnership (n = 25) Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities Bristol between 2000 and 2010 Key project spending in New Deal for Communities Bristol, 2000–10 Key project spending in Social City Programme Duisburg, 1996–2009

147 153 155 157 167 169

ix

List of abbreviations ABIs BCC BRP CaH DCC DCLG DETR EGDU GOSW ICBF LDF LSP NDC NPM NRW NSM ODPM PPP RC SCP SNA VSOs

x

Area-Based Initiatives Bristol City Council Bristol Regeneration Partnership Community at Heart Bristol Duisburg City Council Department for Communities and Local Government Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg Government Office of the South West Institutional Capacity Building Framework Local Development Framework Local Strategic Partnership New Deal for Communities New Public Management North Rhine Westphalia New Steering Model Office of the Deputy Prime Minister Public–Private Partnership Rational Choice Social City Programme Social Network Analysis Voluntary Sector Organisations

Acknowledgements This book was based on a successful PhD research project conducted at King’s College, London, under the supervision of Professor Chris Hamnett and Professor Mike Raco, whose support was critical in guiding this ambitious research endeavour. I would like to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to all the case-study participants for committing their time and sharing their experiences.This research would not have been possible without the support of a number of organisations in Germany and England and their highly competent staff. Especially, I would like to thank Community at Heart in Bristol and the Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg for their support. I would also like to extend my gratitude to the British Royal Geography Society (with the Institute of British Geography), the Central Research Fund of the University of London and the Department of Geography at King’s College, London, for their financial support at various stages during the project. This book is dedicated to my family. Its completion is testimony to their unfaltering love, patience and moral support.

xi

one

Introduction In the face of continuing problems of urban decline, challenges to financing local services in times of austerity and reform pressures to foster new forms of local development partnerships, an increasing local policy activism can be observed in a number of European countries since the mid-1990s. These New Localism(s) embrace new ways in which the delivery of public services is managed. The outsourcing of management and delivery functions to non-state actors, such as Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) and intermediaries, has become an integral component.These reform processes are also being reflected in the shift in urban policies. The formulation and implementation of Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) for deprived urban areas, such as the ‘New Deal for Communities’ (NDC) in England and the ‘Social City Programme’ (SCP) in Germany, are examples of this trend. By decentralising management responsibilities from local authorities to development partnerships at the neighbourhood level, ABIs can be seen as test beds for new forms of urban governance and new public-service delivery mechanisms that seek to foster an active participation from residents and VSOs. England is more experienced in implementing ABIs (OECD, 1998; Smith, 1999)1 and tends, therefore, to draw most of the attention, particularly in Germany (Pfeiffer and Heckenroth, 2001; Burgers et al, 2003; Brombach et al, 2005; Goderbauer, 2005; BMVBS, 2006). Much of the contemporary comparative urban research has, however, been focused on Anglo-American comparisons (Parkinson et al, 1988; Wolman and Goldsmith, 1992; Gaffikin and Warf, 1993; DiGaetano, 1997; IM NRW, 2009; Davies and Pill, 2012). Only a few crossnational comparisons between England and Germany, focusing on the implementation of urban policies, have so far been conducted (Johnson and Cochrane, 1981; Danielzyk and Wood, 1993; Friesecke, 2007; Ganser and Williams, 2007;Wollmann, 2008a; Couch et al, 2011). The idea of writing Regenerating deprived urban areas was therefore strongly influenced by a personal interest in taking a closer look at the historical evolution of ABIs in England and Germany and evaluating the implementation of two contemporary initiatives in a comparative manner.The key aim of the book is to develop a better understanding

1

Regenerating deprived urban areas

of the impacts of ABIs on local development strategies and processes for deprived urban areas. The evidence discovered in this study is informed by an analysis of experiences collected in the implementation of the NDC in Bristol (England) and the SCP in Duisburg (Germany). Both cities have participated in two comparable ABIs, which set out incentives for the creation of new partnerships for the implementation of these neighbourhood regeneration schemes. Comparing these experiences in these two cities perfectly illustrates the convergence of ideas on new partnership approaches across Europe, but also pinpoints the decisive limitations of these policy experiments for alternative public service delivery. The similarities and differences as presented in the book provide evidence about the prevailing strong role of statutory agencies and local authorities in planning processes and the short-lived nature of activities and services funded by ABIs. Despite the outsourcing of management responsibilities for programme implementation to non-state actors in Bristol as well as in Duisburg, the way in which the ABIs have been implemented differed greatly. Whereas the intermediary organisation in Bristol was significantly detached from the local council, even though under strong supervision of central government bodies, the major implementing agency in Duisburg could only operate at arm’s length from the local administration and local councillors. Overall, it is shown that the more projects were detached from planning rationales of statutory agencies, the more vulnerable they were to closures after the withdrawal of funding. The increasing amount of comparative urban research in recent years has acknowledged the forces for conversion across countries and cities. Since the 1990s, strong interest is seen in studies researching to what extent cities converge into key nodes in a globalised (and hierarchical) network of flows and its socio-economic and political consequences (Hamnett, 1994; Marcuse and Kempen, 2000; Sassen, 2001; Smith and Timberlake, 2002; Taylor, 2004). These approaches are complemented by studies analysing the unifying or homogenising forces on cities and whether or how local geographical contexts replicate and/or hybridise neo-liberal outcomes (Swyngedouw et  al, 2002; Ong, 2006, 2007; Clarke, 2009; Brenner and Theodore, 2010). Following these observations, the book retraces the extent to which new market-oriented management principles, such as the search for new delivery mechanisms and an increased co-producing role of non-state actors, have been taken up in the design of contemporary partnership approaches in urban policies in both countries. It argues, 2

Introduction

however, that the New Localism(s) observable in both countries are not single, deterministic outcomes of neo-liberal statecraft, but outcomes of more complex processes, which are also influenced by ‘local desires and capabilities’ (Clarke, 2009: 501). By comparing evidence from the implementation of two national ABIs, this study identifies similarities and differences between transformative pressures exerted on local state spaces across Europe. Revealing the multifaceted nature of contingent outcomes of these governance experiments, it suggests that researching New Localism(s) in different institutional settings provides a rich field of study for future research agendas on comparative urbanism across Europe (Robinson, 2006, 2011). For this study around 56 stakeholders in both countries were interviewed; written materials, such as minutes of meetings, were taken into consideration; and more sophisticated methods were tested, such as an Inter-Organisational Network Analysis based upon an organisational survey conducted with 47 organisations involved in the implementation of the ABIs in both localities. A neo-institutional analytical framework was chosen for this research to better understand how local organisations interact, particularly in the voluntary sector, and cope with the new management principles that have structured these governance experiments, such as working as an intermediary between the state and the residents in deprived urban areas. Being concerned about the quality of inter-organisational relationships, this investigation was inspired by the Institutional Capacity Building Framework (ICBF) that has been formulated as a practical lens for evaluations in the field of urban regeneration (Healey et al, 2003, Healey, 2006). As Figure 1.1 depicts, assessing the transformation of institutional capacities deriving from the implementation of ABIs in these localities both allowed the analysis of governance processes and generated observations on the perceived institutional changes. In turn, assessing these changes gave indications of the impacts of ABIs and the configuration of locally specific constraints against circulating reform pressures. This book is divided into eight chapters. Chapter One introduces the topic, highlighting the key findings of this study. Chapter Two investigates and compares manifestations of the New Localism(s) in the two European countries that were chosen for this research: England and Germany. It identifies three features that characterise these New Localism(s). By retracing public policy reforms in England and Germany, it shows how principles of New Public Management (NPM) have played a crucial role in both countries for reform initiatives to seek new and alternative delivery mechanisms for local welfare provisions. 3

4

New Localism(s)

• The creation of new neighbourhood-based solutions for socioeconomic challenges in deprived urban areas

• Activation of citizens and Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs)

• Partnership-working in inter-organisational relationships

Urban policies aimed at fostering:

Implementation of ABIs transforms

enables

of formal and informal rules and organisational practices and scripts

• deinstitutionalisation

and/or

• institutionalisation

Including processes of

Institutional change

‘“bottom-up” influence of locally specific constraints’ (Lowndes, 2001)

• Relational resources (social capital)

• Mobilisation capacities (political capital)

• Shared knowledge resources (intellectual capital)

Based upon:

Institutional capacities

Figure 1.1: Impact model and framework of change for the implementation of Area-Based Initiatives

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Introduction

Chapter Three provides an overview of the legacy and emergence of ABIs in England and Germany. Whereas a considerable history of area-targeted policy approaches to the concentration of economic deprivation in cities can be noted in England, Germany quite recently discovered the need for a national initiative for disadvantaged neighbourhoods.This book also reviews the evolution of urban policies during a time in both countries in which two social-democratic parties had taken over central government responsibilities and were actively transforming the conception of welfare delivery in both countries. Chapter Four provides the analytical framework for this cross-national comparison. Applying a neo-institutional lens, the ICBF (Healey et al, 2003) is presented to analyse and compare the transformation and institutionalisation of social, political and intellectual capital during the implementation of both ABIs. Chapter Five presents the first case study, the implementation of the NDC in Bristol. It retraces how institutional capacities have been transformed during the implementation process and discusses the scope of (de)institutionalisation of activities funded by the NDC. Chapter Six illustrates the results of a case study on the implementation of the SCP in Duisburg. It similarly retraces how the SCP has been implemented. It identifies how local development actors planned the mainstreaming of services created by the ABI and it describes how and which activities funded by the SCP have been institutionalised. Chapter Seven combines evidence from both case studies and analyses similarities and differences across the cases. More specifically, it looks at the local crystallisation of the New Localism(s) in both countries and compares both ABIs and the (de)institutionalisation of funded activities. Chapter Eight highlights the value of neo-institutional frameworks for studying institutional change, their insight for the future refinement of state theories and the implications for comparative evaluation research, as well as the prospects for ABIs across Europe. Note ABIs have also been implemented in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Hughes and Carmichael, 1998; Turok and Hopkings, 1998; Murtagh, 2001). 1

5

two

New Localism(s) in Europe: restructuring local state spaces and public-service delivery in England and Germany Features of the New Localism(s) With countervailing trends towards a global economy, an increasing local policy activism can be observed in a number of European countries since the mid-1990s (Clarke, S.E., 1993; Clarke, N., 2009). Contemporary research into these trends has noted not only an increasing tendency to identify socio-economic challenges and solutions at the local level, but also an interrelated restructuring of local state spaces in which relationships between central and local government tiers, as well as between the local state and non-state actors, are transformed.The financing of, and responsibility for, public-service planning and delivery at the local level can be seen as one of the core issues around which these transformation processes are taking place. In a cross-national perspective, a political vertical and horizontal restructuring of local governments characterised by fundamental changes in the division of authority and responsibility vis-à-vis the national government and the market has been observed (Goetz, 1993). So the New Localism(s) can be understood as rescaling processes of responsibilities and relationships in state administrations that allocate new roles, not only between different tiers of governments, but also between the local state and non-state actors. They embrace new ways in which local public services are planned, managed and delivered. A difference between the ‘old’ and ‘new’ Localism(s) is seen in the fact that in older conceptualisations, the local state was the legitimate provider of all essential services (Coaffee, 2005).The New Localism(s) instead promote the idea of a state provision that ‘enables’ and ‘ensures’ public-service delivery, thus incorporating non-public-service providers. Approaching this somewhat complex puzzle of reform initiatives and outcomes at the local level may suggest taking a closer 7

Regenerating deprived urban areas

look at some of the key characteristics of these New Localism(s).Three features of these New Localism(s) can be differentiated.

Feature 1: a changing role between national and local governments Research undertaken to investigate the state of decentralisation – the transfer of functional responsibilities to the regional and/or local levels – in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and developing countries highlighted that:‘In those countries with centralised systems 20 or 30 years ago, decentralisation has been widespread, and in those countries with initially more vertically dispersed government systems, further decentralisation from their respective starting points has become the trend’ (Rodríguez-Pose and Gill, 2003: 34). Studies focusing on the provision of welfare services, such as health care, education, housing and social care, in Europe suggest, however, that a complete transfer of authority for the delivery and principles of public services is a little unusual. Central governments still strongly influence the scope and principles under which local decision-making takes place (Banting and Costa-Font, 2010). Some researchers even argue that the new local-policy activism is an expression of a new centralism (Lowndes, 2003) or an ‘orchestrated’, central governmentled distraction, which offers: local government the impression that it is being drawn into a new partnership (promising influence, increased powers, financial latitude) to distract it from the reality of increasing central control (reflecting the centre’s lack of trust) but do so in a highly conditional way by rewarding the top performers – hence the focus on earned autonomy. (Wilson, 2003: 342) Taking the formal rules of central government control over sub-national bodies through legislation and judicial decisions into consideration, it is suggested that it is not the extent, but rather the form of control, that has changed (Goldsmith, 2002). A shift from direct formal methods of control through bureaucratic hierarchies to a more indirect regulation through policy networks and a pluralisation of development actors at the local level has become a common feature across Europe (John, 2000). State theories, in particular, see this rescaling of responsibilities as an emergence of a ‘new politics of scale’ (Cox, 2002) and ‘spaces of 8

New Localism(s) in Europe

neoliberalism’ (Brenner and Theodore, 2002b), in which local state spaces are restructured in order to correspond with neoliberal pressures and seize the presumed potential of local economies (Peck, 2001; Brenner and Theodore, 2002a). According to this strand of research, neo-liberal ideas and strategies are circulating as ‘a kind of operating framework or “ideological software” for competitive globalization, inspiring and imposing far-reaching programs of state restructuring and rescaling across a wide range of national and local contexts’ (Peck and Tickell, 2002: 380). Applying this software would include at least four key elements for the processes of state restructuring: a shift from welfare to workfare; a shift from government-centred political management to a mode of governance that stresses entrepreneurial local leadership and public–private partnerships; austerity in public expenditure; and economic promotion through a range of local supply-side policies (Painter and Goodwin, 2000). In order to steer these transformative processes in public administration, a neo-liberalisation would include: a deinstitutionalisation of pre-existing political practices; an increased scope and reach of corporate capital; and, most centrally, the ‘economisation’ of social and political areas in which functions and services should be run according to entrepreneurial principles (Clarke, J., 2008). In these transformation processes, cities and local state spaces are becoming key strategic sites for the ‘reproduction, mutation and constitutional reconstitution of neoliberalism’ (Brenner and Theodore, 2010: 417) and for: managing the interface between the local economy and global flows, between the potentially conflicting demands of local sustainability and local well-being and those of international competitiveness, and between the challenges of social exclusion and global polarization and the continuing demands for liberalization, deregulation, privatization, and so on. (Jessop, 2003: 5) This restructuring can be seen as a process with two distinct dimensions. Vertically, a ‘glocalisation’ has become observable, which allocates new function to the supranational scale, such as the European Union, and downwards to the local, urban and regional scales (Swyngedouw, 2004). Horizontally, the local state is increasingly enabling and ensuring rather than providing public-service delivery through the incorporation of non-state service providers (Coaffee, 2005). Local governments would 9

Regenerating deprived urban areas

therefore become ‘enabling authorities’ in an ‘enterprise state’ in which public services and welfare policies are delivered and regulated through new forms of governance, notably through partnerships (Cochrane, 2004, 2007).

Feature 2: the rise of local development partnerships Focusing on the institutionalisation of coordinating mechanisms between state and non-state actors as a new form of urban governance has therefore become a central research subject in urban studies (Le Galès, 1998; Heinelt, 2004; Jouve, 2005). At its core lies the observation of a decline in the activity of formal government processes according to clear procedural rules and relationships between state organisations in favour of governance as ‘a much looser process of steering localities which is multi-sectoral and in which networks, alliances and coalitions play an important part [and] may become formalised into structural arrangements such as partnerships’ (Hambleton et al, 2002: 12). Studies of neo-liberalisation, in particular, see this shift from government to governance as an integral element to restructure key strategic sites for economic globalisation (Cerny, 2008). A number of cities and their administrations would therefore be ‘induced to jump on the bandwagon of urban entrepreneurialism, which they do with varying degrees of enthusiasm and effectiveness’ (Peck and Tickell, 2002: 393). Despite the variety of policy sectors in which these phenomena are observed, such as in international relations and development or practices within and between business organisations (Kjær, 2004), current observations in local policy implementation suggest a blurring of boundaries between the state, the market and civil society in the process of governing (Rhodes, 1997; Stoker, 1998; Hirst, 2000; Geddes, 2005). Some researchers interpret these tendencies as a ‘hollowing out of the state’ in which governments steer rather than directly control public-service provision (Peters and Pierre, 1998; Rhodes, 1997, 2007). Consequently, with the fragmentation of local state spaces through the increasing number of local actors defending their interests vis-a-vis the government, concerns of a dilution of authority and accountability have been expressed (Jouve, 2005). In the era of the hollow state: Governance through inter-organizational partnerships presents the most compelling challenge to public administration as we have known it. This new turn in public service has thrown open a veritable Pandora’s box of 10

New Localism(s) in Europe

complexities with respect to the meaning of accountability and the exercise of public authority. (Alexander and Nank, 2009: 364) Much has been written about the effects of the ways in which these processes are steered. Challenging the hollowing-out thesis, it has been argued that within these partnerships, state agencies are still dominant actors (Davies, 2002). In a similar vein, others claim that governance increases state control over civil society (Pierre and Peters, 2000;Taylor, 2000). Some researchers argue that this new form of local governance has allowed central governments to exert more power at the local level (Malpass, 1994). Others argue that in the course of the rescaling processes of state responsibilities, actors at the neighbourhood level have gained new room for manoeuvre (Sullivan et al, 2004; Lowndes and Sullivan, 2008; Durose and Lowndes, 2010). Following this, controversies emerged as to whether these new governance arrangements allow civil actors and groups to exert more influence on local political decisions (Benington, 2001; John, 2006a) or lead to a substantial democratic deficit (Swyngedouw, 2005).The latter strand of research even assumes that by this circumvention of formal democratic processes and arenas and by enlarging networks of governance, new forms of government control or governmentality take effect, introducing a new post-political era (Mouffe, 2005; Swyngedouw, 2009). Others, in turn, argue that these forms of cooperation always existed and therefore governance would not be a new phenomenon – at least in the UK context (Imrie and Raco, 1999; Lowndes, 2001). However, despite all the differences between these approaches, they agree upon the fact that a network of state and non-state actors has gained influence on the implementation of public policies. Local authorities and statutory agencies are still influential, but represent just some of many actors involved in urban regeneration.Whether and to what extent non-state actors, such as private and civil, gain more influence on local policy decisions remains an empirical question. Contemporary comparative studies affirm these emerging governance arrangements and their expressions in local development partnerships across Europe but remind us that this phenomenon ‘is taking place to different degrees, at different speeds, and in somewhat different ways’ (Geddes, 2005: 359) due to the various welfare regimes in which these new forms of urban governance are embedded.Apart from these crossnational differences influencing the emergence and prevalence of these new forms of urban governance, other sources for these ‘cross-local’ 11

Regenerating deprived urban areas

differences can also be identified: ‘Each locality is shaped by a range of historical, socio-economic, cultural and political influences. City networks reflect variations between localities, as expressed in their specific local, political, cultural and institutional heritages’ (Cole and John, 2001: 151). So, despite the differences of central–local relationships across countries, the sub-national variations, or ‘local effects’ (Harloe et al, 1990), derive from the historical, social, economic and political specificity of the locality in which these new partnerships are created. It can, therefore, be assumed that national policy initiatives, such as Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs), are subject to local interpretation and political interaction, which consequently lead to different institutional outcomes at the local level. This perspective allows us to generate explanations of different and hybrid variants of neo-liberal expressions at the local level (Larner, 2003; Ong, 2006), as well as for the different impacts of ABIs in each city. This seems particularly helpful for state theories, which present New Localism(s) as outcomes of (central) neo-liberal statecraft (Brenner and Theodore, 2002b; Peck and Tickell, 2002). In many of these contemporary approaches, neo-liberalisation is treated as an overarching explanation for nearly all institutional outcomes at the local level: Viruses are dangerous, of course, because they spread, and bodies politic – while they may exhibit differing degrees of resistance – are rarely immune to all the strains of neoliberalism.… Even though the successive remaking of economic and social institutions in US-inflected forms is not leading to any kind of simple ‘convergence,’ it may nevertheless be serving to degrade the institutional ‘gene pool’ essential for subsequent forms of neoliberal mutation and crisis containment. (Peck and Tickell, 2002: 380) Following this somewhat ominous and, indeed, worrying bio-technical symbolisation of policy mobilities across OECD countries, this book argues that neo-liberal ideas operate within a local pool of other open-source scripts (or other viruses), which can be reconfigured and enmeshed with other floating solutions and problems addressed by local governments and crystallised in local institutions. Examining the factors that influence local variations also allows us to compare local capacities and actual realities to popular public sector reform ideas that envisage homogeneous local expressions of ‘entrepreneurial cities, with strong leadership and co-ordinated administrative structures, with 12

New Localism(s) in Europe

a powerful city vision, and with an ability to build local and regional partnerships and to cultivate good vertical links to regional, national and European levels’ (Cole and John, 2001: 154). Implementation research also reminds us that governments have always relied on the cooperation with non-state actors to implement public policies, especially with those to which these policies are targeted (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1984).The question, therefore, is how to assess the quality of these changes and these inter-organisational relationships. By exploring these local relations, we are also reminded that we ‘should not ask whether such exchange exists but rather what is the nature of exchange and what are the consequences for the exercise of political power and control’ (Pierre, 1997: 4). In order to explore and identify these local specificities, neoinstitutional perspectives, as introduced in Chapter Four, offer suitable analytical help to reveal the “bottom-up” influence of locally specific institutional constraints’ (Lowndes, 2001: 1960) that reinforce or undermine these reform pressures and visions for public administration and service delivery.

Feature 3: the rise of entrepreneurial management principles for the public sector A driving concept underlying this transformation and materialising of neo-liberal considerations for the reform of public administrations can be seen in the principles of New Public Management (NPM), which have become particularly prominent across Europe since the 1980s. Originating from public-sector reforms in New Zealand (Boston, 1998), these NPM principles describe ‘a way of reorganizing public sector bodies to bring their management, reporting, and accounting approaches closer to (a particular perception of) business methods’ (Dunleavy and Hood, 1994: 9). At their core lies the assumption that market-oriented management principles applied in public administration would lead to more costefficient public services. These should be achieved through replacing former bureaucratic, hierarchical modes of public-service delivery with more decentralised delivery mechanisms. Public services should be contracted out to private businesses and the creation of quasi-markets, in which public as well as non-state actors, such as private companies, compete for financial resources, would lead to an improvement of public services for citizens or customers (Ferlie et al, 1996; Allen, 1999; Manning, 2000; John, 2001; Dunleavy et al, 2006).

13

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Even though a variety of interpretations and applications of these management principles has been noted across countries, which led to ‘an incoherent set of ideas about how best to organise the administration of public services’ (Clarke, N., 2009: 497), the majority of NPM principles share the same vision for public administration: It will be a smaller public sector, intensively focused on efficiency and continuous improvement. It will consist of small, core ministries (responsible for strategy) and a range of specialized, semi-autonomous agencies (responsible for operations). It will work within clear performance frameworks that specify budgets and expected results. It will make widespread use of market and market-type mechanisms, and will frequently work in partnership with for-profit and voluntary sector organizations. (Pollitt, 2001: 474) In particular, the rise of partnerships with for-profit and Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) during the last decade has inspired a number of studies into this shift in the involvement of actors in local public-service delivery and decision-making. Against this background, making a comparison between Germany and England is a tempting opportunity, given that at the end of the 1990s, two social-democratic parties regained central government power, seeking to reinvent themselves through new political visions such as the Third Way and the New Centre. A joint paper published by Gerhard Schroeder and Tony Blair on the eve of the European Elections in 1999 gives a vivid insight into the extent to which these visions for the new welfare state embraced new management principles for public administration and the role for citizens and new spatial scales for public interventions. NPM approaches in public administration, fostering competition and efficiency, were therefore expected to end growing public expenditures for public services: Public expenditure as a proportion of national income has more or less reached the limits of acceptability. Constraints on ‘tax and spend’ force radical modernisation of the public sector and reform of public services to achieve better value for money.The public sector must actually serve the citizen: we do not hesitate to promote the concepts of efficiency, competition and high performance. (Blair and Schroeder, 2003: 112)

14

New Localism(s) in Europe

Both political leaders formulated an ideological welfare pragmatism in which stronger individual responsibilities and mutual obligations at the neighbourhood level are expected to foster growth and wealth in society: The belief that the state should address damaging market failures all too often led to a disproportionate expansion of the government’s reach and the bureaucracy that went with it. The balance between the individual and the collective was distorted. Values that are important to citizens such as personal achievement and success, entrepreneurial spirit, individual responsibility and community spirit, were often too subordinated to universal social safeguards. Too often rights were elevated above responsibilities, but the responsibility of the individual to his and her family, neighbourhood and society cannot be offloaded on to the state. If the concept of mutual obligation is forgotten, the result is a decline in community spirit, lack of responsibility towards neighbours, rising crime and vandalism, and a legal system that cannot cope.The ability of national governments to fine-tune the economy in order to secure growth and jobs has been exaggerated. The importance of individual and business enterprise for the creation of wealth has been undervalued. The weaknesses of markets have been overstated and their strengths underestimated. (Blair and Schroeder, 2003: 111) The stronger role of local communities in providing services and the consideration of a new neighbourhood scale have therefore been advocated as early as in the 2000s, 10 years prior to the Localism Act in 2010 that the newly elected cabinet and coalition between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives put in place in the UK (DCLG, 2011). How, and to what extent, these three presented features of a New Localism have been interpreted and materialised in reform initiatives in England and Germany is set out in the following two sections.

Beyond the market and the local state: public-service delivery reforms in England In England, the introduction of entrepreneurial principles in public administration coincided with a decisive reform of local government responsibilities. Until the 1980s, local authorities had far-reaching 15

Regenerating deprived urban areas

competencies. With the establishment of the Beveridge welfare state after the Second World War, fostered by the Labour government, welfare provision had been allocated to national bodies such as the National Health Service (NHS). With the expansion of welfare services, local authorities were nevertheless urged to fulfil a number of tasks, mostly social services, community care, education and housing (Cochrane, 2004). The financial allocations from central to local government to deliver these services increased significantly from 20% in the 1920s to approximately 65% in the 1970s (Wollmann, 2008b: 238). The responsibilities as ‘all-purpose authorities’ also included the provision of major public utilities, such as water and energy supplies, and the right to levy local taxes and the local rates. This changed under the Conservative central government between 1979 and 1997, which transformed the extent of public services and their local delivery mechanisms.Through enhanced control over local spending, local authorities were urged to create partnerships with other public and private bodies to provide local services (Stoker, 1999). Local government responsibilities as direct public-service providers were reduced in favour of private-sector intermediaries, including non-elected ‘quasi-autonomous, non-governmental organisations’ (Quangos), as Stoker (1999) accurately described: What happened to British local government during the period of Conservative government from 1979–1997 was in many respects a brutal illustration of power politics.The funding system was reformed to provide central government with a considerable (and probably unprecedented) level of control of spending. Various functions and responsibilities were stripped away from local authorities or organised in a way that obliged local authorities to work in partnership with other public and private agencies in the carrying out of the functions. (Stoker, 1999: 1) Other authors argued that this removal of responsibilities from the local level directly benefited the central government:‘Increased central control allows the government to experiment and to evaluate projects at a local level rather than to implement national policies.This localized approach is cheaper, and it ensures damage limitations if the experiment fails’ (Lawless, 1989: 164).With New Labour’s election in 1997, the new national government transformed the Conservative strategy to reform public administrations without sacrificing the strong position of central control over local affairs.Through the Local Government Act in 2000 16

New Localism(s) in Europe

and its Local Government Modernisation Agenda (LGMA), a further devolution of responsibilities to the local level was announced, but the following years until 2010 proved that:‘Under “New Labour”, in short, there was to be no return to local authorities being near monopolistic service providers’ (Wilson, 2005: 156). A variety of NPM practices has been introduced, such as performance-assessment schemes, under which public services at the local level had to be delivered (Davis and Martin, 2002; Coulson, 2004; Sullivan and Gillanders, 2005; Laffin, 2008). A sophisticated web of compulsory monitoring and performance contracts, such as Best Value, Comprehensive Performance Assessments, Local Public Service Agreements and Local Area Agreements (LAAs), made local authorities subject to far-reaching inspections, monitoring and a central government ‘control freakery’ (Wilson, 2003). New regional organisations, such as the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) and Government Offices for the Regions (GOs), not only reshaped the relationship between central government to sub-national tiers, but also contributed to a more complex picture of government responsibilities (Deas and Ward, 2000; Pike and Tomaney, 2009). Despite an announcement of a New Localist Agenda ‘as a strategy aimed at devolving power and resources away from central control and towards front-line managers’ (Stoker, 2004: 117), studies noted that the devolution of power in the UK had been strongly influenced by a framework of national priorities and goals (Wilson, 2003). At the local level, the large number of actors in charge of local development and policy initiatives has, in turn, transformed local political arenas in England into ‘an increasingly disaggregated arena characterized by a complex web of crosscutting and hierarchically arranged relationships’ (Lowndes, 2002: 137). The shift of responsibilities between different tiers of government, as well as between local authorities to non-state actors, has become particularly clear in the reform of welfare provision, which in England has become a ‘complex mosaic’ of different service providers (Wilson, 2005). Whereas the Conservative government favoured market mechanisms for local service delivery, New Labour urged local authorities to share these tasks with the third sector.1 Since 1997, VSOs have therefore been allocated a growing role in the local provision of social care, health and education (Kendall, 2000). A compact between central government and VSOs identified principles and roles for the third sector in 1998, which ‘signalled intentions to raise the sector’s profile, marking a shift in public policy from welfare state hierarchies and marketisation, towards networks and partnership working’ (Milbourne, 2009: 279). 17

Regenerating deprived urban areas

This emphasis on alternative ways of welfare delivery was symptomatic of New Labour’s approach to welfare provision, in which neither the market nor private actors nor the state, with its bodies, have been seen as the sole means for the provision and delivery of welfare services at the local level. Beyond state regulation and free market mechanisms, a ‘third way’ was proclaimed in which the voluntary sector should have a distinct role to play:‘In deciding where to act on behalf of the national community, whether as regulator or provider, governments must be acutely sensitive not to stifle worthwhile activity by local communities and the voluntary sector’ (Blair, 2003: 4; original emphasis). Self-discipline of citizens, co-production and a community responsibility to contribute voluntarily to welfare provision was envisioned instead. An orientation towards community has therefore been increasingly ‘reintroduced as part of the process of redefining welfare in ways that highlight personal and collective [non-state] responsibility’ (Cochrane, 2007: 53). With the emergence of the Coalition government between the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats in 2010 also came an explicit central government interest in promoting a Localism that gives ‘More power for neighbourhoods, to keep local pubs open, stop post offices from closing, to run local parks, to plan the look, shape and feel of their area’ (Cameron, 2010). Being embedded in a ‘Big Society’ agenda for England (Alcock, 2010; Kisby, 2010), this Localism has been portrayed as being formulated out of economic and ideological considerations ‘to reduce the economic deficit and thereby limit the role of the state.The “big society” agenda is intended to fill the gap left after substantial cuts in public expenditure have been implemented at central and local levels’ (Bailey and Pill, 2011: 324). The consequences of this central government reform initiative are as yet unknown and therefore not the subject of this study. But it is already clear that the legacy of the New Localism in England, and thus the shifting of responsibilities to new scales, such as to the neighbourhood, and to non-state actors, such as VSOs, was announced to be continued.

Coping with the local budget crises: reforming the local state administration in Germany In parallel with observations in England, NPM principles and a reform of the welfare state have also played a decisive role in the transformation of local state spaces during the Red–Green federal government era in Germany between 1998 and 2005. This observation seems surprising when the traditional strong autonomy of local authorities in Germany 18

New Localism(s) in Europe

is considered. Because of the German Basic Law, local governments are protected against direct interference by central government, as Article 28 of the constitution stipulates: ‘municipalities must be guaranteed the right to regulate all local affairs on their own responsibility, within the limits prescribed by the laws’ (Deutscher Bundestag, 2000). As long as the provision of public services can be financed by local budgets, local authorities, as the third executive tier of government, have a guarantee of local autonomy in Germany’s federalist state organisation and a key responsibility for policy implementation and service delivery. However, due to local budget constraints deriving from declining local revenues through taxes and increasing unemployment, a local financial crisis has been developing since the late 1980s (Jungfer, 2005; Junkernheinrich et al, 2007).The aggregate financial situation of German municipalities has led to a ‘steady erosion of the financial pillars of municipal self-government’ (Hrbek and Bodenbender, 2008: 117). In cases in which local budgets cannot be passed and approved due to the lack of financial resources, state governments and their subordinate bodies like the local audit commission (kommunale Finanzaufsicht) and district governments (Bezirksregierungen) are allowed to interfere directly in local investment decisions for public service provision. In 2007, approximately 50% of the 369 local authorities in North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) were not able to pass an annual budget plan (IM NRW, 2009). Local authorities with declining revenues are therefore facing increasing supervision, which guarantees legal compliance with federal and state law (Wegrich, 2006). Through the growing allocation of responsibilities towards the local level and the decrease in local revenues, an imbalance between self-government and the influence of federal government control can be seen (Schmidt-Eichstaedt, 1999). Due to a varying set of ‘golden leashes’ (Goldene Zuegel) – the acceptance of upper-tier government regulations in exchange for financial benefits – local decisions become more and more intertwined with political decisions of the European Union (EU), the state governments (Laender) or the federal government (BBR, 2000). Against this background, NPM principles have been particularly fostered during the last decade as an overall strategy to respond to budget constraints in public administration. Inspired by the NPM debate at the international level in the 1980s, two distinctive reform discourses emerged in Germany that sought to restructure the way in which local public services were delivered (Wollmann, 2008a). First, new managerial visions for local governments have been promoted that conceptualise local authorities as service enterprises rather than 19

Regenerating deprived urban areas

public bodies (Reichard, 2002). A discourse around a New Steering Model (NSM) promoted by the German Association of Municipalities for Managerial Reforms (KGSt) from the early 1990s suggests taking performance reviews, new types of controlling, competition and lean management into further consideration in public administration. The aim of the NSM is ‘to enhance the efficiency of administration by introducing decentralised resource responsibility and results-oriented procedures, and to improve the political controllability of administrative action by reorganising the relationship between administration and politics’ (Bogumil, 2006: 5). Scripts on how to interpret and implement these NSM principles were found in the Netherlands, for example, in the Tilburg Model,2 which, in turn, gave an example of the remarkable interwoven, but disconnected, processes of policy mobilities between European cities: All in all, in the 1990s, Dutch municipalities were following a path trodden by their German counterparts in the 1980s, while at the same time German municipalities were following a path trodden by their Dutch counterparts a decade earlier. This intersection is particularly ironic in the case of Germany. Local governments in Germany are following the Tilburg example unaware of the fact that Tilburg itself is in the process of redirecting its focus toward an example previously set by German local government. (Hendriks and Tops, 1999: 134) While NSM in Germany has predominantly promoted reform agendas up until the mid-1990s, a second interrelated discourse on civic community (Buergergemeinde) emerged (Wollmann, 2002). The vision of an ‘activating state’ (Aktivierender Staat), announced by the Red– Green federal government in 1998, was supposed to optimise service delivery through internal reorganisation and external co-production of participating citizens (Lamping, 2002). Formal and informal activities at the local level, such as new participatory forums and municipal charters, would transform residents from political principals to customers and co-producers of public services (Bogumil and Holtkamp, 2002; Gabriel and Eisenmann, 2004). Although initially no more than an electoral campaign for the Social Democratic Party (SPD) during the federal election in 1997, the vision of a ‘New Centre’ (Neue Mitte) soon became a political label under which the need for an overall reform of public services, and the scope of welfare services in particular, has been expressed (Meyer, 2001). 20

New Localism(s) in Europe

So, NSM and citizen participation have become decisive ‘magic words’ in the reform process of local authorities (Gabriel and Eisenmann, 2004: 129). The traditional neo-corporatist welfare mix (Schmitter, 1989), in which, besides the welfare state, the family and a network of welfare organisations are considered to deliver welfare services at the local level, came under scrutiny. Facing rising local expenditures for welfare services due to increasing unemployment and an ageing population, local authorities as the main providers of welfare services increasingly sought new delivery and financing mechanisms (Backhaus-Maul, 1999; Greese, 1999; Bußmann et al, 2003).With the promotion of outsourcing and market and competition principles, the number of private actors and self-help groups at the local level mushroomed (Wollmann, 2008b). Local welfare associations (Wohlfahrtsverbaende), traditionally the main providers of social services, have been confronted with decreasing memberships, limited funding regimes and stronger competition with private companies (Schmid, 1996; Klug, 1997; Behrendt et  al, 2004). With the reform of the health-care law in 1994 (Pflegegesetz), commercial competition has been introduced as private companies intervene in the former stable, cooperative, mutual relationship between welfare organisations and local authorities. Welfare organisations increasingly adopted new NPM principles such as outsourcing, capped service agreements and stronger managements to reduce costs (Dahme et al, 2008). This policy exchange of experiences as well as the overall popularity of NPM principles to reform public administration can be seen as the fertile ground upon which partnership approaches for the implementation of urban policies in England and Germany grew.The following chapter will retrace the evolution of urban policies in both countries, and ABIs in particular, and contextualise them in the overall reform initiatives of public administration. Notes In contrast to the private sector, the third, or voluntary, sector is understood as a sphere in which organisations operate for non-profit purposes. 1

In the 1980s, the city of Tilburg became prominent for its implementation of NPM practices. Tilburg reformed its public administration by restructuring its financial management, changing its organisation through the creation of a business holding and implementing an overall customer reorientation in its public-service delivery (Hendriks and Tops, 1999). This model strongly 2

21

Regenerating deprived urban areas influenced the formulation of the NSM in Germany and was referred to as ‘the state of the art’ in public administration (Mix and Herweyer, 1995).

22

three

National urban policies for deprived urban areas: the birth of Area-Based Initiatives Creating partnerships to respond to economic decline in cities has become a popular way of implementing urban policies1 across Europe and has emerged ‘as one of the homogenising concepts within the EU, supporting the notion of European integration by emphasising the possibilities for collaboration between a number of different stakeholders with potentially competing or conflicting interests’ (Benington and Geddes, 2001: 2).The dialogue between governments to implement the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) adopted in 1999 has led to an increased cross-national policy mobility of approaches and experiences. A number of policy circuits through which ‘policy knowledge and policy models move from city to city’ (McCann, 2008: 2) as well as from country to country can be noted, for example, through: • The inception of an ‘Urban Decline Study Group’ in 1983 by the European Commission for Regional Policy (Cheshire et al, 1986; Kunzmann, 1989); • The series of reports connected to the European Commission’s policy on regional development and planning framework ‘Europe 2000+’ (Boland, 1996); • The emergence of European City Networks (Benington and Harvey, 1998), such as EUROCITIES, with its former thematic exchange focus on ‘Quartiers en Crise’ (Le Galès, 2002), or the URBAN Network (Huttenloher, 2005); and • A number of European memoranda between national governments, such as the Lille Programme (2000), the Rotterdam Urban Acquis (2004) and the Bristol Accord (2005). The Leipzig Charter on Sustainable Cities adopted under the German EU Council Presidency in 2007 marked the most recent document in this series and postulated that:

23

Regenerating deprived urban areas

The ministers commit themselves … to use the tool of integrated urban development and the related governance for its implementation.… The reconciliation of interests facilitated by an integrated urban development policy forms a viable basis for a consensus between the state, regions, cities, citizens and economic actors … special attention is paid to deprived neighbourhoods within the context of the city as a whole. (BMVBS, 2007b: 2) Whereas urban policies are usually considered to have very broad conceptual umbrellas for all public-sector interventions in cities, Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs), as area-targeted policies, offer much clearer characteristics. Parkinson (1998: 2) identifies the following commonalities between European ABIs: • A combination of different parallel spatial policies formulated at the European, national, regional and local level; • An integration of single-sector policies into a multi-sectoral and spatially targeted strategy; • An association of anti-poverty policies with ABIs; and • The creation of partnerships between different sectoral actors. Despite the national variations, a common feature of ABIs is their delivery of services to a particular group  in a particular urban area or neighbourhood, for example, to the unemployed, immigrants, young men or women. In contrast to other public and, in particular, welfare policies, which usually target individuals without considering places of residence, the focus of ABIs is spatially specified by defining a territorial unit and recipients (Andersen, 2001). ABIs are therefore central-government initiatives that provide financial incentives for local-development partnerships to identify, implement and preferably sustain solutions in and for those urban areas in which multiple forms of socio-economic deprivation are spatially concentrated (Andersson and Musterd, 2005). During the last decades, ABIs were increasingly integrated into the policy repertoires of supranational bodies in Europe, for example, the Cohesion Policy of the European Commission through the URBAN I/II and URBACT initiatives. Other supranational bodies engaged in developing countries, such as the Cities Alliance and the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN Habitat), also follow a distinct area-based approach, particularly in their slum-upgrading projects (CA, 2008).The following sections will retrace the emergence of ABIs 24

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

in England and Germany in more detail (see also Table 3.1), with a particular introduction to the two initiatives whose implementation is further described in Chapters Five and Six, that is, the New Deal for Communities in England and the Social City Programme in Germany.

Between central-government control and outsourcing: urban policies and development partnerships in England Urban policies in England were traditionally implemented on the basis of a clear division of responsibilities between central and local governments (Cochrane, 1993). Whereas local authorities were in charge of guiding and regulating building activities and development in their jurisdictions, central government focused on a strategic development framework between the regions by setting up regional planning systems, development corporations and the designation of new towns (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2006). This clear division of labour was also reflected in the implementation of ABIs. England’s legacy in the implementation of ABIs is clearly rooted in the deeply felt concerns expressed in the 1960s as to whether the public services provided in deprived urban areas were appropriate with regard to the higher level of household deprivation and emerging inner-city unemployment. Fearing the spreading of urban riots and influenced by the American debate on urban ‘underclass and inner city ghettos’ (Myrdal, 1963), special programmes were introduced to overcome the difference in service provision in inner-city areas by the local authority in partnership with other statutory agencies and Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) (John, 2006b). Hence, the first ABIs were formulated, such as the Education Priority Areas (EPAs) in 1966 and the Urban Aid Programme (later renamed Urban Programme) in 1972 (Smith, G., 1987; Cullingworth and Nadin, 2006). Community Development Projects (CDPs) were soon to follow between 1969 and 1972, directed at deprived areas and immigrants as particular target groups (CDP, 1977; Batley and Edward, 1978; Turok, 1987; Lawless, 1989). In this period, local authorities kept their status as ‘natural agencies to tackle inner city area problems’ (DoE, 1977: 8). It was not until the Conservative government era, from 1979, and the introduction of New Public Management (NPM) principles in the 1980s that partnership approaches with non-state actors became ‘the modern orthodoxy in urban regeneration policy’ (Ball and Maginn, 2005: 10). Whereas the early 1970s has been characterised as an era of urban experiments led by the state (Lawless, 1989), the 1980s turned 25

Regenerating deprived urban areas

out to be a testing-ground for enterprise-led urban development (Wilks-Heeg, 1996). A number of urban policies came into being to foster public– private partnerships and area-based interventions, such as through the Urban Development Corporations (UDCs) or Enterprise Zones (Lawless, 1989; Edwards and Deakin, 1992; Rydin, 1993; Imrie and Thomas, 1999). These initiatives were based on a development model that assumed that ‘regeneration should be physically led by a singlepurpose agency, free from the restraints of local democracy, which should establish at minimal public cost the conditions for private investment, which generate wealth that will eventually flow back into the community’ (Parkinson, 1988: 110). In order to build the Hong Kong of the 1950s and 1960s inside inner Liverpool or inner Glasgow’ (Hall, P., 1982: 417), these approaches encouraged explicitly international capital by enabling an investment environment without interfering in regulations, such as taxes and the planning controls of local authorities. Even though announcements were made of intentions to include and/or consult local authorities as well as residents in the implementation of these initiatives, studies argued that in most cases they failed to deliver these promises (Atkinson, 1999). Instead, some commentators saw in these partnerships ‘the most decisive attacks ever made on local democracy’ (Danielzyk and Wood, 1993: 124). The policy shift was also noticeable in existing ABIs, such as the Urban Programme that was continued by the Conservative government.After some financial cutbacks in 1979, the programme received increased expenditure in the early 1980s. Nevertheless, greater emphasis was given to projects that directly addressed economic issues in cooperation with the private sector rather than ‘social’ projects: ‘even subsidies that were originally conceived in terms of the direct social effect of the public monies are now frequently justified in terms of their cumulative effect on the local economy’ (Rydin, 1993: 60). The number of ABIs increased constantly during the following years. Despite emerging critiques, such as by the Audit Commission, who identified the lack of coordination as a ‘patchwork quilt of complexity and idiosyncrasy’ (AC, 1989), new ABIs, such as the City Challenge Programme (CCP), were set up in the 1990s. As cooperation at the local level was one of the main expectations of the programme, the CCP was a pioneer in its attempt to create broad partnerships, with a major focus on including local residents (De Groot, 1992). However, studies suggested that the participation of residents received only minimal attention (Froessler and Wagner, 1995) and the relationship 26

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

between the state and recipients of the CCP turned out to be a ‘last outpost of British Colonialism’, as local residents were neither included in the formulation of strategies for their area nor allocated resources for self-help (Hall, N., 1993). On the basis of an extensive overall evaluation of urban policies, it was noted that the focus on a property-led regeneration did not lead to a decline of unemployment rates (Robson et al, 1994). In fact, the condition in deprived urban areas deteriorated (Robson, 1994). Against this background, the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) was introduced in 1994. This maintained the concept of partnershipworking, but included different parts of the central government and facilitated a more decentralised programme delivery. Aimed at working with residents and local organisations by combining and ‘bending’ central-government resources from different departments, the SRB brought together 20 ongoing urban programmes under a single entity. In this programme, local partnerships between public bodies and private and civil actors were invited to bid for resources. NPM tools, such as regular performance reviews by central government and payment by results, were introduced to ensure the efficiency of the programme delivery. This legacy of partnership approaches in urban regeneration and ABIs was continued during the New Labour government era between 1997 and 2010. In comparing the way in which urban regeneration has been addressed, some distinct continuities between both central governments became obvious: Central themes of continuity between Major and Blair include the emphasis on locally led solutions within a broad central framework, competition for regionally ringfenced funds, reorientating local government away from merely implementation of centrally directed services to more accountable and locally directed community service providers, and partnerships between public and private bodies. (Tiesdell and Allmendinger, 2001: 922) The differences, however, were apparent in the way in which these policies ought to be implemented. Whereas partnerships in the 1960s were understood as being a strategic and operational coordination between central and local governments, partnerships between central government and the private sector became the dominating form during the Conservative government era (Southern, 2002).With New Labour, a more coordinated approach was promoted: 27

Regenerating deprived urban areas

A joined-up problem has never been addressed in a joinedup way. Problems have fallen through the cracks between Whitehall Departments, or between central and local government.And at the neighbourhood level, there has been no one in charge of pulling together all the things that need to go right at the same time. (SEU, 1998: 4) It was expected that pooling resources from single-sector approaches to formulate a coherent and coordinated strategy would create innovative synergies between sectoral policy approaches. It was claimed that by following holistic, multi-sectoral strategies in close cooperation and coordination, the effectiveness of urban policies could be enhanced, local knowledge could be mobilised and different sectoral expertise could be united (NRU, 2002). In order to overcome the perceived lack of coordination and silo mentality of administrations, New Labour strengthened existing bodies and created new governing bodies at the sub-national level, whose purpose was originally to coordinate the implementation of centralgovernment policies at the local level. At the regional level, the role of the Government Offices for the Regions (GORs), created in 1994 for fostering the coherence of central-government policies, was further stressed and they became powerful bodies for local actors (Musson et al, 2005; Bianconi et al, 2006). Acting as the ‘eyes and ears’ of central government (ODPM/NRU, 2005a: 19), they played a significant role in managing central–local relationships and in monitoring initiatives implemented at the local level, such as the New Deal for Communities (NDC). Financial resources were allocated to these partnerships from central government, provided that a number of development strategies, such as the Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy (LNRS), and performance agreements with the GOR, such as the Local Area Agreements (LAAs), had been formulated (SEU, 2001; ODPM/NRU, 2002; ODPM, 2006; DCLG, 2007). The rescaling of government responsibilities and, in particular, the delivery mechanisms of welfare services went along with the ‘revival of citizenship and the activation of communities to spearhead urban change’ (Imrie and Raco, 2004: 4). The failures of the Conservative government era to address the spatial concentration of poverty and inequality in British cities left a ‘gap between these worst estates and the rest of the country’ (SEU, 1998: 1). A new ‘urban renaissance’ was therefore announced to engage ‘local people in a partnership for change and enabling communities to take a decisive role in their future’ (SEU, 1998: 2). New legislative and planning procedures, 28

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

such as Community Strategies, the ‘plan of plans’ for citywide Local Development Frameworks (LDFs), were introduced, which asked for a further engagement of local communities in identifying planning priorities (Aspden and Birch, 2005; Raco et al, 2006; Tewdwr-Jones et al, 2006). At the local level, Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) were established in all the 88 local-authority districts in receipt of Neighbourhood Renewal Funding (NRF), including representatives from the public, private and voluntary sector in order to achieve a strategic cooperation between the increasing plethora of partnerships and ABIs in deprived urban areas. These bodies, seen as ‘a top-down intervention aimed to achieve local network formation’ (Bailey, 2003: 445), operate as nonstatutory bodies with no direct executive powers, with the aim to ‘develop a vision for an urban area which would unite the fragmented ABI partnerships and provide a more strategic framework in which ABIs could develop and collaborate with other regeneration initiatives’ (Coaffee, 2004: 446). These attempts to introduce new coordinating bodies for a multi-agency and a ‘joined-up’ policy approach in urban regeneration have been accompanied by a stronger claim to engage with local communities at the neighbourhood level: ‘It has become conventional wisdom that communities need to be involved both in designing what is to be done and in implementing it, and that the best policies work through genuine partnerships’ (SEU, 1998: 28). Against this background, a plethora of ABIs emerged, of which the NDC became the major flagship  initiative of the New Labour government. With the NDC, the central government sought to fulfil its promise ‘to reduce the gaps … that distinguish some of the poorest neighbourhoods from the rest of the country’ (DETR, 1999: 1). Between 1999 and 2008, around £1.71  billion was spent on some 6,900 projects in 39 neighbourhoods that were chosen to receive NDC funding (Batty et al, 2010). A further £730 million was made available by other public, private and voluntary-sector sources for local partnerships to tackle unemployment, high levels of crime, educational underachievement, health challenges and the amelioration of physical circumstances, including housing. With its resource allocation and 10-year period, the NDC was promoted as ‘one of the most intensive and innovative area-based initiatives (ABIs) ever introduced in England’ (Batty et al, 2010: 5). The outstanding feature of this initiative was its commitment to allocate the management responsibilities to ‘local partnerships that have at its core local residents, community and voluntary groups but which also include business, the local authority and other public 29

Regenerating deprived urban areas

bodies’ (DETR, 1999: 7). Applying its third-way principles, the central government not only planned to consult local residents, but also proposed that the delivery of the NDC should be managed and steered by intermediaries, preferably the voluntary sector and local residents at the neighbourhood level. It addressed local residents in deprived urban areas as beneficiaries as well as co-producers of the initiative (Alcock, 2004). In order to deal with ‘cross-cutting’ issues, such as unemployment, crime and health (ODPM, 1999), a strong emphasis was placed on a partnership model at the neighbourhood level that should create economic solutions and services while serving as a state intermediary to bring together key national, regional and local agencies (DETR, 1999). Table 3.1 summarises some of the key characteristics of the NDC initiative, which will be further illustrated in the following chapters.

Halting the downward spiral: urban policies and the birth of Area-Based Initiatives in Germany As in England, partnership approaches between state and nonstate actors for designing and implementing public policies, such as urban policies, are not a new phenomenon in Germany. Generally, up to the end of the 1990s, policies were traditionally formulated by, and implemented through, an agreement between the state and interest organisations, such as labour unions (Konzertierte Aktion). This consensus approach, or corporatism, was the underlying governing principle for all major policy initiatives deriving from federal, state or local governments (Alemann, 1981; Schmitter, 1989). This corporatist tradition was particularly prominent for labour-market policies, where roundtables between the federal government and various confederations of German employers as well as labour unions negotiated reform initiatives.This principle has been replicated at all tiers of government and in almost all business organisations in which labour unions were included in the preparation of major organisational changes. These corporatist principles have also been applied in other policy sectors, such as vocational training (Streeck et al, 1987), health (Wiesenthal, 1981), welfare and environmental policies (Voelzkow, 1996; Zimmer, 1999; Streeck, 2003; Schmid, 2006). Until the 1990s, an incorporation of organised interests in the implementation or preparation of urban policies was mainly driven by local authorities in seeking partnerships with housing associations. This constellation emerged from the housing shortage after the Second World War due to the significant scale of destruction and influx of 30

National urban policies for deprived urban areas Table 3.1: Key characteristics of the New Deal for Communities New Deal for Communities (England) Duration: –– Inception of the first round in 1998 by the New Labour government: 17 pathfinder projects in England. –– Expansion of the programme in 1999: further 22 projects in England in the second round (ODPM/NRU, 2005b). –– NDC funding ceased in 2010. Responsible government bodies: –– Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). –– Government Offices for the Regions in England (GORs). Objectives: –– To achieve strategic change in deprived urban areas. –– Creation of neighbourhood-level agencies. –– Community engagement. –– Partnership-working with other statutory agencies and learning and innovation (DETR, 1999). Key policy areas: –– Unemployment. –– High levels of crime. –– Educational underachievement. –– Health challenges. –– Housing and the physical environment. Target areas: Neighbourhoods between 1,000 and 14,000 households were eligible for funding (ODPM/NRU, 2005b). NDC areas consisted typically of about 9,800 people (Beatty et al, 2009). Two major selection criteria: areas with the highest levels of deprivation based upon the 1998 Index of Local Deprivation (ILD) and even distribution of beneficiary areas or at least one eligible local authority area in each region across England determined by the DCLG (DETR, 1999). Financing and funding take-up The total cost of the 10-year programme was approximately £1.71 billion provided by central government (Batty et al, 2010); £580 per person per year living in an NDC area (Lawless et al, 2009: 264). In 1998, 17 local partnerships were announced; until 2010, 39 NDC partnerships have been built (DCLG, 2008a). Partnerships are implementing approved Delivery Plans, each of which has attracted approximately £50 million of NDC programme investment. Projects have been accepted on the grounds that competitive bids for NDC funding were submitted to the GORs. Conditions for funding take-up were: –– the provision of broad partnerships between VSOs, public agencies and local communities; –– the establishment of an accountable body for allocating public funds; and –– the formulation of a vision and a delivery plan (DETR, 1999).

31

Regenerating deprived urban areas

refugees. The cooperation with housing associations also intensified over the post-war years as the economic miracle – Germany’s strong economic growth and expansion of the manufacturing industry – led to the demand for further housing for immigrants or ‘guest workers’, first from Southern Europe and then, beginning in the 1960s, from Morocco,Tunisia and Turkey (Treibel, 1999). State subsidies, investment programmes, guidelines and new laws were passed to structure the cooperation with housing providers to meet the housing needs of the growing population. Up to the late 1970s, the post-war approach named ‘area rehabilitation’ (Flächensanierung), in which the broad-scale clearance of old and construction of new housing stocks prevailed, was the focus of urban policies conducted mainly by local authorities (Heineberg, 1988; Pfotenhauer, 2000). During those years, a significant suburbanisation took place, coinciding with an out-migration of more affluent parts of the population and a concentration of poor households in the remaining rehabilitation areas (Sanierungsgebiete) in the inner city. Despite the cost-intensive replacement of the housing stock in these areas, the concentration of poor households was aggravated (Zapf, 1969). Growing criticism by citizen action groups, academics, housing associations and city associations became noticeable (Stracke, 1980; Bodenschatz et al, 1983: 456;Wiesner, 1988; Häußermann et al, 2008). Interest organisations of local authorities, such as the Association of German Municipalities (Deutsche Staedtetag), demanded a policy turn towards inner-city areas; ‘Save our city now!’ was the motto of its annual meeting in 1971, which demanded measures towards a ‘humanization of the cities’ (Harlander, 1998; Deutscher Staedtetag, 2005). Against this background, a strategic shift in urban regeneration took place, emphasising a ‘careful’ urban renewal (‘Behutsame Stadterneuerung’) of deprived urban areas. Announced during the International Building Exposition (IBA) in 1978, this model became a renewal orthodox, which still influences contemporary regeneration measures and its partnership structure in Germany (Miller, 1993; Häußermann et al, 2002; Guentner, 2007). At its core, the model aims at fostering an urban renewal process in deprived urban areas without an indirect expulsion of disadvantaged households, and with an active participation of residents and entrepreneurs in the formulation of the aims of the renewal measures. Since then, new forms of mediation and participatory planning methods were increasingly used, and with the amendments of the Federal Building Code in 1976 and 1979, principles of ‘careful’ renewal are reflected in German national legislation (Pfotenhauer, 2000). 32

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

With the application of these principles, the spectrum of actors involved in urban regeneration significantly diversified. Local resident groups and consortiums between VSOs have been built to guide the implementation of regeneration measures, such as the Traegertreff Duisburg Bruckhausen, Basiskreis Detmold-Herberhausen and Präventivkreis im Hammer Norden, to name some of the oldest in Germany. Up to the end of the 1990s, housing associations were seen as being among the most influential and traditional partners for regeneration measures in Germany and they increasingly called attention to the fact that residents and housing providers were overwhelmed by prevailing problems in deprived urban areas. New strategies for neighbourhood renewal, an increased participation of residents and area management were some of the key recommendations (BdW, 1998; Steinert, 1999). However, the former solid partnership between local authorities and housing associations and their dominant development paradigms were about to change. Demands for the application of participatory approaches in urban regeneration, the commercialisation of former housing trusts and the emergence of public–private development consortiums as well as semi-public organisations increasingly pluralised the organisational landscape in urban regeneration. Consequently, local state spaces in Germany began to transform from the 1990s and created new forms of cooperation (OECD, 1999). Local authorities were soon seen more as enabling innovators than as agencies for public service provision: The extent to which the partnership model is being used not only with investors and developers but also with organisations that represent the interests of local residents and retailers, changes the role of the local authority from an (only distributing) arm of the welfare state to a catalyser of innovation and cooperation processes. (Mayer, 1994: 448) In contrast to England, Germany’s legacy in the implementation of ABIs started only in the 1980s, and then only at the sub-national level. The Social City Programme (SCP), the first ABI formulated by the central government of the Social Democrats and the Green Party in 1999, is so far the major national ABI in Germany (see Table 3.3 for other initiatives). However, it adapted key characteristics of pre-existing local and regional initiatives for deprived urban areas that emerged in the late 1980s, for example, initiatives in the cities of Berlin and Bremen, the North Rhine/Westphalian programme ‘Districts with Special Renewal Needs’, later renamed Social City NRW (SCNRW), the programme 33

Regenerating deprived urban areas

‘Social Urban Renewal in Hamburg’, and the initiative ‘HEGISS’ in Hesse (DIFU, 2003c; Guentner, 2007). The development of area-based policies was influenced by a policy discourse at the beginning of 1990 which focused on the increasing social polarisation in German cities on the one hand and on the ‘fate’ of the local democracy on the other (ARGEBAU, 2005; Guentner, 2007). Both prominent discourses complemented one another as they were concerned with the state of German cities and recommended further public interventions in deprived urban areas. The first discourse highlighted ongoing economic changes in cities and their spatial manifestation. A ‘crisis of the social city’ (Krise der Sozialen Stadt) was proclaimed, since the ‘socially mixed composition of the European City’ was seen to be undermined by social polarisation and the segregation of disadvantaged households (Häußermann, 2000; ARGEBAU, 2005). Consequently, urban research in Germany focused on theories that may provide appropriate theoretical and methodological frameworks for analysing this observed tendency in German cities. The concept of social exclusion, deriving from French research on poverty, was taken up and the relevance of the US ‘underclass’ concept for the German context was critically discussed (Alisch and Dangschat, 1998; Heitmeyer and Anhut, 2000; Farwick, 2001; Kronauer, 2002; Häußermann et al, 2004; ARGEBAU, 2005). However, with the focus on segregation and the ‘downward spiral’ of decline in deprived urban areas, neighbourhood effects became prominent subjects in urban research and were soon incorporated in the formulation of ABIs (Aehnelt et al, 2004; ARGEBAU, 2005; Guentner, 2007). The second discourse concentrated on the dissolution of the social city as the key German model of consensus-driven local politics. Due to the pluralisation of local state spaces, the question of how local governance arrangements can effectively be coordinated was increasingly addressed (Hanesch, 1997; Blanke et al, 1986; Heinelt, 2004).The implementation of integrated and area-targeted policy approaches in urban regeneration was seen as one major recommendation in order to achieve a better coordination and collaboration among local actors in a ‘solidary city’ (solidarische Stadt) (Alisch and Dangschat, 1993, 1994; Hanesch, 1997). Political alliances between the public and the voluntary sector, including an enhanced participation of citizens for the strengthening of the social city, were demanded. Against this background, the first national ABI, the SCP, emerged from an inter-state initiative in 1996 of the Conference of the Ministers for Urban Development and Housing of the States (ARGEBAU)2 to curb the growing social polarisation in cities. Taking up this initiative, 34

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

the new federal government announced the SCP in 1999, which, in 2004, became a permanent feature of urban-development funding (Staedtebaufoerderung) provided by the federal government. Consequently, based upon an administrative agreement between the federal and the state governments, the SCP was formulated to focus on: high density, highly populated neighbourhoods in urban areas that demonstrate substantial deficits with respect to their social structure, the state of construction, job supply, level of education, provision of social and neighbourhood cultural infrastructure, and the quality of dwellings, the residential environment, and the overall environment. (DIFU, 2003b) Between 1999 and 2009, around 571 neighbourhoods in 355 cities received funding from the SCP (Deutscher Bundestag, 2010). By 2007, around €2.3 billion was made available by the federal, state and local governments. The overall objectives were: • To improve the housing and living conditions in deprived urban areas by the provision of funding mechanisms for construction measures; • To enhance the life chances of individuals by organising skills development and training; and • To change the district’s image and identification processes of its residents through revitalisation measures (Franke et al, 2000). Guidelines to design the delivery structures were issued and six operational fields of activity were identified, including housing, social inclusion, socio-cultural infrastructure and public space (Austermann and Zimmer-Hegmann, 2000; ARGEBAU, 2005). In the words of the German Institute of Urban Affairs (DIFU), a national body assigned to provide guidance and information for SCP beneficiaries, concerted efforts and broad partnerships would be needed to halt the downward spiral (Abwaertsspirale) in deprived urban areas: Without state support, the downward spiral in some disadvantaged urban districts will continue. The processes at work here reinforce each other unless politicians, local authorities, residents, businesses and other local players make a concerted effort to break the cycle. We need integrated urban district policies which focus on the neighbourhood as a whole and underscore the existing potential to improve

35

Regenerating deprived urban areas Table 3.2: Key characteristics of the Social City Programme Social City Programme (Germany) Duration –– Inception of the first round in 1999 to 2002 after the election of the Red– Green coalition government. –– The initiative has been continued by all consecutive federal governments. –– SCP has been embedded as a guiding principle for neighbourhood renewal in the regulations of the Federal Building Code. Responsible government bodies –– Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs. –– 16 states (Laender). –– Local authorities. Objectives of the Programme –– To stabilise and improve the physical housing and living conditions in deprived urban areas as well as their economic basis. –– To improve the life chances through capacity-development measures. –– To strengthen the community image and sense of place (DIFU, 2003b; BMVBS, 2005). Key policy areas –– Civil participation, community life and social inclusion. –– Local economy, work and employment. –– Social, cultural, educational and recreational infrastructure, education and health. –– Housing. –– Public space and environment (ARGEBAU, 2005). –– Interdepartmental cooperation at the national, regional and local level through integrated planning and pooling of resources. –– Combination of ‘investive’ (physical measures) and ‘non-investive’ (social policy-oriented) area-based policies. Target areas Target areas are suggested by local authorities but chosen by the state government. Neighbourhoods of around 6,000 inhabitants in either high-rise buildings usually at the urban fringe or old inner-city residential neighbourhoods. Financing and funding take-up The financing is shared three ways between the central government, the state and the participating local authority. But the share of the participating local authorities is subject to the regulation by each Land. Between 1999 and 2009, 571 neighbourhoods in 355 cities became beneficiaries (Deutscher Bundestag, 2010). Until 2007, the federal government, states and local authorities allocated around €2.3 billion (Deutscher Bundestag, 2009). The implementation of the initiative has to be renewed annually by the central government and the states through an administrative agreement.

36

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

local living conditions and erect ideally self-supporting structures. (Becker et al, 2002: 9) Integrated action plans were demanded to achieve an area-based focus in public-service delivery (Verräumlichung) and the aforementioned thrive for cooperation between different local administrative departments and actors from the voluntary and private sector. Finding new ways to overcome the boundaries between both local administrative departments as well as local state and non-state actors and residents, the SCP was conceptualised as a ‘learning programme’ (Loehr and Roesner, 2003;Walther and Guentner, 2007). As a ‘programme of incentives’ for new ways of cooperation, the SCP was seen as a ‘political pioneering feat’ (Aehnelt et al, 2004).

Comparing Area-Based Initiatives: cross-national observations Despite all the differences, both ABIs share at least three common expectations. First, a concentration of financial resources on smaller spatial units may produce beneficial synergies between sectoral policy approaches, for example between social services, housing and education, and increase the impacts on the multifaceted nature of deprivation experiences.The concentration of resources on smaller spatial units may foster inter-departmental and inter-organisational cooperation, creating a collaborative advantage, hence achieving something collaboratively that ‘no organization could have produced on its own’ (Huxham, 1996: 141). The outcomes of the intervention are visible to the local population, which could develop a greater sense of legitimacy of public interventions in return. It is expected that a new spirit of optimism, or ‘Aufbruchsstimmung’ (DIFU, 2003c: 13), will reduce the experience of stigmatisation (Smith, G.R., 1999). Second, both ABIs attach increased importance to the involvement of residents and VSOs in the implementation of the initiatives, as it is argued that ‘plans imposed on a community, that are not developed with them and win their support, won’t deliver lasting change’ (DETR, 1999: 8). Moreover, following a clear claim of NPM principles, an ‘activation’ of residents through volunteering and the help of intermediaries in the implementation of ABIs would strengthen the networks, norms and relationships that shape the quantity and cooperative quality of interactions between residents and organisations in deprived urban areas and create new forums of citizenship (Alisch, 1998; Franke and Löhr, 2001).

37

38

Era of urban experiments to tackle deprivation in inner cities (Lawless, 1989) • Community Development Projects (CDPs) • Education Priority Areas (EPAs) • Urban Aid Programme (later renamed Urban Programme) Further Literature: CDP (1977), Turok (1987), Batley and Edward (1978), Cullingworth and Nadin (2006), Smith, G. (1987) and Yelling (1999).

Testing-grounds for enterprise-led urban development (Wilks-Heeg, 1996): • City Action Teams (CATs) • Housing Corporation • City Technical Colleges • Inner City Task Forces • City Grant • Inner City Open Learning Centres • Compacts • Job Clubs • Derelict-land Grant • Transport Supplementary Grant • Employment Action • Land Registers • Enterprise Zones (EZs) • Loan-Guarantee Scheme • Enterprise Training • Race Relations Employment Advisory • Enterprise Allowance Scheme Service • Estate Action • Safer Cities • Ethnic Minority Business • Section 11 Grant Grants • Small Firms Service • Garden Festivals • Urban Development Corporations (UDCs) • Housing Action Trusts (HATs) • Youth Training Further Literature: AC (1989), Rydin (1993), Raco (2000) and Imrie and Thomas (1993).

1960s– 1970s

1980s– 1990s

England

(continued)

• Emergence of local ABIs, such as in Duisburg, and ABIs initiated by state governments, such as in Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen and Hesse in West Germany. • Large-scale housing programmes at the urban fringe in East Germany. Further Literature: Guentner (2007), Oelschlaegel (1987), Kuerpick and Weck (1998), Bodenschatz et al (1983), Hämer (1990), Bernt (2003) and Wiesner (1988).

Applying the principles of ‘careful urban renewal’ in local and state policies (behutsame Stadtentwicklung)

Period of urban renewal through clearance and reconstruction • Launch of the ‘Redevelopment and Development programme’ (Städtebauliche Sanierungs- und Entwicklungsmaßnahmen) for area rehabilitation (Flächensanierung) in rehabilitation zones (Sanierungsgebiete) of West German inner cities. • Reconstruction programmes in East Germany. Further Literature: Pfotenhauer (2000), Heineberg (1988), Harlander (1998), BBR (2000) and Zapf (1969).

Germany

Table 3.3:The legacy of Area-Based Initiatives in England and Germany

Regenerating deprived urban areas

1990s– 2000s

England Era of area-based policy mushrooming • Action Teams for Jobs • Health Action Zones • Business brokers • Healthy Living Centres • Children’s Fund • Housing Market Renewal Fund • City Challenge Programme (CCP) • Home Zones • Coalfields • Safer Communities Initiatives • Communities against Drugs • Single Regeneration Budget • Community Finance and Learning • Small Retailers in deprived areas Initiative • Step up • Community Chests • Local Government Associations (LGAs) • Community Empowerment Fund New Commitment to Regeneration • Community Champions Fund • New Start • Creative Partnership • Neighbourhood Renewal Fund • Crime Reduction Programme • Neighbourhood and Street Wardens • Early Excellence Centres • Neighbourhood Management • Education in Cities Action Zones • Neighbourhood Nurseries • Employment Zones • New Deal for Communities • Estate Action • Partnership Development Fund • Ethnic Minority Outreach Service • Pilot Clear Zones • European Regional Development • Recover Assets Fund Fund • Sport Action Zones • European Union Objective 2 • Sure Start • European URBAN I+ II • Youth Inclusion Programme • European URBACT I+II Further literature: Imrie and Raco (2004), Booth and Green 1993), ODPM (2003), Lupton and Turok (2004), Ball and Maginn (2004), Hull (1999), Smith, G.R. (1999), Chatterton and Bradley (2000) and Coaffee (2004).

• Development and opportunities for young people in disadvantaged neighbourhoods (E&C) • European Union Objective 2 • EU URBAN I+ II • EU URBACT • EU Social Fund – federal programme ‘Social City’ – Education, Economy, Work in the Neighbourhood (BIWAQ) • North Rhine/Westphalian programme Districts with Special Renewal Needs (later merged into Social City) • Socially Inclusive City – Districts with Special Renewal Needs (the social city – SCP) • Urban restructuring in the old federal states (Stadtumbau West) • Urban restructuring in the new federal states (Stadtumbau Ost) • XENOS – Living and Working in Diversity Further literature: Walther and Guentner (2007), Staubach (1994), Alisch and Dangschat (1993) and Häußermann et al (2008).

Germany National discovery of ABIs

Table 3.3:The legacy of Area-Based Initiatives in England and Germany (continued)

National urban policies for deprived urban areas

39

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Third, both ABIs may foster the creation of infrastructure and services (Parkinson, 1998) that are not provided by either the private or public sector but are needed to overcome provision gaps in deprived urban areas (Parkinson, 1998; Smith, G.R., 1999). Welfare services, in particular, such as personal counselling, health services and vocational training, are considered to provide decisive conditions for improving the living conditions in deprived urban areas. A ‘bottom-up planning approach’ and the establishment of local-development partnerships would allow for the identification of the problems to be tackled and more adequate solutions (Smith, G.R., 1999). In a nutshell, a spatially targeted intervention and multi-sectoral local-development partnership approach aims to: • Increase inter-organisational cooperation, in particular, between statutory agencies and with and between non-state actors such as VSOs; • Activate local residents for the formulation and implementation of ABIs; and • Foster neighbourhood-based solutions that lead to the creation of new, more accurate, public services in deprived urban areas. Whether and to what extent these objectives have been met remains an empirical question and is the subject of the remainder of this study. The following chapter will provide an analytical framework for this endeavour while putting an emphasis on assessing the quality of the inter-organisational relationships being developed through such regeneration partnerships. Notes Urban policies are conceptualised as a broad category of those policies that have been explicitly formulated to affect the development of cities (Van den Berg et al, 2007). Following this notion, urban regeneration is understood as a direct public policy that seeks to counteract a broad range of challenging issues in cities, such as economic decline, social exclusion and environmental problems (Couch et al, 2003). 1

The annual conference of the Ministers for Urban Development and Housing of the States (Bauministerkonferenz) ensures that administrative rules and regulations are preserved consistently at the regional level on the one hand, and serves as an interest organ for the states to formulate demands and statements in the field of urban development to be considered at the federal level on the other (ARGEBAU, 2005).

2

40

four

Exploring the impacts of Area‑Based Initiatives through a neo-institutionalist perspective The aim of this chapter is to suggest a theoretical framework for empirical analysis that allows us to explore and identify factors influencing the diversity of impacts deriving from the implementation of Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs). It is argued that a comparative study of the impacts of the New Localism(s) and ABIs can benefit considerably from neo-institutionalist approaches that are sensitive to formal as well as informal local institutional forces and pressures in these transformative processes. Drawing upon neo-institutional approaches from organisational theory, this approach focuses on the creation and institutionalisation of implementation partnerships, the rules for participation, and new neighbourhood solutions put forward by ABIs in both countries, as well as their impacts on ‘mainstream’ planning and development practices. It offers a complementary lens for the study for new forms of urban governance: Organisational theory can be used to develop a broader understanding of processes of institutionalisation within local governance, spatial variations in policy delivery and local policy-making processes. If used in a manner complementary to an emphasis on wider socio-political relations, it enables a more sophisticated understanding of contemporary local political processes to be developed. (Raco, 2002: 452) The body of literature on neo-institutionalism is highly diverse. Attempts at categorising the differences between the approaches within this research stream have led to somewhat confusing results; for example, whereas Hall and Taylor (1996) identify three strands within neo-institutionalism, Peters (2005) defines six varieties within this body of research. Despite all the differences, though, these approaches are based upon the core observation ‘that institutions matter in political explanation’ (Davies, 2004: 571). To understand the processes by which 41

Regenerating deprived urban areas

structures (rules, norms and routines) become established as guidelines for social behaviour (Scott, 2004), institutions are seen as: social structures that have attained a high degree of resilience. [They] are composed of cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative elements that, together with associated activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to social life. Institutions are transmitted by various types of carriers, including symbolic systems, relational systems, routines, and artifacts. Institutions operate at different levels of jurisdiction, from the world system to localized interpersonal relationships. Institutions by definition connote stability but are subject to change processes, both incremental and discontinuous. (Scott, 1995: 33) In contrast to older approaches that focused mainly on the influence of formal rules and the structure of organisations on political behaviour, neo-institutionalism highlights the role of norms and conventions as informal rules shaping organisational behaviour (Senge, 2006). At the heart of a neo-institutional analysis lies the study of the process through which commonly accepted perceptions and political meanings emerge and change.Against this background, a number of analytical approaches have emerged since the 1980s to incorporate both formal rules and informal conventions in the analysis of political behaviour and its influence on changing modes of governance. These frameworks pay ‘attention to the way in which institutions embody values and power relationships; and they study not just the impact of institutions upon behaviour, but the interaction between individuals and institutions’ (Lowndes, 2001: 1953). Central to sociological research is the perspective in which human action is interpreted. Every kind of human action, such as policymaking, is structured by rules of ‘appropriate’ behaviour, organised into institutions. A ‘logic of appropriateness’ can be found when individuals follow such rules, which ‘are seen as natural, rightful, expected and legitimate’ (March and Olsen, 2004: 3).The individual decision – which action has to be taken – is an individual cognitive process that is geared to similarity and congruence rather than consequences. It is assumed that individuals act according to their expectations of what other people in their situation and role would do. Routines and cognitive scripts of behaviour are usually followed and taken for granted. This institutionalised practice of behaviour encompasses a mutual and tacit understanding of ‘what is true, reasonable, natural, right and good’ 42

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective

(March and Olsen, 2004: 4). In this perspective, organisations are highly influenced by, and embedded in, an organisational field, in which each organisation has to prove its legitimacy and modernity (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). By adopting rules, values and norms from the organisational environment, organisations increase their legitimacy in an organisational field. Focusing on the implementation process of policies, this research perspective examines ‘the institutional infrastructure which frames what projects and policies emerge and to impacts on identities, knowledge resources and cultural assumptions’ (Gonzalez and Healey, 2005: 2057). It therefore highlights the importance of values that provide meaning and understanding to political processes (Geddes, 2006). New policy initiatives, such as ABIs, question current organisational behaviours and actively ask for change. Engaging with new organisations and individuals as well as reorganising planning rationales that focus on areabased interventions in deprived urban areas are just a few examples that are expected to challenge an organisational status quo. Cognitive scripts that were once commonly accepted turn out to be rather persistent and stable (Lowndes and Wilson, 2003). Historical approaches, in particular, stress this persistence. It is argued that the founding moment of an institution is crucial; institutions react to changing circumstances but are constrained by past trajectories (Thelen, 1999). Every policy choice made is influenced by the context of historical events and decisions (Steinmo et al, 1992). In other words, social causation is seen as ‘path-dependent’: ‘Institutions are seen as relatively persistent features of the historical landscape and one of the central factors pushing historical development along a set of paths’ (Hall and Taylor, 1996: 9). Path-dependence characterises historical moments and sequences in which institutions are created that ‘have deterministic properties’ (Mahoney, 2000: 507). The moment in which institutional changes occur is considered to exert significant influences on the development of alternative institutional options. Institutional change is therefore somewhat unusual and ideas, solutions and practices might be ‘locked in’ at a given point in time, which hinders the adoption of alternative options. A restructuring of institutions, therefore, has to cope with ‘the long arm of the past’ (Offe, 1996: 219). Institutional change is therefore most likely to occur at ‘critical junctures’, which create ‘branching points’ that interrupt a historical trajectory and move onto a new path of development (Moore, 1966; Bulmer and Burch, 1998). In cases in which an institutional change can be observed, two major processes can be differentiated: institutionalisation and 43

Regenerating deprived urban areas

deinstitutionalisation (Quack, 2006). In the case of ABIs, this institutionalisation of practices is understood as: • Recognition of disadvantaged neighbourhoods and the reformulation of corporate policies in line with the implementation of mainstreaming; • Changing spending patterns within a wider area, often concentrating available budgets on the most needy; • Reshaping local services, involving the transformation of existing resources within a given area; and • Experimenting and learning from good or best practice by the rolling out of lessons learnt within regeneration initiatives to other areas (Smith et al, 2007: 168). In other words, mainstreaming – an institutionalisation of programme activities – might be met through an adoption of the area-based rationale in citywide development strategies combined with an increased resource allocation to services in deprived urban areas and/ or continuing support for structures and services created by projects deriving from ABIs. The following chapters will exemplify these processes in relation to the scope of mainstreaming of area-based approaches in regular public-service provision in further detail. Neo-institutionalist approaches conceptualise institutionalisation as a process during which cognitive scripts are diffused and become accepted and legitimate behaviours become acknowledged by organisations. It has already been noted that ideas, behaviours and processes become institutionalised when they are taken for granted. Focusing on each organisation, we can see institutionalisation as a process: that happens to an organization over time, reflecting the organization’s own distinctive history, the people who have been in it, the groups it embodies and the vested interests they have created, and the way it has adapted to its environment. In what is perhaps its most significant meaning, ‘to institutionalize’ is to infuse with value beyond the technical requirements of the task at hand. (Selznick, 1957: 17) Organisations develop a distinctive character and competence over time that is acknowledged and recognised by an organisational field. However, research on diffusion processes has observed a homogenisation of organisations and similar formal characteristics within an organisational 44

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective

field:‘Organisational change occurs as the result of processes that make organizations more similar without necessarily making them more efficient’ (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983: 147). Adopting similar features and practices over time, organisational change is therefore seen as an outcome of isomorphism. Three types of isomorphism are usually differentiated: • A coercive form deriving from pressures on organisations to adopt certain standards or legitimate practices; • A normative form based upon informal rules and ideas about standard procedures; and • A mimetic form that drives organisations to copy organisations perceived as more successful in order to reduce uncertainty. Organisations can also mimic the adoption of new organisational practices while preserving old institutions. This strategy, called ‘decoupling’, can usually be found when contrasting pressures for institutional changes emerge and organisations prove their legitimacy to the organisational field while ‘preserving the status quo’. Processes of isomorphism can take place at different levels, such as when governments adopt similar policy approaches such as New Public Management (NPM) principles to reform their public services (Knill and Balint, 2008), or when development organisations in urban regeneration pursue similar development strategies (Chien, 2008).The last example – the transfer of experiences or policy exchange across organisational fields and countries – can be seen as a typical example of processes of mimetic isomorphism (Hambleton, 1995). A second form of institutional change is seen in a process of deinstitutionalisation. This process can be observed when institutions commonly fall into disfavour and disappear. It is seen as a: process by which the legitimacy of an established or institutionalized organizational practice erodes or discontinues. Specifically, deinstitutionalization refers to the delegitimation of an established organizational practice or procedure as a result of organizational challenges to or the failure of organizations to reproduce previously legitimated or taken-for-granted organizational actions. (Oliver, 1992: 564) In other words, existing rules, practices, resources and power become contested and discontinued in local actions (Olsen, 2008). Three 45

Regenerating deprived urban areas

mechanisms of deinstitutionalisation can be distinguished (Olsen, 2008). First, institutions can disappear because of political pressures deriving from members of an organisation who question the validity of an institutionalised organisational practice, or from the organisational field, which causes members to question the appropriateness of organisational practices. Second, functional pressures can dissolve institutions when an organisational practice is not ‘perceived by organizational members to possess intrinsic worth or legitimacy beyond its technical requirements’ (Oliver, 1992: 571). As already illustrated in Chapter Three, deinstitutionalisation processes in the field of urban regeneration can be illustrated by the variety of public-sector reforms following the change of central governments in the UK. Beginning from the major reorganisation schemes in the 1980s under the Thatcher government, in which planning functions of local authorities were intentionally circumvented in favour of the private sector, up to the variety of local performance schemes introduced by the New Labour government, local government bodies have experienced several changes of regulations questioning their current organisational practices. Against this background, the study of ABIs can benefit from the analysis and tools provided by organisational sociology that apply a neo-institutional lens. Studying changing organisational practices and analysing the role of inter-organisational relationships in these processes that are embedded in institutional contexts and socio-political features of places offers a new but promising analytical strategy for exploring institutional change (McQuarrie and Marwell, 2009). Having clarified the processes of institutional change, the next section presents the Institutional Capacity Building Framework (ICBF) that is applied to analyse the implementation of ABIs in both cases. Providing a lens through which development partnerships can be studied, it offers a practical neo-institutional tool to analyse inter-organisational relationships (social capital), mobilization capacities (political capital) and knowledge resources (intellectual capital) created and transformed by the implementation of ABIs.

The Institutional Capacity Building Framework: evaluating shared knowledge, new political spaces and inter-organisational relations The ICBF offers a suitable framework for analysis to assess whether and how organisations involved in the implementation of ABIs have adopted new practices and integrated them in existing cognitive 46

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective

scripts for organisational behaviour. It provides an interpretive view of transformative efforts to change the qualities of inter-organisational relationships in localities (Healey et al, 2003; Healey, 2006) and is based on the assumption that these relationships are likely to be affected ‘by the design of non-elected as well as elected agencies, and by the formal and informal institutional arrangements that link (or fail to link) different bodies involved in local decision-making and service delivery’ (Lowndes and Wilson, 2001: 633). Within this view, special attention is put on the informal aspects of institution-building and governance, and thus on the development of common frames of reference accepted and reproduced by organisations involved in the implementation of public policies. In other words, both formal rules of participation and shared understandings and meanings of collaborative processes are to be studied: Transformation in governance, the re-configuring of institutional capacities and designs, is understood not merely as a task for actors with interests and leadership qualities, or the mobilisation of coalitions to achieve formal changes in law and organizational structure. It is about transforming the deeper frames of reference and cultural practices which structure how people make sense of their collective world and engage cognitively and bodily in their day-to-day routines. (Healey, 2007: 65) The concept of institutional capacity suggests that localities with a plethora of organisations that cultivate high exchanges of information and a sense of common purpose above organisational interests are more likely to change and adapt than other places (Amin and Thrift, 1995). According to this perspective, this environment of ‘institutional thickness’ in which local organisations are embedded may provide the supportive structure needed for local actors to collaborate and change their organisational practices. Even though the qualities of such cohesive institutional contexts may promote beneficial common outcomes in some circumstances, we are reminded that ‘cohesive communities and integrated “polities” are not desirable as such.They need to be judged by their qualities not their existence’ (Healey et al, 2003: 63). Against this background, the concept of institutional capacity, used as a synonym for institutional capital, qualifies these social relations in a locality (Healey, 1998). This concept is based on the assumption that institutional capacity is usually produced by inter-organisational relationships and collaborative arrangements. As these relationships 47

Regenerating deprived urban areas

change continually, institutional capacity is not seen as ‘historically fixed’ or unchangeable. Organisations still ‘inherit’ ideas and relationships from past experiences, but they can actively contribute to shift discourses and practices. Following this perspective, evaluating institutional capacitybuilding requires us to distinguish between the qualities of social relations, for example, trust and norms structuring inter-organisational relationships, and the knowledge resources emerging from these relations. Three forms of capital deriving from inter-organisational relations are differentiated: intellectual capital (knowledge resources), political capital (mobilisation capacity) and social capital (relational resources) (Healey et al, 2003). Evaluating the impacts of ABIs in the localities under study therefore requires us to assess whether inter-organisational relationships have been changed (social capital), information generated through the implementation has been shared and promoted (intellectual capital) and new rules for participation, in particular, for target groups such as Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) and local residents, have been established (political capital). The approach allows us to assess how: knowledge resources and relational resources are mobilized, and how this affects the frames of references or discourses through which meanings are arrived at and mobilized, the processes by which meanings are disseminated and the relation between such discourses and the practices through which material actions are accomplished. (Healey et  al, 2003: 64)

Knowledge resources as intellectual capital Information shared and used to generate knowledge in a partnership is a decisive criterion to assess what frames of reference have been generated. Consideration of the range of knowledge resources and modes of distribution is of particular importance to understanding how ideas and practices on development issues and solutions have been created and shared. Discourses initiated by the partnerships play an important role as they not only frame particular aspects of issues and solutions (Mills, 2004), but also serve as a legitimising force for ‘appropriate’ practices and actions, particularly in the situations of ‘organised anarchies’ in which actors have to cope with ambiguity, uncertainties and pressures (Cohen et al, 1972). Dealing with unknown practices of organisational behaviour in new partnerships and finding solutions and priorities for dealing with ‘wicked problems’ can be seen 48

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective Table 4.1: Selected dimensions of institutional capacity-building Dimensions of institutional capital Knowledge resources (intellectual capital)

Mobilisation capacity (political capital)

Relational resources (social capital)

Elements and indicators for assessment –– The range of knowledge resources to which participants have access. –– The distribution of information and creation of shared knowledge (openness and learning). –– The opportunity structure and the ‘rules of engagement’. –– The arenas used and provided by the regeneration schemes. –– The presence and absence of critical change agents at different stages. –– The range of stakeholders involved. –– The morphology of the partnerships, in terms of division of labour and interorganisational relationships.

Source: Adapted from Healey et al (2003).

as an example of a decision situation of extreme uncertainty (Rittel and Webber, 1973). Paying attention to the attempts of creating a frame of certainty, which organisations need for decision-making and sensebuilding, exemplifies the extent of power within these new governance arrangements:‘Control of the terms under which knowledge is defined allows those with the capacity to define useful knowledge to set key priorities and marginalize alternative ways of defining success and what works’ (Grimshaw and Smith, 2007: 34). What the authors describe here is the expected and usually observable clash of views between expert knowledge that is based upon abstract systems of knowing and the realities of local residents, with their richness of personal experiences (Habermas, 1984; Healey, 2006). Analytical approaches that are based upon this communicative theory assume that the communication process in partnerships such as the ABIs is a two-way process between experts from statutory agencies and all other stakeholders, such as VSOs and local residents. Sharing knowledge would therefore create the basis for social learning, which derives from a dialogue on the common grounds for decision-making, shared understandings and the explicit acknowledgement of differences (Berkes, 2009). Learning is therefore understood as a process in which information becomes knowledge that is shared by all organisations in the partnership (Kooiman, 2003). So attention is being paid to the way in which information and decisions are being collected, processed and

49

Regenerating deprived urban areas

shared among the partnerships being built for the implementation of ABIs.

Mobilisation capacity as political capital Reviewing the creation of mobilisation capacities within a partnership shows us which actors participated in the implementation of ABIs and which rules for interaction have been reinforced. Establishing new participatory forums with particular rules of engagement is a common feature of new urban-governance arrangements. What kind of actors are invited to join, which roles are allocated to actors in these arenas and which actors turn out to be critical-change agents tells us about the actual level of participation in these new governance experiments. This indicates ‘who is entitled or required to participate, how the participants may interact, and what constitutes a decision’ (Hult and Walcott, 1990: 9). Against the backdrop of a growing variety of institutional arrangements or a fast-growing institutional supply for public participation creating the political space within which urban regeneration initiatives are embedded, it is necessary to scrutinise how and to what extent ‘communities’ in deprived urban areas can intervene in these new forums (Atkinson, 1999; Raco, 2000; Jones, P.S., 2003). In the assessment of ABIs, we are therefore reminded to pay attention to the way in which these arenas for local participation are created: ‘An apparently supportive institutional space can be provided by local authority structures which are willing to re-adapt to inclusive partnership working through producing flexible inter-institutional working and engaging communities’ (Jones, P.S., 2003: 592, original emphasis). For policy initiatives under study, such as the ABIs, special attention is put on the actual extent of ‘activation’ of residents and involvement of VSOs. Research on citizen participation in urban regeneration during the last decade has drawn rather sceptical conclusions. Work on, and adaptations of, the ‘community participation ladder’ have highlighted that participatory exercises can turn out to be empty experiences or even a ‘tyranny’ (Arnstein, 1969; Cleaver, 1999; Cooke and Kothari, 2001; Jones, P.S., 2003). It is argued that residents often do not have the same status as other stakeholders or are not treated as partners in these arenas (Healey, 2006). The dominant call for more community participation can turn out to be a largely discursive phenomenon without any real impacts on the power structures of local development decisions (Perrons and Skyers, 2003, Dargan, 2009). Studies in Germany similarly highlight that while new forms of participation may intensify 50

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective

and establish new social networks, they may result only in an ‘orderly administered marginality’ (verwaltete Marginalität) and not change the economic situation of deprived households (Häußermann et al, 2008). Analysing the structure of, and the rules in, the arenas created in the implementation of both ABIs, therefore, allows us not only to assess how different interests are expressed and influenced in the development agenda in these ABIs, but possibly also to scrutinize whether these arenas are acknowledged by existing formal,‘mainstream’ planning and political processes in both localities. By that we can deduce evidence of the extent to which these forums have been institutionalised as new governance arenas.

Relational resources as social capital During the last decade, a number of attempts have been formulated to qualify inter-organisational relationships and the special functions of social relationships for economic development. This can be seen in a growing literature on social capital (Portes, 1998; Rydin and Pennington, 2000; Lowndes and Wilson, 2001; Bull and Jones, 2006; Nahapiet, 2008). Social capital has been defined in a number of ways, for example as a social norm (Fukuyama, 2001), a ‘variety of entities’ facilitating cooperation in social structures (Coleman, 1988) or accumulated cultural resources (Bourdieu, 1977). At its core lies the assumption that the existence of reciprocity and trust, reflected in networks of informal as well as formal interrelationships, may possess beneficial effects for social groups. According to Putnam, social capital can be seen as: features of social life-networks, norms, and trust – that enable participants to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives. Whether or not their shared goals are praiseworthy is, of course, entirely another matter. To the extent that the norms, networks, and trust link substantial sectors of the community and span underlying social cleavages – to the extent that the social capital is of a ‘bridging’ sort – then the enhanced cooperation is likely to serve broader interests and to be widely welcomed. (Putnam, 1995: 664) In the ICBF it is assumed that a web of networks existing in each locality is able to create a capacity to enhance individual and organisational relationships. It asks for assessing the range of stakeholders involved 51

Regenerating deprived urban areas

in the implementation and the morphology of the networks such as the density and division of labour between organisations. Research on the nature of inter-organisational networks highlights ‘the effects of cohesive ties between social actors on subsequent cooperation between those actors’ (Gulati and Gargiulo, 1999: 1146). It is argued that neither institutional arrangements nor generalised morality should be seen as the origin of trust in a society; rather it is the embeddedness of actors in a social network, thus ‘the actors’ very concrete social relationships’ (Bachmann and Zaheer, 2008: 541). Economic exchanges and cooperation are therefore embedded in social networks, which structure the flow of information and capacities to create alliances with other organisations (Granovetter, 1973, Jones and Lichtenstein, 2008, Kenis and Oerlemans, 2008). By analysing the morphology of partnerships, and so the inter-organisational relationships, we are able to scrutinise the extent to which actors trust each other and how actors judge each other’s influence on the implementation of these policy initiatives. In this respect, inter-organisational trust is understood as: institutionalised trust structures, whether originating from cultural norms, institutional mechanisms in the environment of the relationship, or at lower levels of analysis, from the past history of the involved actors’ behaviour, generate expectations of behaviour to which individuals operating in organizational contexts conform or at least orient their behaviour. (Bachmann and Zaheer, 2008: 544) These governance experiments are envisaged to increase the interorganisational cooperation between state and non-state actors, as well as between VSOs in particular. Developing trust in inter-organisational relationships can be seen as an indicator of the stability of these relationships created during the implementation of ABIs. When it comes to alternative provision and the delivery of public services, particularly by the third sector, the existence of reciprocal trust can be seen as a basis for further cooperation. However, we are reminded that ‘Power can be hidden behind a facade of “trust” and a rhetoric of “collaboration” and can be used to promote vested interests through the manipulation and capitulation of weaker partners’ (Hardy et al, 1998: 65). So, apart from the level of reciprocal trust in these inter-organisational relationships, we also have to consider and distinguish the exercise of power or influence in these partnerships. In this research, we focus not only on authoritative power, 52

Area‑Based Initiatives: a neo-institutionalist perspective

for example the influence of statutory agencies to shape and control the implementation of ABIs, but also on so-called generative power, ‘the power to learn new practices and create new capacities’ (Coaffee and Healey, 2003: 1982). So, not only is special focus put on the position of organisations within a partnership with command over specific rules and resources, but this framework also highlights the way in which people ‘embody assumptions about appropriate ways of thinking and acting in their daily discourses and practices and how these in turn may become embedded in institutionalized practices’ (Healey, 2003: 106). It therefore addresses the question of what kinds of organisations sought to take control (‘power over’) and whether they did or not, as well as how power is exerted to make things happen (‘power to’) (Huxham and Beech, 2008). By retracing the creation of knowledge resources (Who is setting the agenda?), mobilisation capacities (Which roles are allocated in the implementation?) and relational resources (Did the partnership accumulate enough power to shift mainstream policies and who has the capacity to act?), the ICBF provides a holistic framework to assess how power is exerted in these policy initiatives in different localities.

53

five

Lost in transformation: urban governance practices and the New Deal for Communities in Bristol Bristol is the economic powerhouse of the South West. By creating a first class gateway into the city, this project will ensure the business potential of Bristol is unlocked to enable the city to successfully compete with top ranked commercial centres both nationally and across the world. (SWRDA, 2008)

These words of a development manager of the South West Regional Development Agency (SWRDA) marked the opening of the third phase of a £750  million inner-city development project aimed at transforming parts of Bristol’s city centre into a thriving office district. Indeed, considering Bristol’s population dynamic and economic history, these ambitions seem to correspond with the economic legacies that have emerged in Bristol over a long time.With a population of 416,400 people, Bristol is the largest city in the South West and one of the eight ‘core’ cities in England outside London (BCC, 2009c). Due to its growing service economy and strategic location to important traffic nodes, studies forecast an increase in net migration and the population reaching 520,000 people in 2026 (BCC, 2009c). The population dynamic stands in direct relation to Bristol’s former economic development. Historical records show that Bristol’s location on the River Avon, beginning from early settlement in the 11th century, played a significant role in the economic activity that shaped the face of the city. Trade links between manufacturers of wool, sugar, cloth, tobacco and glass and overseas markets were established, which underlined the early importance of Bristol as a hub for cross-national trade links. A milestone in this international trade was reached in Bristol with its short-lived but leading role as England’s central port in the triangular, intercontinental slave trade in the early 16th century. After a period of boom and decline in the 19th century in which local merchants desperately tried to prevent a transition from trade to 55

Regenerating deprived urban areas

an industrial system, in 1901, Bristol attracted an industrial sector – aircraft design and production – which would soon become a symbol for Bristol’s economy. Located in the north of Bristol around the airfield, this production site attracted major investments for commercial and military products and created a distinct spatial pattern in Bristol’s economy and urban fabric between the north/west, with its high concentration of firms, and the south/east, mainly dominated by residential areas. During the interwar period, heavy industries, for example chemical production plants, emerged in the Avonmouth area north of Bristol, whereas the city centre retained its diverse industrial base. It is due to this background that the Great Depression of the 1930s did not affect Bristol as much as other northern industrial cities. However, Bristol was severely affected by the Second World War and German air raids. Apart from the loss of life, much of Bristol’s ancient shopping centre and housing areas were destroyed and homelessness led to an exacerbation of social problems (Bassett, 2001). Since the 1960s, Bristol has experienced several economic booms. Like many of the post-war economies in Europe, Bristol’s economy grew steadily. In 1961, a quarter of the total workforce was employed in industrial sectors such as aircraft manufacture, food and tobacco processing, accompanied by a constant growing service sector (Boddy and Lovering, 1986). But the major restructuring of Bristol’s economy took place during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, with a loss of approximately 48,000 jobs in manufacturing (Tallon, 2007). Since then, Bristol’s economy has been mainly dominated by the service sector. The decentralisation of insurance, banking and finance from London, and Bristol’s strategic location in relation to other growth centres along the M4, made Bristol one of ‘Britain’s sunbelt cities’ (Bassett, 2001: 17). This transformation to a post-industrial, service-oriented city also manifested itself in the employment structure of Bristol’s economy. Whereas some 33% of the workforce was employed in manufacturing in 1971, this percentage had fallen to 12.5% in 2001 (Boddy, 2003). On the other hand, employment in the service industry grew by 150% between 1971 and 1991, with the creation of an additional 51,000 jobs (Tallon, 2007). In 2009, approximately 32% of Bristol’s population worked in this sector, comprising jobs in retail, leisure and hotels, as compared to 19% in the South West and 22% in England (BCC, 2009a). Despite this exceptional pace of growth, Bristol can also be seen as a city with a significant concentration of poverty and socio-spatial polarisation across the city. Some of the most deprived urban areas in England form a kind of curve from the north to the east edge of the 56

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

city centre towards the south, surrounding some of the most affluent areas of the country. Using data obtained by the Office for National Statistics to formulate the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) in 2007, Bristol was ranked 50th out of 149 local authorities in England.1 In comparison to other areas in England, Bristol belongs to the upper third of the list.The survey undertaken to develop this list of deprived urban areas also formulated the following conclusions (BCC, 2007b): • Bristol has a number of areas that belong to both the most and the least deprived urban areas in the country; • 39 areas in Bristol are included in the top 10% of multiple deprived areas in Britain, which house around 65,000 people (16% of Bristol’s residents); and • 14 of these areas belong to the most deprived 3% (18 in 2004) and four areas feature in the most deprived 1% (five in 2004). This study focuses on the situation in one of the most deprived wards in Bristol and England, Lawrence Hill, which includes within it the New Deal for Communities (NDC) area Barton Hill. Overall, Bristol is an outstanding and illustrative example in which to study the forms and consequences of the New Localism(s) in England. The city has been highly influenced by central government policy and reform initiatives. The emergence of various development agencies and delivery structures outside the formal political process connected to the rise of Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) can be seen as a product of this constant transformation process. The conflict-ridden relationship between central and local government in Bristol reached its peak when the Conservative government set up an Urban Development Corporation (UDC) for the redevelopment of Bristol’s harbour in 1989 (Punter, 1993). When the Bristol Development Corporation (BDC) was created by the central government, its relation to the Bristol City Council (BCC) was characterised by ‘mutual suspicion and sometimes outright hostility’ (Punter, 1993: 54). But all attempts to avoid the establishment of a UDC in Bristol, including a petition to the House of Lords in 1988, were unsuccessful. A major shift in local-development strategies became noticeable after the re-election of the Conservative Party in 1992. This turning point paved the way for the emergence of a number of development partnerships in Bristol in cooperation with the private sector, as for example, The Bristol Initiative (TBI), fostered by the Confederation of British Industry (Adburgham, 1998). Public agendas changed and 57

Regenerating deprived urban areas

many initiatives constantly referred to a discourse on the economic significance of, and potential for, Bristol in Europe (Deas et  al, 2000). Finally, building partnerships became a local script as well as a requirement for funding in Bristol, especially for ABIs, such as the City Challenge programme (De Groot, 1992). Consequently, during this time, a number of alliances with the private and voluntary sector were actively sought and established to comply with the basic requirements of contemporary funding schemes and to overcome declining local revenues (DiGaetano, 1997). But these arrangements were considered fragile and temporary. Many of the alliances had been built on a project basis, oriented at funding opportunities and driven by pragmatism, which led to fragmented governing arrangements (DiGaetano and Klemanski, 1993). However, after gaining back its lost planning powers and being reformed as a unitary authority in 1997, Bristol benefited from increasing funding opportunities for ABIs provided by the New Labour government, such as Education Action Zones, Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) 7 and the NDC, whose delivery organisations further diversified the organisational landscape in Bristol. Eleven different, partially unconnected but overlapping, ABIs were running in Bristol in 2002 (BCC, 2002), which resulted in ‘a fragmented and complex system of partnerships without the protocols which might make joined up working more practicable’ (Stewart, 2001: 17). Each of them had their own delivery structures in place that were detached from the authority of the council. While the different rounds of the SRB were coordinated by the Bristol Regeneration Partnership (BRP), set up by the BCC in 1995 as a unified cross-sector, interagency partnership for neighbourhood regeneration (Miller, 1999), this agency was shut down in 2002. It was replaced by a newly staffed Local Strategic Partnership (LSP), which – as it will be shown – did not engage at all in the coordination of ABIs. This diversification was further triggered by the constant instability and uncertainty deriving from the political constellation within the BCC. Due to the constant loss of voters, the local Labour Party could not hold its traditional majority in the council. In fact, there had not been any overall political control between 2003 and 2009, resulting in either shared or minority administrations. Although the Liberal Democrats (LibDems) had been the largest single party in the council, the city was run by a minority Labour administration until its collapse in February 2009. In the local elections in June 2009 – after 30 years of Labour-dominated politics in Bristol – the LibDems got the majority

58

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

of votes and ran the city council for the first time in Bristol’s history (The Telegraph, 2009). This political turbulence and instability in the city council had also been observed by central-government agencies and the newly established performance-monitoring regimes. So, in its annual comprehensive performance assessment of local governments in England in 2002, Bristol’s performance was rated as ‘weak’ by the Audit Commission (AC, 2002). According to this report, a lack of leadership had been observed, which resulted in poor public-service delivery. Responding to this, the BCC agreed to reorganise its structure and approve a post of Chief Executive in 2003. This decision was commended by subsequent reports on Bristol’s performance; for example, in 2006, the Audit Commission stated that: the restoration of the Chief Executive post in 2003 and the drive of the current political leadership has begun the transition from a previously departmentalist council which lacked clear priorities and did not see things through, to one recognised by partners as providing strong leadership and drive. (AC, 2006: 6) However, this post was only filled for four years because of a lack of consensus between the political parties, and it was soon replaced.This political instability and the lack of collaborative development decisions were interpreted by a number of interviewees as a lack of leadership in local development issues: “Bristol’s politicians are only threat people.There has never been an opportunity for them, everything has always been a threat first … I think this is a leadership thing.You might say it’s about having vision and confidence for your city. Over here, we miss that.” (NDC board member, Resident) Consequently, the BCC was usually characterised as torn apart by the political parties, with its local development processes being driven by a number of outsourced agencies and partnerships without having a distinct city-development strategy in place. It is not surprising, therefore, that the comprehensive regeneration strategy for Bristol has been constantly updated and reformulated since the BCC regained its planning power in 1998 (BCC, 1998, 2000a, 2001a, 2003, 2005, 2009d). This situation provided the background against which the NDC partnership was formed in Bristol. 59

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Spending the New Deal for Communities jackpot in Bristol Barton Hill Bristol belonged to one of the 17 Pathfinder Projects of the NDC approved in the first phase of the programme in 1998, with another 22 authorities being approved a year later. Based upon the Index of Local Deprivation and a political decision by central government to allocate resources to one city in each of the newly created regions across England, and with the highest deprivation scores in the South West, Bristol was invited to put a bid forward.2 Based upon the former systematic bidding principles of the preceding SRB programme, the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) published a first call for proposals in 1999 (DETR, 1999). This document made clear the principles under which the NDC implementation partnership should be designed, such as to foster innovative approaches and new ways to include local communities without acknowledging local ‘petty rules’ (DETR, 1999). Directed towards local administrative procedures, this principle demanded organisational solutions outside the council. Using more simple terms, something new and something innovative had to be proposed. According to the Index of Local Deprivation, as Bristol had not just one but 10 areas that could have come into consideration as candidates for a bid, a team from the BRP organised a consultation exercise in the former St. George Community College (later renamed City Academy), at which local residents and Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) of deprived areas in Bristol delivered presentations on their visions and aims for their areas.The areas then had to vote for an NDC candidate, excluding their own area. As a winner of this competition, the combined areas of Barton Hill, Redfield and The Dings were chosen as the area to put forward a bid. During this consultation or competition, a second ‘prize’ was also made available in addition to the NDC funding, £50 million over 10 years. Bristol had also been invited to put forward a bid for SRB 5 (£10 million over seven years). Whereas VSOs of Barton Hill, notably the Barton Hill Settlement (BHS), began to work on a bid for the NDC in cooperation with the BRP as a ‘community mentor’, Hartcliffe in the south of Bristol received funding from SRB 5. This way of outsourcing the decision process to select the area, and, hence, of not leaving it to local councillors and the political process, clearly shows aspects of former regeneration partnerships in Bristol, such as the UDC. This process deliberately circumvented the formal 60

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

decision-making procedures of the local government, such as the urban planning committee within the council. While the political parties and the BCC had been informed of how the process would look, outsourcing this process seemed to be a more favourable option: “The [central] government asked Bristol to choose an area to go forward for NDC funding. Politically, this was dynamite, as the area should be only 1,000 up to 5,000 households.… No matter where we [BCC] choose, we are going to get a real bad political flap for this. So they [BCC] decided to ask the Bristol Regeneration Partnership to run the process of choosing what area went forward for the NDC.” (NDC board member, Resident) Therefore, the decision to outsource this process can be considered as a strategic choice to circumvent perceived political conflicts within the council. Box 5.1: Profile of the New Deal for Communities area in Bristol The NDC area in brief The NDC area covered four areas: Lawrence Hill, Redfield, The Dings/St Philips and Barton Hill, with its multi-storey apartments in the heart of it, in which around 55% of the population lives (BCC, 2001b). Having traditionally been the housing area for workers attracted by the Great Western Cotton Factory in the 19th century, this area was known for centuries for its overcrowding, lack of sanitation and high infant mortality (Barton Hill History Group, 1997). Using assigned slum-clearance powers in the mid-1950s, a clearance programme was adopted by the BCC to demolish around 24,500 dwellings in the area (Malpass and Walmsley, 2005) and, with the building of multi-storey flats, created Bristol’s ‘Little New York’ (Jennings, 1962; Barton Hill History Group, 2005). In 2006, Lawrence Hill was one of the wards with the largest number of unemployed claimants in Bristol (BCC, 2006). According to the census in 2001, around 13,000 people, comprising 5,449 households, lived in the area (BCC, 2009b). Data provided by the Bristol Care Trust show that, in 2006, Lawrence Hill led the table of the most health-deprived areas in Bristol (BPCT, 2007).3 In comparison with an overall average of 9% black and minority ethnic (BME) population in Bristol, Lawrence Hill also belongs to one of the most diverse neighbourhoods in Bristol, with a 39% BME population (BCC, 2008b). A mix of young, immigrant newcomers and older, white residents make up the diversity of the local resident 61

Regenerating deprived urban areas population in the area. Among these residents are also new immigrants, such as the Somali population, who have been identified ‘as a fragmented community with very little access to mainstream services and available opportunities’ (Eid, 2004: 7). According to a survey, only 27% of the population in Lawrence Hill felt that they could influence decisions and only 22% were involved in community or voluntary organisations (BCC, 2006).

After 15 months of preparation, and under the advice of a local law firm in Bristol, central-government requirements had been met by the NDC partnership and a final bid was submitted in November 1999, which was then approved in early 2000.As a result, a new intermediary organisation called Community at Heart (CaH), a company with a limited guarantee but also a registered charity, was set up to manage the implementation of the NDC. A key vision for the area had been formulated, aimed at: ‘creating a strong and responsible community that has the ability to understand, engage and overcome its problems enabling residents to build a safe environment that fulfils local needs, inspires and provides opportunities for all’ (CaH, 2004b). Figure 5.1 illustrates the organisation chart of CaH. As the BCC was named as the accountable body for the NDC implementation, the NDC Chief Executive was aligned to the Corporate Finance division of the BCC, as it transferred the funding provided by central government (BCC, 2000b; CaH, 2004b). Whereas the NDC office, with its managers, oversaw the management and administration of staff, and rental and project issues, the NDC partnership board was the major steering and decision body of the organisation. This board was responsible for the definition of key targets and the formulation of annual delivery plans. According to its own publications, this board was seen as ‘a vehicle for elected residents to be sitting at the same table alongside the mainstream public agencies when they are planning strategies and services for the area’ (CaH, 2005b: 30).This board was supposed to lead and direct the delivery of the NDC scheme by agreeing on its mission, policies and annual spending plans. Of the 20 voting members of the partnership board, 12 members consisted of residents and organisations from the area. Out of the five central-government priorities (worklessness; poor health; high crime and educational underachievement; housing; and the environment), CaH formulated five core themes (CTs) and added another five so-called local themes (LTs). These 10 working areas built the ground for the NDC implementation in the following years.

62

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol Figure 5.1: Organisational chart of Community at Heart Partnership board

Locally elected residents (voting members) Government Office of the South West (GOSW) (non-voting member) Other interested organisations (non-voting members)

Organisations from the NDC area (co-opted voting members) BCC representative (voting member)

War councillors (non-voting members)

Chief Executive

Operations manager

Project manager

Staff and premises issues

Project issues

BCC Corporate Finance

Best Practice Coordinator Publicity and guidance issues

Source: Author’s figure based on CaH (2002).

Figure 5.2 depicts the key working themes of the NDC in Bristol in relation to the money spent on each theme. It distinguishes between the five CTs, the five additional LTs, as well as the overhead costs of CaH, as defined by the NDC partnership in Bristol. A total of £51,271,249 NDC funding was invested in the NDC of the area by the end of the programme in 2010. Around 69% (£35.4  million) of the funding was spent on central-government themes, whereas 21% (£10.9 million) was allocated to LTs formulated by the NDC partnerships. Appendix IV lists all major NDC projects that have been financed within these working themes. In the following sections, focus is put on the transformation of institutional capacities deriving from the implementation of the NDC in Bristol.They illustrate these processes by reviewing the way in which the NDC partnership has shared knowledge, formalised new spaces for participation and engaged in inter-organisational cooperation. Being able to draw on survey data from the end of the NDC initiative in Bristol, patterns are also identified that reveal the limited scope of institutionalisation and overall weakness of these new governance arrangements fostered by the NDC.

63

Regenerating deprived urban areas Figure 5.2: Distribution of New Deal for Communities expenditure by working theme, 2000–10 (%)

LT V: Young People’s Services (5%)

CaH overhead costs (10%)

CT 1: Advice, Business, Learning and Enterprise (18%)

LT IV: Sports (2%) LT III: Race Equality (2%)

CT II: Community Safety (10%)

LT II: Community Services (8%) LT I: Arts and Media (4%) CT V: Housing and the Environment (16%)

CT III: Education (13%)

CT IV: Health and Wellbeing (12%)

Notes: CT – core theme; LT – local theme.

Generating knowledge: Community at Heart as a knowledge broker and gatekeeper The Government have asked the community themselves to find the solutions to our area problems, and our community has done just that. (CaH, 2002: 76)

These impassioned sentences marked the closing words of the delivery plan published by CaH in 2002. Since the NDC, as a ‘showcase’ for resident-led regeneration, aimed at putting local residents in the driving seat of the delivery of projects, the role of knowledge and expertise played a decisive role (SEU, 1998). As the bid for NDC funding included a broad range of areas to be addressed, the need for expertise to conduct these projects in Bristol became quickly apparent, as noted by a representative of a housing trust:

64

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

“They made a huge commitment to the area when they bid. As all organisations do, they promise this and that,‘We’ll do local labour, involve local people’, but actually then, when they won the bid, they realised that they hadn’t [sic] have any experience on how to do that.” (Housing Manager, Business) This quote not only hints at the difficulties between the technical expertise required for planning and delivering public services and the capacity of the newly created intermediary organisation (CaH), it also discloses the pressure exerted upon the NDC partnership and the ambiguity it had to face. Having committed to ‘close the gap’ between the NDC area in Bristol and ‘the rest of the country’ during the bidding process, CaH found itself under pressure to deliver this promise. Consequently, it can be argued that these pressures and ambiguities contributed to the position of CaH as a knowledge broker in the NDC partnership and an actor that dominated the definition of issues and solutions. As Table 5.1 depicts, the NDC in Bristol had six principal processes of generating and sharing knowledge in place: surveys; a performance management and monitoring scheme; planning documents; publications; meetings; and evaluations. Reviewing 10 years of the NDC implementation in Bristol, surveys were an important source through which information on local needs were generated. Surveys collected a large volume of information about the socio-economic characteristics of the area. Some of this data derived from surveys in 2004 and 2007 for the formulation of the IMD commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (Deas et  al, 2003; Anttila and Wright, 2004). These studies were complemented using surveys commissioned by CaH. This source of information had a considerable influence on the way in which problems were framed and prioritised. Elements of the results of these surveys were published in various project documents and were usually used to make the case for the prioritisation of development issues. Performance management schemes and monitoring reports can be seen as another process through which the NDC scheme generated information. Every organisation involved in the implementation of an NDC project had to adapt the principles of a comprehensive system consisting of a broad set of at least 67 centrally defined, mandatory performance indicators, which had to be monitored and periodically assessed (Ambrose, 2005). It is argued that these processes contributed 65

66

On request

Collecting quantitative information about issues and community interests in the NDC area CaH undertook or commissioned external research or commercial organisations CaH in control of process

On request

CaH mandated to deliver information to GOSW

CaH managers filled in quarterly returns validated by GOSW All decisions of the partnership have to be validated by the GOSW CaH and its partnership board in control of process On request Public

CaH commissioned external consultancies, such as UWE

Evaluations –– GOSW –– NDC partnership board –– The public Assessing the effectiveness in delivering outcomes

Public

Partially published, available on request

CaH in control CaH in control of of process process

Mainly organised by CaH

Consultation, information and discussion (board meetings)

Advertising NDC projects; announcements

–– CaH funded and/ or delivered flagship publications –– Community newspaper, such as GrassRoots CaH or NDC partnership board decides on funding

Meetings –– Residents –– NDC partners

Publications Residents NDC partners

Notes: CaH – Community at Heart; GOSW – Government Office for the South West; NDC – New Deal for Communities; UWE – University of the West of England.

Public accessibility of information

Degree of control

Mode of delivery

Key focus

Key audience

Planning documents –– GOSW –– NDC partnership board Assessing the Outlining ‘efficiency’ in delivering investment plans, outputs such as the annual spending plan

Performance management and Surveys monitoring scheme NDC partnership –– GOSW board –– BCC Corporate Finance

Table 5.1: Knowledge-generating activities in the New Deal for Communities Bristol

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

to an isomorphism of NDC partners, in particular, VSOs. In turn, CaH was itself bound to a controlling environment dominated by targets set up by central government and monitored by the Government Office for the South West (GOSW) in particular. The implementation of the 160 projects under the NDC Bristol was accompanied by the production of a wide range of planning documents (CaH, 2002, 2005a, 2005b, 2009m, 2010). Annual spending plans, project implementation forms and monitoring and evaluation reports were soon to follow. These documents and plans were usually based upon decisions of the NDC partnership board and were demanded by the GOSW for granting the financial allocations for each financial year. The exclusivity of these documents for NDC processes and the detachment from citywide planning processes turned out to be one of the major bottlenecks for mainstreaming NDC services and projects. A fourth knowledge-generating activity can also be seen in the number of publications produced by the NDC scheme in Bristol to circulate information. Community newspapers, such as ‘GrassRoots’, ‘ebulletin’ and ‘up-our-street’, as well as leaflets, were used by CaH to inform local residents about planned activities and announcements. These were usually published online or distributed in the area on a regular basis. Another form of generating and sharing knowledge can be seen in the meetings between CaH and its board members or local residents. Board meetings, in which strategic planning decisions were made, were usually held on a monthly basis. Apart from these regular meetings, a number of consultation meetings with local residents were also organised by CaH. These were usually announced through notices in the area or published in the magazines provided by CaH. A final way of generating knowledge can be seen in the number of evaluations that CaH commissioned. During the 10 years of implementation, two programme-wide evaluations were undertaken by the University of the West of England at the beginning of the initiatives (Smith, I., 2004, 2005). A number of theme-specific evaluations, such as on Community Safety, were also commissioned (ERS, 2007, 2009; Redding, 2008;VIVID, 2008b). Some theme-related evaluations could be found on the internet, but most of these documents lay in the hands of the CaH. The fact that no programme-wide evaluation was conducted at the end of the NDC in Bristol discloses some major shortcomings in the design and function of these evaluations. Considering the way in which these processes of knowledgesharing were structured shows that most of these processes were designed to suit an exclusive circle of communication between CaH, 67

Regenerating deprived urban areas

organisational partners, the BCC as an accountable body and the GOSW.This exclusivity can also be seen in the accessibility of the range of knowledge resources. It was up to the CaH to design the process of knowledge generation, for example, evaluations and distribution of the information. Considering the design and accessibility of these knowledge-generating activities, CaH can be considered as a knowledge gatekeeper and broker in the NDC scheme.

Formalising an arena for participation: the partnership board of Community at Heart Everyone resident in the area – of whatever age, gender, ethnic origin, housing tenure, length of stay – has a right to be heard, to get involved in, and to benefit from the £50 million investment. (CaH, 2005b: 2)

This quote signifies the key value set down in the charter of the NDC partnership in Bristol and exemplifies the way in which public participation in the NDC in Bristol was framed. Allowing local residents to have a much greater input into the management of this ABI has been seen as both a means and an end to be achieved by the initiative: Thus community engagement is not just a key element of the process of delivering the scheme, community engagement and the ‘capacity’ of local communities to organise themselves to demand and run better public services that flow from engagement is a key substantive outcome of the scheme as well. (Smith, I., 2005: 12) The last section illustrates that when it comes to knowledge generation, information was only selectively shared among the NDC partnership in Bristol. It has already been mentioned that shared understandings are expected to be built through the creation of local forums in which differing ideas and perspectives are exchanged and common perceptions on practices are developed. Having reviewed the various projects implemented under the NDC scheme in Bristol, five ways of engaging with the NDC scheme can be identified: • Participation in planning exercises organised by CaH; • Submitting proposals for small-scale measures to be funded by CaH; • Volunteering to carry out projects initiated by CaH;

68

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

• Contributing to surveys on the NDC scheme; and • Joining the NDC partnership board of CaH. Considering the short-term character of the first four ways, the only substantial arena for continuous interaction among the partnership was joining the board of CaH. Figure 5.3 illustrates the memberships in the NDC partnership board, as found in 2008. It shows that the NDC partnership board was the link and major forum for development actors to decide upon development decisions within the NDC scheme. Figure 5.3 depicts the major actors identified on the partnership board in 2008. Members with voting rights on the board (highlighted in grey) included locally elected residents, a representative from the BCC (which was, however, vacant in 2008) and some organisations Figure 5.3: Organisational chart of membership of the New Deal for Communities partnership board, as found in 2008

Partnership board of the NDC Bristol

Locally elected residents • Four Barton Hill residents • Two Dings residents • Two Lawrence Hill residents • Four Redfield residents

Organisations from the NDC area (2008) • Barton Hill Settlement • Black Development Agency • Somali Resource Centre • Schools (eg City Academy)

Voting members

BCC representative (vacant in 2008)

Ward councillors Government Office of the South West

• Lawrence Hill Ward Councillor (LibDem) • Eastern Ward Councillor (Labour Party)

Non-voting members

Other interested statutory Organisations (2008) • Avon and Somerset Constabulary • Primary Care Trust

69

Regenerating deprived urban areas

from the NDC area that were determined annually, such as VSOs and schools. Generally, all other organisations and statutory agencies were able to join the NDC partnership board but without any voting rights. Joining the partnership board meant that organisations had to accept allocated roles and the ways of working demanded by the NDC scheme; in particular this included the monitoring and reporting systems through which relationships were functionalised and power relationships established. In this sense, participation meant benefiting from the NDC scheme by delivering paid and monitored services for CaH, the main delivering body. This system was not just adopted by VSOs; statutory agencies, such as the Primary Care Trust (PCT), also highlighted difficulties in adopting these working methods: “That was just a painful process.The NDC programme was so big. So much money and people getting involved.… It was the most bureaucratic organisation I’ve ever come across. The processes in place were so laboured to get funding. We were asked to put in a bid to manage the health bid of the NDC scheme in Barton Hill. It took over a year to be written in such a way that it was accepted and then to go through all their [CaH’s] processes. It was just so laborious and painful. But that’s just the way it was. And then, it was so monitored of course.” (Health Project Officer, Statutory Agency) This was also noticed by the external evaluation, which highlighted that respondents from delivery agencies noted a high level of bureaucracy associated with the NDC scheme, involving more paperwork and institutional hurdles than former regeneration initiatives, such as the SRB. It concluded that ‘the bureaucracy of the programme is a strong disincentive for the engagement of partners’ (Smith, I., 2005: 44). As already noted, the inception of the NDC was embedded in a number of regulations and conditions formulated by central government. In this sense, as a new organisation, it is fair to say that CaH was either forced to accept or quickly adopted the scripts provided by central government to deliver the NDC scheme. This corresponds with findings of other studies on NDC schemes elsewhere: Many of those involved in the NDC feel there is, for the first time, real ‘permission to do things differently’. But guidelines on option appraisal and benchmarking give a contrary message.These guidelines may be offered with the 70

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

intention of supporting those who are not familiar with the tasks that are placed before them.They also ensure that local developments can be understood within an overarching national policy framework. But coming from the centre, as they do, they enshrine pre-existing cultures of programme design and decision-making, rather than taking the risk that communities, given time and resources, may do things differently. (Taylor, 2000: 1024) NDC partner organisations in Bristol saw in this deterministic way of working a major hindrance in responding adequately to the needs and views expressed by local residents in the NDC area: “Because of the way that the themes and everything worked, with putting in appropriate forms and so on, it got really complicated. At that time, we had a number of PIBs [Project Implementation Boards] and things.Without them and doing this whole assessment, we could not ratify as a board spending X amount on a seat in a bus stop or indeed subsidising an old people’s party.This was very frustrating in the early days that things that people really wanted, quick wins, things they could see, just was not possible.” (Principal, Statutory Agency) Reviewing these experiences of organisations joining the NDC partnership board highlights the way in which the inter-organisational cooperation during the NDC scheme led to a coercive isomorphism of partner organisations, particularly VSOs. Both VSOs and statutory agencies alike had to develop new ways of working to meet the rules for monitoring and project implementation in order to become a legitimate partner. In order to cope with contrasting pressures between formal rules and informal practices and expectations, a process of decoupling could also be found. In other words, for the sake of the funding, organisations accepted these rules but clearly stated that these rules were ‘bureaucratic’, ‘laboured’ and ‘complicated’.

Generating relational resources: inter-organisational relationships in the New Deal for Communities partnership We have seen that knowledge resources built during the implementation of the NDC scheme in Bristol were not equally shared within the partnership. Additionally, the major arena for participation, the 71

Regenerating deprived urban areas

partnership board, was strongly influenced by rules set up by the NDC scheme and imposed on its development partners. Evidence for the dominating role of CaH is further strengthened in this section, based upon results of the inter-organisational network analysis (see also the Appendices). However, this does not mean that CaH should be considered as an ‘arm’ of the BCC. A local councillor described this relationship more accurately as a buffer between residents and statutory agencies of the council: “The council is so withdrawn and so separate and they don’t deliver what people across the city think that they should be delivering.That’s why Community at Heart became the buffer between the council and the residents and tenants. They felt that they could go to Community at Heart and Community at Heart would advocate for them and that is something that a lot of tenants have taken advantage of and have success.… What a lot of the communities saw was that Community at Heart actually added power and structure to their voice when tackling the professionals, if you know what I mean.” (Councillor, BCC) This buffer function is clearly reflected in the data deriving from the inter-organisational network analysis considering the level of trust shared among the partnership. Figure 5.4 shows a partial extract of the NDC partnership in Bristol, as found in 2009.4 Figure 5.4 clearly shows the buffer function of CaH. At least three decisive observations can be made. First, the sociogram reflects the torn and fragmented relationships among the organisations of the local council. No organisation among those three major agencies responsible for the implementation of urban policies in Bristol – the LSP (BCC Partnership), the Neighbourhoods Directorate (BCC Neighbourhoods) and the Safer Bristol Partnership (BCC Safer Bristol) – would approach BCC Corporate Finance, the accountable body of the NDC. The same can be noted for the LSP, which would not be approached by its colleagues in the council. Second, CaH would be approached by BCC Neighbourhoods and BCC Corporate Finance but not by the LSP. It also shows that none of the organisations of the council would approach the NDC board for the discussion of ideas and projects. Third, the figure demonstrates that, apart from the Somali Resource Centre (SRC), none of the council organisations would approach a 72

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol Figure 5.4: Community at Heart as a buffer between the local administration and the area BCC Partnership BCC Corporate Finance BCC Safer Bristol

BCC Neighbourhoods

CaH resident board members

CaH

SRC

BHS

BDA

Notes: CaH – Community at Heart; BCC – Bristol City Council; SRC – Somali Resource Centre; BDA – Black Development Agency; BHS – Barton Hill Settlement.

VSO in the NDC area. The broker function of CaH between the council administration and the third sector in the NDC area is clearly reflected here. However, this buffer function of CaH has not led to stronger cooperation with the BCC. Especially at the beginning of the NDC scheme, a considerable lack of cooperation between CaH and mainstream agencies was noted: “During the first phase especially, the residents did not see the necessities to collaborate with statutory agencies.They had won the jackpot. So, they wanted to spend the money by themselves and so did the council. The lower officer level saw the need for cooperation but not their bosses.… The lack of commitment to work as a partnership was also noticeable in the language. It was a distancing language. ‘They’ instead of ‘We’ was common to describe the work of the NDC partnership.” (Researcher, University)

73

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Other evaluations of NDC partnerships show that some local authorities actually withdrew or cut mainstream budgets for NDC areas during the implementation period (Lawless, 2004). Apart from this financial withdrawal, it is also reported that the need in the public sector to meet performance targets considerably hampered decisions to engage in activities, such as the NDC, that did not contribute to the target achievements (CRESR, 2002). Businesses and VSOs in NDC partnerships would therefore belong to some of the under-represented organisations (CRESR, 2002). We can already conclude, therefore, that after 10 years of joint implementation of the NDC in Bristol, the scope for interorganisational cooperation between organisations of the BCC and new actors such as VSOs from the NDC area is limited. This fact can be seen as a major reason for the fading legacies of the NDC in Bristol. Considering that much of NDC funding (51%) has been used to run new services in the NDC area, the lack of cooperation with mainstream agencies means that the social capital that is needed to develop strategies to sustain these is not available; an argument that will be further developed in the next section.

Between mainstreaming and the realities of institutionalisation: winding down the New Deal for Communities experiments We have used 16% of the money and next year we will receive eight million, if we do not start a dialogue with service providers about mainstreaming then we will only deliver projects and then leave. We need to become more outcome focused, employing staff is not an outcome. (BP, 2003)

With these words, the first executive manager of CaH in Bristol, midway through the NDC implementation period, pointed to one of the major challenges of the initiative. Even though this quote shows that the need for a strategy of mainstreaming was mentioned as early as 2003, the mid-term evaluation of the NDC in Bristol two years later drew a rather sceptical conclusion: ‘The big challenge is to move from low level mainstreaming into serious and appropriate innovation in how public services are delivered in the area. The signs are hopeful but tangible evidence is patchy’ (Smith, I., 2005: ix). It should be noted that strategic considerations on how to sustain the projects and services created by NDC funds after the withdrawal of the programme was neither requested by the DCLG during the course 74

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

of the initiative, nor became common practice in the NDC areas. A report from the national NDC evaluation in 2003/04 on the progress towards mainstreaming in the 39 NDC areas pointed to: a continuing absence of shared understanding about what mainstreaming means with the concepts of mainstreaming often contested and misunderstood. This weakness in understanding and shared meaning is reinforced by the fact that there is as yet little strategic thinking about mainstreaming. (Stewart and Howard, 2004: 1) In practice, mainstreaming was sought through the production of a so-called succession strategy, to be formulated by each NDC delivery body at the end of the NDC period to kick-start the winding-down of the NDC. It was not until 2008 that the DCLG issued guidance to provide local delivery bodies with a framework for developing these succession strategies (DCLG, 2008a, 2008b). According to the network of NDC cities, an organisation built up by the NDC delivery bodies to structure communication with the DCLG, this exercise was seen as overdue: “We feel that these papers are very, very late and it’s kind of strange to set up people’s roles and responsibilities in the last year of the programme. But there we are. The wheels of government turn very slowly.” (Urban Policy Officer, Intermediary) Even though these documents complemented programme notes already issued in 2002 and 2006 (DCLG, 2002, 2006a, 2006b), the major trigger to produce succession strategies came with the threat of the DCLG not to allocate the last three annual spending budgets between 2008 and 2011 until each NDC delivery body had developed a strategy. In general, local delivery bodies were reminded that ‘a good relationship with the local authority is critical to succession planning’ (DCLG, 2008a: 8), which should be based upon strong relationships with local authorities, clear lines of communication and an alignment with wider district strategic priorities. Whereas the general tone of the DCLG at the beginning of the initiative had been to seek organisational solutions for the NDC delivery body outside local councils, its recommendations at the end favoured solutions in line with local planning processes, such as Local Area Agreements (LAAs) and statutory agencies. The focus shifted 75

Regenerating deprived urban areas

considerably from delivering quick results during implementation to the way in which relationships between the council and local residents should be built, as a policy officer of the DCLG concisely described: “It’s more than about having five  million quid left over in the bank. It’s actually about mainstreaming. It’s about building these relationships with your local authority which is vital because in many ways they’re going to be the ones that are going to be providing their services afterwards. It’s about your priorities in line with the Local Area Agreement priorities. Local people are represented on LSPs. But there has been some conflict, I suppose, between what local residents wanted and how this can be sustained.” (Urban Policy Officer, Central Government) These demands seem very disconnected from the procedures during the implementation period. Thinking about the tight monitoring regime under which the NDC partnership had to conduct its projects, the DCLG clearly had the opportunity to address these demands earlier. Against this background, the stipulation to think about creating ‘good relationships’ with the local council can be seen as a fig-leaf for shifting the responsibility for any possible closures of services to the NDC delivery bodies. In Bristol, however, a succession strategy had been published by CaH in 2009 (CaH, 2009l, 2009m). The documents suggested that CaH would continue its work as a neighbourhood management office funded by existing building assets worth £4 million and reserves of £364,000, which would be sufficient to sustain the organisation until 2015 (CaH, 2009m). Easton and Lawrence Hill Neighbourhood Management was named as the successor organisation of CaH, deriving from a fusion with a neighbouring Easton Community Partnership. Elements of a succession strategy were neither integrated in the initiative nor subject to discussions in Bristol, as the representative of the GOSW noted: “Mainstreaming wasn’t really built into the initiative to say ‘Here’s some money but we expect you, if it’s successful, to pick this up’. I guess that’s why Bristol is falling down and hasn’t done enough of it. For some of the stuff they’ve funded it is difficult to prove it’s been successful. Maybe in hindsight, looking back five to six years, and, say, through

76

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

an evaluation, to make sure this is in place now. But alas, we can’t.” (Urban Policy Officer, Central Government) According to the GOSW, this lack of thinking about the strategic ways in which services could be sustained in the area can be traced back to the structure and rationales of the CaH partnership board: “Looking back over nine years, it’s been a hard process I’ve got to say. You would have hoped that the board was strategic. But the residents wanted to talk about minutiae, the real thing, what’s really specific to them rather than the bigger picture. My pavements are cracking and the gates are broken, etc. But what about the bigger picture? So it [resident-led regeneration] is a great ethos, but one I’m not convinced of. It is my own personal view because I sat there in board meetings pulling my hair out and trying to address these issues and not getting anywhere.” (Urban Policy Officer, Central Government) Other evaluations of NDC partnerships confirmed this lack of strategic decisions in the partnership board, which were ‘characterised by ad-hoc, reactive decisions rather than by any sense of rationality’ and in which ‘Safe and clean’ (Lawless, 2004 : 392) quick projects were favoured: There is only modest progress in thinking about long term sustainability. Learning is still focused on developing skills and experience for delivery within NDCs, and local evaluation concentrates on project evaluation closely linked to monitoring.There is little evidence to suggest that lessons emerging from the NDC Programme are impacting on mainstream agencies or on the broader renewal agenda. (Stewart and Howard, 2004: ii) While the formulation of a succession strategy can be seen as a policy attempt to sustain NDC projects, the actual institutionalisation of NDC legacies has to be seen as a more uncontrolled, unplanned outcome shaped by different factors supporting or constraining the extent to which NDC projects and activities were sustained. Services created by the NDC implementation, which have to stand the test of time, are either taken for granted and adopted or questioned and dismissed by other development actors. The following sections argue that only a few NDC projects had in fact been fully institutionalised, 77

Regenerating deprived urban areas

in the sense that they are going to be continued by organisations and with other financial means than with NDC funding. In the majority of cases, services and structures created by the NDC are either kept alive with remaining NDC resources or become the subject of further consideration by statutory agencies.

Something useful, something convenient, something useless: New Deal for Communities legacies in Bristol Recognising that money is not always the solution has focused attention on how to maintain involvement in neighbourhood management when there is no project funding. (CaH, 2010: 5)

Considering the extent to which activities of the NDC have been adopted by mainstream public service providers in Bristol, a rather sceptical response to the above quote taken from CaH’s succession strategy has to be formulated. It seems that the legacy left by the NDC in Bristol will have only marginal relevance for the ways in which urban policies are implemented in Bristol at the end of the NDC initiative. Reviewing the ways development actors, particularly regular publicservice providers, responded to projects left by the NDC in Bristol shows three distinctive patterns of institutional change: continuing NDC legacies; the reconfiguration of NDC elements; and bypassing NDC legacies. Continuing New Deal for Communities legacies through the adoption of norms The Race Equality and Community Cohesion Action Plan (RECCAP) is one of the few examples of the NDC in Bristol in which an institutionalisation of NDC projects can be reconstructed. Devised by CaH between 2005 and 2007, this plan was adopted by all implementation partners within the NDC area. Setting out a series of actions for projects and agencies to ensure that they were delivering accessible services, its aim was to achieve ‘A fair and just community that champions inclusion, celebrates diversity and allows everyone to live, learn, work and play free from discrimination, prejudice and racism’ (VIVID, 2008a). The plan formulated nearly 300 actions across 11 themes and involving 33 partner agencies and organisations. It has to be seen in relation to the racial tensions in Barton Hill in 2004, after which CaH and GOSW undertook several investigations into the causes of 78

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

these conflicts (CaH, 2004a). Drawing upon various documents, the RECCAP emerged as an umbrella document under which various partnerships between statutory agencies, the BCC,VSOs and residents have since been formed. Alongside other policy initiatives deriving from several centralgovernment departments to address community cohesion, such as action guides for local authorities (DCLG, 2005; Robinson, D., 2005), the BCC adopted RECAPP as a model for the whole city: “RECCAP was a successful document that the Bristol City Council adopted. So, for Community at Heart, that was really a major coup. They put all the work and effort into this using Barton Hill as a model and Bristol City Council saw the value of the work that they had done within their race theme and adopted the RECCAP principles as well within the Bristol City Council’s protocol, which I think was a great thing for them.” (Urban Policy Officer, Central Government) The example of the adoption of RECCAP norms as citywide planning norms shows that low-cost solutions without the need for further funding allocations seem to be more likely to be sustained. It can be assumed that Barton Hill might eventually benefit from these principles by shifting attention in public-service delivery to those areas in which newly arrived immigrants reside, but this particular mainstreaming process has not involved any concrete services created by the NDC in Barton Hill. Picking out the cherries: partial adoption of New Deal for Communities services A second pattern of institutionalisation includes a partial adoption deriving from the NDC initiative. It allowed regular public-service providers and political actors to pick out those elements that suit their own organisational or political purposes. An example of a partial adoption is the Wellspring Healthy Living Centre (WHLC), which is seen as one of the flagship projects for the NDC (CA, 2004). CaH invested over £6 million to build a centre in Barton Hill in which community health and arts projects were provided. Among a variety of arts projects, it houses a doctors’ surgery, dentist and pharmacy, and hosts sessions from other health professionals (eg midwives, school nurses, district nurses and health visitors). During the 79

Regenerating deprived urban areas

NDC period, the centre was managed by CaH before it became an independent company in 2008, employing its own staff and managed and run by a resident board. Due to the new health services provided through the centre, the PCT had already noticed this project in its early days in 2003 and funded a Senior Health Promotion Specialist (SHPS) to work in the NDC area. Other work around health and well-being activities and complementary health services are still funded by the PCT. According to a senior health officer of the PCT, this decision derived from the growing attention of area-based factors influencing the health of residents in deprived urban areas: “We’ve seen improvements in all deprived urban areas.The correlation between health expectancy and neighbourhood development is so great.You think of everything that affects health. It’s about having a good job, having education, appropriate housing conditions, everything, which is why in public health we’re happy to work on those things, what we call the deterministic health effect.” (Health Project Officer, Statutory Agency) Apart from the adoption of the area-based orientation in delivering health services, the need for decentralising health services also came from the spending cuts in central hospitals in Bristol: “As a health service, we’re looking to decentralise things generally and put more services at the neighbourhood level. This comes again because of closing hospitals and that we’re taking lots of the services hospitals currently provide and putting them in neighbourhoods.” (Health Project Officer, Statutory Agency) However, despite the decision to fund certain health-service worker posts at the WHLC, the financial stability of the whole organisation has to be considered as weak. According to the business plan formulated in 2009, the centre can be run like this for around five years.This hints at the powerful position of statutory agencies that eventually decide upon the adoption of projects deriving from the NDC. It can be argued that in situations in which rules for delivering urban policies collide, such as institutions created by the NDC and rules of mainstream publicservice providers, the rules that eventually become legitimate are those

80

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

formulated by more powerful state actors, such as central government, statutory agencies and the local council. Bypassing projects: the waning significance of New Deal for Communities legacies in Bristol Another pattern of how public-service providers reacted to services left by the NDC implementation can be seen in the deliberate neglect of ideas, structures and services created by CaH. Considering the 160 NDC projects in Bristol, a full account of comparable processes of deinstitutionalisation cannot be given. However, evidence suggests that the detachment of the NDC implementation from the rationales and rules of public-service providers in Bristol clearly contributed to its delegitimation after the withdrawal of funding. The mid-term evaluation in 2005 had already highlighted that agencies of the BCC, such as Social Services, were reluctant to take over projects that have been created by CaH (Smith, I., 2005). According to a senior council worker of the BCC, the autonomy of CaH, deriving from its considerable financial resources, could be seen as one of the major reasons for the foreseeable closure of a number of projects created by the NDC in Barton Hill: “From a personal point of view, I think it’s actually too much money to pump into an area. I think you could be more focused if you got less than that. I’m certainly saying that Hartcliffe, which had just £12 million from the SRB, was a lot more focused on what they could do with the money because they had less of it. I suppose the danger is the dependence on the money. ‘You’ve got a big pot of money now, do whatever you want’, and all of a sudden it’s gone. I’m not aware that the City Council will be mainstreaming much of it.” (Housing Policy Officer, BCC) An example to illustrate this problematic freedom of ‘doing whatever you want’ is the incongruence of NDC delivery procedures and citywide planning processes. Even though a comprehensive planning and consultation process for formulating a citywide development framework had begun during the NDC delivery (BCC, 2007a), interviewees of the NDC partnership reported that the NDC delivery had not been aligned to this, even though the need for such a strategy was acknowledged:

81

Regenerating deprived urban areas

“Bristol had an appalling history of being unable to produce a sensible strategy for the city around housing and deprivation. Whereas in some places, they could say ‘Oh yes, we think that this [funding] should go here because our strategy is to do this and this in the next or the first place we want to deal with’.There would be some sort of policy, strategy or guidelines that would lead them – in Bristol there weren’t.” (NDC board member, Resident) Many interviewees of the NDC partnership bemoaned the lack of alignment of the NDC delivery with the formulation of LAAs, which were seen as important to allocate roles and responsibilities in public-service provision at the neighbourhood level. Even though the Bristol partnership produced a new LAA for the 2008–11 period (BCC, 2008a), only a few interviewees remarked that they were asked to comment on certain documents of the LSP. Furthermore, queries were raised as to whether these agreements reflected the needs in the area of Barton Hill: “The Local Area Agreement should be the city’s way of strategically thinking about the way in which regeneration works as well as including the lives of the citizens of Bristol into this consideration. But in reality it is a total waste of time. I don’t think we have really, as a city, got a handle on how to put together an LAA. I doubt that this adds something to the work that is going on in our neighbourhood.” (NDC board member, Resident) Apart from the fact that the majority of organisations represented in the NDC partnership did not contribute to the formulation of the LAAs and questioned their relevance, those who did criticised the complexity of the document: “The inception of LAAs was a good step towards a delivery agreement with the government, like a contract to deliver. However, it should be saying something about the LDF (Local Development Framework) but it doesn’t. And it has become a very technical thing, hundreds of indicators in the beginning, which then had been fortunately narrowed down to 198 indicators. Then, there is a fair amount of disengagement. The community engagement with the LAA is low because it has become something only highly 82

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

trained people could even understand and contribute to.” (Executive Manager, Intermediary) These quotes hint at the difficulties for the delivery organisation, as well as residents, to contribute to the process even when they were involved. The indicator-driven formulation process turned out to be excessively demanding, time-intensive and even incomprehensible to some. Considering the fact that the LSP had not been part of the NDC partnership board, and the fact that neither the LSP nor CaH would approach each other according to the results of the organisational survey, this lack of cooperation at the end of the NDC initiative is not surprising. Remembering the various reorganisations of Bristol’s administrative structure deriving from the changing political majorities in the council, it can be assumed that this instability led to high turnover of staff members in the LSP. This instability not only influenced the way in which the LSP worked with organisations in the sector, but also blurred the clarity of its responsibilities, as a local councillor admitted: “The LSP, well yes. To be quite frank, it’s one of those bodies of the council that if you ask any of the councillors, very few of us actually know what it does or what it means” (Councillor, BCC). We can conclude that NDC partnership organisations were not the only actors that did not participate in the formulation of planning targets, such as those for the planning process of the LAAs. The evidence presented here suggests that the LSP in Bristol, formally one of the central actors for the planning process during this time, was largely unknown and inaccessible to a number of development actors in Bristol. The NDC, as implemented in Bristol, has also not led to a governance arena in which local residents can permanently contribute to ongoing development processes in the former NDC area. Even in those projects that have been taken over by statutory agencies, such as the WHLC, the partnership board is no longer seen as a legitimate steering body by statutory agencies and the NDC partnership organisations. In this respect, it can be argued that the activation of citizens, or, in NDC terms, community engagement, turned out to be tied to the NDC implementation.This evidence is also reflected in another study on community engagement based upon six case studies of the NDC. Appreciating that some statutory agencies have indeed cooperated with the NDC partnership, this report, however, draws the conclusion that: There is little sign that this has generated significant institutional change. The experience of the NDC Partnerships demonstrates the capacity of local communities 83

Regenerating deprived urban areas

to contribute to policy development and therefore, even if indirectly to outcome change; this is unlikely to be reproduced in relation to service provision more widely unless government can find ways of making agencies at the local and sub-regional level more sensitive to community engagement issues. (Fordham et al, 2009: 68) The reference to state organisations again highlights the decisive role of public-service providers for the process of institutionalisation. In the case of Bristol, evidence suggests that the deinstitutionalisation of the NDC partnership forum was mainly evoked through the power of state actors, such as the LSP, to define their own rules of engagement, particularly for planning processes such as the LAAs. So, the power over the definition and legitimisation of rules and processes left by the NDC has essentially decided upon the fate of services and activities created by NDC. In brief, services and activities created by the NDC implementation have also been deliberately circumvented and neglected. In these processes, such as for the contribution of citywide planning processes, NDC partnership organisations have not been invited to the process or have struggled with its regulatory demands. It can be argued that more powerful development actors, such as the LSP in this case, were able to exert their dominance by defining, changing and allocating their own rules of engagement. Overall, the results of the example presented here can essentially be seen as a consequence of the reluctance of the BCC to engage with the NDC implementation from the beginning and vice versa. So, in this respect, the early withdrawal of the BCC from the NDC implementation laid the foundation of processes of deinstitutionalisation that took full effect after the withdrawal of the NDC funding.

New Deal for Communities in Bristol: a flash in the pan This assessment of the way in which institutional capacities have been transformed leaves us with two major conclusions. First, the NDC as implemented in Bristol has mainly built up CaH as a new organisation to conduct development measures without the interference of the local council, but with rules set up by central government. Interorganisational cooperation and participatory processes to include residents and VSOs were restricted to the delivery of short-term projects. This dominance of CaH can be shown in the dynamics in 84

Area‑Based neo-institutionalist perspective Urban governance practices andInitiatives: the New aDeal for Communities in Bristol

which intellectual, political and social capital has been built during the NDC era. The way in which knowledge resources have been generated was designed and implemented to suit a somewhat exclusive circle of CaH as the main delivery body, the GOSW and the BCC. CaH served as a gatekeeper for delegating information, thus influencing the way in which shared knowledge was generated. This beneficiary role also became clear through the role of the partnership board at CaH, the only arena for participation, which was in turn highly influenced by rules defined and set up by CaH and the NDC scheme. Being part of the NDC meant adopting rules of behaviour set out by the NDC. Reflecting these dynamics among resident board members, it can be argued that the participation in this forum was considerably constrained by set rules of engagement and norms attached to this political space. Thinking also about the inter-organisational trust being built during the NDC implementation in Bristol, we have noted a cleavage between an administrative-led network of agencies and local VSOs of the NDC area. The central position of CaH was described as a buffer between statutory agencies and local VSOs. But this buffer was not used to develop a mediating position between different perspectives and ideas on development priorities and issues; rather, it was used to fortify the authority of the main NDC delivery body, CaH. This, in turn, led to an environment of mistrust among the NDC partnership and ‘institutional thinness’ in the NDC area. Second, embedding the results of this assessment in a historical perspective, we see that the NDC did not halt Bristol’s legacy in the implementation of urban policies influenced either by rules set out by central government since the mid-1990s or the commonly accepted rule to outsource planning functions without involving the formal political process. In fact, the NDC turned out to be one of numerous other partnership schemes in Bristol in which the BCC was all but absent, despite having the potential to influence the implementation and using it for the creation of new services in Barton Hill. This opportunity was missed as the BCC clearly had the opportunity to engage and intervene in the way in which services and institutions were built. The review of the institutionalisation process shows us that new institutions created by the NDC were more likely to endure when they were aligned to the system of regular public-service delivery. Only a few NDC projects were fully institutionalised, in the sense that they are going to be continued by organisations and with other 85

Regenerating deprived urban areas

financial means than with NDC funding. In the majority of cases, services and structures created by the NDC are either kept alive with remaining NDC resources or subject to further consideration by statutory agencies. Most of the services and structures built up by the NDC are, however, likely to be dissolved and delegitimised by citywide development processes and actors. Overall, we can note that the outsourcing of planning and managing functions for regeneration activities under the NDC to non-state actors, such as to a new community-based intermediary organisation in this case, did not undermine the power of statutory agencies or the local authority. Since questions of maintenance costs for services, the legitimacy of newly created governance forums and management bodies, and their alignment to citywide development processes were not integrated into the design of the initiative at the beginning, it is not surprising that only a few activities and services are going to survive the withdrawal of NDC funding. Notes The IMD 2007 was constructed by combining the seven transformed domain scores, using the following weights: Income (22.5%); Employment (22.5%); Health Deprivation and Disability (13.5%); Education, Skills and Training (13.5%); Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%); Crime (9.3%); and Living Environment (9.3%). 1

2

Plymouth, as a direct ‘competitor’ to Bristol, received an invitation a year later.

Indicators for this health deprivation include: years of potential life lost; comparative illness and disability ratio; measures of emergency admissions to hospital; and the numbers of adults under 60 suffering from mood or anxiety disorders. 3

A full description and explanation of this applied method as well as a sociogram of the full network can be found in Appendices I–III. 4

86

six

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change: the Social City Programme in Duisburg History is both a heritage and a burden, since the conditions at a given point in time shape the probabilities and directions of change – often, as in this case [Ruhr area] – constraining the development. (Friedrichs, 1996: 134)

‘Strukturwandel’, the change of economic and social structures, has become a highly used buzzword in research and local politics to describe Duisburg’s socio-economic transition during the last century. Located at the fringe of Germany’s Rhine–Ruhr Agglomeration (Ruhrgebiet), Duisburg’s economy is highly intertwined with the boom and bust of the mining, iron and steel industry (Hall, P., 1966).1 It was the construction of the Lower Rhine steel foundry in Duisburg North – which became Europe’s biggest steel-production site – that transformed Duisburg to the main city of the steel industry in Germany (Birkenhauer, 1984). The demands of this sector and its major corporations such as Thyssen, Krupp and Mannesmann left clear traces in Duisburg’s urban fabric. Literally, only 9% of the physical space in Duisburg Marxloh, one of the case-study sites, has been marked for residential land use, the majority of the space is used by the steel industry (Pesch et al, 2003). After the Second World War, two-thirds of Duisburg’s workforce worked in this industry (Buennig, 1983). All major urban infrastructures, such as industrial sites, transport links and residential areas, were planned and constructed around the needs of these major employers of Duisburg’s population. Once at the forefront of the industrial revolution in Germany, with its enormous loss of industrial jobs since the mid-1970s, Duisburg now belongs with the cities of Gelsenkirchen and Herne at the ‘losing end’ of the economic transformation in the Ruhr area (Strohmeier and Häußermann, 2003). The steel crisis of the 1970s led to another phenomenon, which was unique in West Germany: a shrinking urban population. Whereas Duisburg had already lost around 145,000 inhabitants between 1961 87

Regenerating deprived urban areas

and 1985, this tendency has continued (Bensch, 1986). Between 1995 and 2003 alone, the city lost another 30,000 inhabitants, falling in 2005 to under 500,000. In 2008, Duisburg’s population shrank to 493,000, with estimated further losses of around 20,000 until 2027 (Richter, 2008). Apart from other cities in East Germany, such as Eisenhuettenstadt, which suffered from the economic transition after reunification in 1990, Duisburg is seen as a definitive example of a shrinking city in Germany (Glock, 2005). Due to the high unemployment rate and the number of recipients of transfer incomes in Duisburg, public housing has played a major role in providing affordable housing. Despite the major demands in this sector, the housing supply has been considerably reduced in recent years. It is reported that between 2000 and 2006, the number of public apartments was reduced by a quarter (10,000) of the total supply, consisting of around 33,100 apartments in 2006 (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). According to further plans to privatise public housing, it is expected that the rents will rise and the amount of subsidised housing will decrease (Stadt Duisburg, 2007b: 17). On the other hand, the loss of population has also led to a rising vacancy rate of (private) residential properties. In 2006, it is reported that around 5% of all residential properties were unoccupied. It is estimated that this percentage will double during the next five years, assuming that the size of households remains stable and the population declines (Innova AG, 2006). So, whereas the demand for subsidised housing in Duisburg is still high, some areas are experiencing considerable vacancy rates in the available housing stock due to the loss of population and higher rents. Since the decline of the steel industry accelerated in the 1980s, Duisburg has been actively searching for alternative methods of local development, during which Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) and new forms of public-service delivery became permanent scripts in attempts to shake off its industrial past and promote a ‘structural change’. Being one of the first cities in Germany to implement area-based policies as early as the 1980s, it is not surprising that ABIs formulated at uppertier levels of government, such as the Urban Neighbourhoods with a Special Need for Regeneration programme in North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) and the Federal Social City Programme (SCP), copied elements from Duisburg’s ABIs. Even though approaches to ABIs in Germany ‘trickled up’ from the local to the national level, their original discovery in Duisburg was clearly initiated through a federal and state government-funding scheme for job creation in the 1980s (Arbeitsbeschaffungsmassnahmen [ABM]). The condition for obtaining funding for these full-time ABM positions 88

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

was that these jobs were ‘in the public interest’ and directed at the most affected groups of the population, such as the young unemployed (Mohr, 1980: 479).The Department for Human Resources in Duisburg, which was responsible for ABM schemes, and the Department for Housing saw the opportunity for setting up a distinct-regeneration scheme in one of the most deprived areas, Bruckhausen, using this funding scheme. A first ABI in Duisburg, called ‘Project Bruckhausen’, was therefore born in 1983, promoting a ‘holistic approach to counteract the erosion of social and physical structures’ (EGDU, 2004b: 9). This area-based approach to addressing unemployment and physical decay became a blueprint for other initiatives in NRW: It is a model for an interdepartmental action of the State Government to improve the housing and working situation … by encouraging various exemplary measures in the field of urban renewal, housing, modernisation, environmental programmes, prevention of youth unemployment and creation of new jobs. (Stadt Duisburg, 1994: 3) This approach was enshrined in a State Directive called ‘Job Creation Measures and Urban Development’ in 1988 (EGDU, 2004b; Althoff et  al, 2005). The neighbouring Marxloh area was soon to follow with its own ABI called ‘Urban Renewal Programme Marxloh’ (Fix et al, 1998). Even though ABIs in Duisburg remained relatively small programmes compared to regional projects, such as the IBA (Internationale Bauaustellung) Emscher Park, which ran between 1989 and 1999 and claimed to serve as a ‘workshop for the future of old industrial regions’ (IBA, 1996), ABIs fitted well into the overall policy aim to create alternative local economic niches. Between 1993 and 2005, Duisburg’s areas in receipt of funding for these ABIs were thus allocated around €67 million (MBV NRW, 2006a: 67). In order to implement these various projects, Duisburg explicitly chose an outsourcing strategy in public administration. Under the mission of creating a Corporate City (Konzern Stadt) in order to tackle the declining budget of the local authority, various development agencies owned by the Duisburg City Council (DCC) and public– private partnerships (PPPs) were established (Stadt Duisburg, 1991). Following a direct recommendation of the state government of NRW, an Agency for Economic Promotion (GFW Duisburg) was established as early as 1988, being the first PPP in Germany (Ziesemer, 2004). The creation of other development agencies followed, such as for the conversion of the inner-city port (IDE, 2007). Aimed at promoting 89

Regenerating deprived urban areas

‘economic and socio-cultural structural change’, a city marketing agency was also born in 1995 (Duisburg Marketing, 2010). This outsourcing strategy corresponded with an emerging discourse actively promoting and postulating new local partnerships between and across sectors (Froessler et al, 1994; Selle, 1994). As ‘engines of structural change’ and ‘signposts into the future’, guidelines were advertising the usefulness of business collaborations and partnership-working between businesses, administrations and political actors (Kilper et al, 1996: 11). By this time, it became clear that a heterogeneity of interests had replaced the former tripartite corporatism, as the number of development actors in Duisburg considerably increased (Katzenstein, 1987; Streeck, 2003). Up to the early 1980s, Duisburg was considered a typical example of the corporatism that emerged in post-war Germany. A close, tripartite interaction between the local council, labour unions and steel companies dominated local politics (Bovermann et al, 1996; Funder, 1996). This tripartite coalition had also been stabilised by a constant majority of Duisburg’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), which gained an absolute majority between 1964 and 1994 (Glock, 2005). Local development decisions were usually based on this stable governing arrangement. Often, union members and corporate representatives were also members of the DCC, coining the term ‘political multifunctionary’, used to describe the overlapping roles of local actors in different policy and societal spheres during this time (Gissendanner, 2004). Along with this transformation, labour unions lost considerable influence in political decision-making as the steel industry and union membership declined. It also ended the political hegemony of the SPD, which lost more and more votes during the elections in subsequent years until the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) gained a majority of the local council in the mid-2000s. However, having watched the first ABI experiences in Duisburg, the state government of NRW agreed to follow these ‘new paths in urban renewal’ (EGM, 1996: 3) and announced its own ABI in 1993, called Urban Neighbourhoods with a Special Need for Regeneration (Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf).This ABI would turn out to become a blueprint for the federal government initiative that followed six years later. With its aim to encourage local authorities to create integrated action plans for the regeneration of its most deprived urban areas, it also took up approaches that were already applied in Duisburg as well as in some other cities in NRW, such as Essen and Dortmund. Funding was granted for 28 areas in 24 local authorities across NRW (MSKS, 1998; Austermann and Zimmer-Hegmann, 2000).

90

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

The following sections will analyse processes of decision-making, particularly with respect to the way in which knowledge resources, mobilisation capacities and relational resources have been built during the implementation of the federal initiative called the Social City Programme (SCP) in Duisburg. It is shown that the SCP implementation has further strengthened the role and capacity of the council’s intermediary organisation, the Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg (EGDU), as the main broker of the DCC to deal with ABIs in the city. Corresponding with the long tradition of local autonomy in Germany, the SCP implementation by the EGDU was highly steered by local councillors and the formal political processes of the DCC. However, despite this strong relationship to the administration and local political process, the review shows that the commitment of the DCC to sustain services created from the SCP in Duisburg’s deprived urban areas can be considered as low.

The Social City Programme in Duisburg North: continuing local policies with central-government funding In 1999, the state government of NRW joined the first of the annually renewed agreements between the states and the Federal Ministry for Transport, Construction and Urban Development (BMVBS) for conducting ‘integrated’ development measures in deprived urban areas under the SCP (BMVBS, 1999). Guidelines produced by the federal government gave recommendations on how to design the implementation process (DIFU, 2000). Due to the constitutional rights of local authorities and states, however, it was up to the states to ensure that the requirements for funding take-up were met, such as the existence of a so-called area management office in the target areas. As NRW had already established its own initiative in 1993, the federal programme was effectively merged into the pre-existing state programme. It was, therefore, not surprising that apart from the extension of target areas in NRW, no major changes in the division of labour from the former state initiative can be found. Strengthened by a resolution of the State Council in 2002, which committed itself to sustain the area-based approach as a permanent policy in NRW, the requirements set up by the NRW government for funding take-up for the SCP has not changed significantly (Landtag NRW, 2002).An interdepartmental steering group  in NRW (IntermAG), under the lead of the State

91

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Ministry for Construction and Transport, was responsible for enforcing these rules and regulations. The availability of additional funding for ABIs in Duisburg further strengthened the activities in Marxloh and Bruckhausen, which were expanded in 2001 to three other areas: Hochfeld, Beeck and an area called the Poets Quarter (Dichterviertel). Box 6.1: Profile of the Social City Programme areas Marxloh and Bruckhausen in Duisburg North The SCP area in brief As former residential areas for Thyssen’s workforce, Marxloh and Bruckhausen, have been especially affected by industrial decline over the years. Major features of these areas have become: a declining population in which skilled workers are leaving the borough; low rents attracting low-income families; high unemployment rates, especially among immigrants; and poor environmental quality due to the emissions from the surrounding industrial sites and motorways. Marxloh and Bruckhausen, with their 17,600 and 6,100 residents respectively, experienced the highest loss of population in Duisburg up until 2005 (Deloitte, 2007; Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). Bruckhausen, in particular, had already lost around 30% of its population between 1950 and 1980 due to its high air pollution and disinvestments in the housing stock (Tobias and Boettner, 1992; Pesch et al, 2003; Althoff et al, 2005; Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). Being a ‘triangular island in the midst of industry’, poor living conditions are noted (Althoff et al, 2005: 23).The housing stock in both areas is mainly dominated by public housing, which provides the most affordable rents in Duisburg (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). However, the number of households that are threatened with loss of their home due to rent arrears is twice as high as in the South of Duisburg (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). Both areas have the lowest shares of registered employees subject to social insurance contributions and the highest density of unemployed or social benefit claimants in Duisburg (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). During the last 25 years, however, a thriving cluster of retail stores mainly run by small Turkish entrepreneurs emerged in Marxloh (Neumann and Schatz-Bergfeld, 1999a).Today, with 44% of the total population, the boroughs of Hamborn and Meiderich-Beeck, to which both areas belong, have the highest shares of immigrants in Duisburg, of which the Turkish population forms the largest group (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). At the district level, 60% of Marxloh’s population and 85% of Bruckhausen’s residents have a migration background, one of the highest proportions to be found in NRW (Landtag NRW, 2004; Stadt Duisburg, 2008c).2 Both areas also belong to the youngest areas in Duisburg and NRW; children and adolescents make up 51% of Hamborn’s and 48% of Meiderich-Beeck’s population (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c). This is directly correlated with the high number of immigrant 92

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change families, as the natural growth rate among German households has constantly declined during recent years (Stadt Duisburg, 2008c).

With the expansion of ABIs implemented in Duisburg, the DCC took the decision to centralise the management of these development initiatives.The EGDU has therefore been the major agency responsible for ABIs in Duisburg since 2001 (Stadt Duisburg, 1998). As an organisational body outside the council and in charge of the ‘continuous development and implementation of holistic concepts in the integrated neighbourhood renewal in Duisburg’ (EGDU, 2001: 8), the organisation does not fall under the regulations of the public administration. The existence of an intermediary organisation responsible for area-based policies outside the public administration is seen as a positive and promising vehicle for short-term projects: “This construct [EGDU] allows us at the end of the day to implement short-term projects on behalf of the City of Duisburg; projects that are both needed and demanded. It offers us the opportunity to facilitate processes that wouldn’t be possible within the administration. I mean the whole range of administrative procedures from travel authorisations, financing projects to employing new staff. It’s a good vehicle for time-bounded, for example, three-year projects.” (Civil Servant, DCC) As Figure 6.1 shows, the organisational structure of the EGDU, as found in 2009, consists of a head office in which the executive management and its theme-related project officers are located. In 2008, the EGDU had around 30 employees with different professional backgrounds, such as architects, economists and youth and community workers (Stadt Duisburg, 2009a). The neighbourhood managers located at the Neighbourhood Management Offices in the SCP areas are also employed by the EGDU and serve as a first point of contact for residents and local Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) in the neighbourhoods and as representatives of the EGDU. A board at which the DCC and the CivicTrust Duisburg (Buergerstiftung Duisburg) are the main shareholders and trustees supervises the financial and organisational management of the organisation.3 However, the supervisory board consists of eight voting members:

93

Regenerating deprived urban areas Figure 6.1: Organisational chart of the EGDU Supervisory board

Executive management Head office

Department for Urban Development and Project Management of DCC (Trustee)

Local councillors (voting members)

Socio-cultural affairs

Building and housing

Local economy

Urban redevelopment

Administration

Civic Trust Duisburg (trustee since 2009)

Chair of local area forums (co-opted, non-voting members)

Neighbourhood Management Offices

Bruckhausen

Marxloh

Beeck Poets Quarter

Hochfeld

Note: DCC – Duisburg City Council. Source: Author’s figure based on EGDU (2010a).

• One representative appointed directly by the Lord Mayor, usually the head of the Department of Urban Planning and Project management, to which the EGDU is directly aligned; • Four members of Civic Trust Duisburg; and • Three councillors appointed by a decision of the DCC. The board is complemented by a number of co-opted, non-voting members appointed by the area committees of the SCP areas. This board could only be assigned and granted discharge for a financial year by a resolution of DCC. The EGDU oversees six major action areas in its work in Duisburg North: local economy; vocational training; urban redevelopment; housing and environment; intercultural work; and social infrastructure. Data on the earmarked contributions from NRW for the promotion of urban-development measures reveal that between 1995 and 2006, around 7,500 measures have been financed, 460 for SCP projects in NRW (since 1998).The majority of the grant derives from the budget of the state ministry. 94

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

In total, €2.3  billion have been provided for the SCP in NRW between 1995 to 2006.As shown in Table 6.1, between 1996 and 2005, around €76 million was allocated to the SCP areas in Duisburg, with the area of Marxloh receiving the highest allocation from the SCP funding. The following sections review the SCP implementation process through which institutional capital has been generated. Being able to draw upon data deriving from a survey at the end of the SCP initiative, it is possible to show not only how intellectual, political and social capital has been built, but also to what extent projects and activities have been mainstreamed and institutionalised.

Generating knowledge resources for the Duisburg City Council: the EGDU as the holder of institutional memories in urban regeneration Being one of the first local authorities in Germany to formulate its own area-based approach in the 1980s, the state programme in NRW in the 1990s essentially continued this legacy. When the federal government set up the SCP in 1999, Duisburg had already developed a wide range of knowledge resources deriving from the area-based policies implemented in the areas of Bruckhausen and Marxloh. Table  6.2 distinguishes five major ways in which information was generated and shared in the SCP partnership. The way in which annual reports have been formulated, distributed and approved clearly demonstrates the nature and the extent of control that the DCC exerted on activities of its development agency, the EGDU. Since its inception, the EGDU had to produce annual reports disclosing all financial activities during the previous and prospective financial year. These reports were discussed in council sessions as resolutions to be adopted by the councillors in the main and financial committees. Once the councillors adopted the report, the EGDU’s executive manager Table 6.1: Social City Programme funding for Duisburg Bruckhausen Marxloh Hochfeld Beeck Total

e (millions) 16.4 40.4 (including 14.6 from the EU Urban Initiative) 17.8  2.3 76.9

Source: MBV NRW (2006a).

95

96

Report submitted by the EGDU to be adopted by the local council

Mode of delivery

Reviewing the implementation structure as well as ‘successes’ in formulating integrated development strategies

Evaluations –– Supervisory board of the EGDU and the DCC –– SCP NRW City Network

Area committee meetings (closed to the public); all other meetings public

EGDU or VSOs

Meetings –– Local Councillors –– Residents –– VSOs –– Borough administration Consultation, information and discussion (area committee, area forums and supervisory board meetings) Either organised through EGDU or VSOs

Publications –– Local Council –– Development practitioners (regional and international) Project reviews

EGDU published or funds the publications Public when to be adopted by Public the council

All documents had to be adopted by the local council

All planning documents for investments in SCP areas, eg, endorsement notes for major redevelopment projects, Small Scale Monitoring; mission statements, etc EGDU or area committees EGDU delivers create or commission the flagship development of documents publications

Planning documents –– Local Council –– Borough administration

Notes: EGDU – Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg; DCC – Duisburg City Council; SCP – Social City Programme; NRW – North Rhine Westphalia; VSOs – Voluntary Sector Organisations.

EGDU, SCP NRW City Network or NRW state ministry commissioned external consultancies and universities Degree of Local council represented EGDU or NRW state control through the Department ministry in control of of Urban Planning process Public Public –– For the whole SCP: public accessibility of –– For Duisburg North: information available on request

–– Overview of key funding take-ups and investments in the areas –– Prospective businesses

Key focus

Key audience

Annual reports of the EGDU Local Council; Supervisory board of the EGDU

Table 6.2: Knowledge-generating activities in the Social City Programme in Duisburg

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

as well as advisory board would be granted discharge for the financial year. It should be noted that these council sessions and all documents were open to the public and SCP partnership (EGDU, 2001; Stadt Duisburg, 2005, 2006, 2007a, 2008b, 2009a). A number of evaluations of SCP activities have been commissioned. The evaluations commissioned by central government focused on the comparison between the implementation process in different states, for example on selection of areas and procedures for funding take-up (Aehnelt et  al, 2004; BMVBW, 2004). Another evaluation commissioned by the state of NRW focused on the creation and implementation of integrated, and thus multi-sectoral, strategies in the NRW cities receiving SCP funding (Aehnelt et al, 2008). The results of both evaluations were published by the commissioning ministries and formed the basis for symposia that were held on a regular basis. In the course of the NRW evaluation, two distinct reports on the implementation efforts in Duisburg North have been issued and published (Kloth, 2006a, 2006b). Another form of distributing information and generating knowledge can be seen in the number of meetings that were regularly held in the SCP partnership. So-called area forums (Runde Tische) turned out to be the only open arenas for interested parties to exchange ideas and express interest in the SCP implementation, and were usually held on a bi-monthly basis.The closed meetings for the major steering bodies in the SCP areas, area committees (Stadtteilausschuesse), were usually held on a monthly basis. Apart from these regular meetings, a number of consultation exercises with local residents were also organised by the EGDU or their affiliated area management offices. In comparison with all other forms of knowledge-generating activities conducted or initiated by the EGDU, the creation of planning documents for Duisburg North to be adopted by the DCC are the most important outputs from the EGDU’s activities. Planning documents for public investments in Duisburg North have usually been prepared by the area committees under supervision of the EGDU, which were then adopted by the DCC. Apart from this, due to the various EU funding streams, such as URBAN I and II, which have been successfully obtained by the EGDU, a number of background studies for the introduction of new planning features, such as a Small Scale Monitoring in the area of Marxloh, were issued (Neumann, 2002; Neumann and Schatz-Bergfeld, 1997, 1998a, 1998b, 1999a, 1999b). Finally, a number of publications published by the EGDU highlighted its activities in the areas. The activities funded by micro-credits of the ‘Local Capital for Social Purposes’ (LOS), provided by the Federal 97

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ) and the European Social fund (ESF), have been given great attention in reports published by the EGDU (EGDU, 2004a, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008a, 2010b). It has to be noted that those activities that were related or promoted by European funding were usually more widely publicised than other activities undertaken in Duisburg North (ILS, 2000; Weck, 2000; Weck and Zimmer-Hegmann, 2000). Reviewing the way in which the different forms of knowledge generation were organised shows us that the majority of processes in place were meant to serve and support the planning processes of the DCC. The annual reports, as well as the planning documents, disclose the strong role of the council for the EGDU. The council was the recipient, beneficiary or principal of these knowledge-generating activities. Considering the function that the EGDU had to play to prepare planning decisions for the council also shows that it had to accumulate different forms of knowledge. It had to provide the range of specific knowledge needed in urban planning in terms of legal and administrative procedures. This was provided through a whole range of planning officers employed by the EGDU, but also by the strong biographical interrelation of senior staff members with the DCC.The executive management as well as senior project managers used to be former civil servants or heads of various administrative units of the DCC. In these cases, working for the EGDU did not necessarily mean working outside the local council. According to a senior management officer of the EGDU, this aspect would be: “a real outstanding feature of this organisation. Many people working here are from the local council and they have still a close relation to it, like our executive managers and I.We are civil servants of the local council and so we will be in the future.This means that the know-how, which has been created here over the years, remains in Duisburg.” (Project Manager, Intermediary) Being involved for over 25 years in ABIs in Duisburg North and having a stable personnel, in particular, in the senior management, the EGDU can be seen as a holder of institutional memories for urban policies and ABIs in Duisburg.

98

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

Creating arenas for controlled interaction: area committees as closed shops for local councillors and the local administration Resident participation is an indispensable strategy within the implementation of an integrated urban renewal. (EGDU, 2004b: 15)

The previous section showed us that the EGDU was the main driver for identifying issues to be tackled in the area and the main facilitator of solutions to be implemented.The DCC was the recipient, beneficiary and principal of these processes. So far, few indications have been given about the extent to which other non-state actors, such as residents or VSOs, have contributed to the identification of issues and solutions in the SCP implementation in Duisburg. Overall, at least four ways of creating a mobilisational capacity can be differentiated: • Participation in planning exercises organised by the EGDU; • Submitting proposals for small-scale measures under the LOS scheme; • Volunteering to carry out projects initiated by the SCP; and • Being involved in the local area forum in Bruckhausen or in Marxloh. In practice, participating in the local forums was the major way for local residents andVSOs to express and exchange ideas on development priorities and solutions in Duisburg North. As Figure 6.2 depicts, two main bodies were established to steer the SCP implementation in Duisburg North: an area forum and an area committee in the SCP areas. Area committees function as the major strategic forums for steering the SCP implementation in Duisburg. These committees were explicitly created to include political parties in the SCP implementation in Duisburg North. So, apart from the chair of the local area forum and two representatives of EGDU’s supervisory board, the DCC elected four local councillors for each committee. The committee elected a chair who was responsible for the coordination and management of the bi-monthly meetings, which were closed to the public. Minutes of meetings as well as agendas were usually distributed to all interested parties. Due to its structure, area committees were seen as technical committees of the council for SCP issues in Duisburg North. These committees not only decided upon the priorities of the SCP, but in many cases in which the DCC had to be involved, they also served

99

Regenerating deprived urban areas Figure 6.2: Governing bodies for the Social City Programme implementation in Duisburg North

Decide upon projects funded by the SCP in the neighbourhoods

Area committees of the SCP areas

One representative of each DCC borough administration

Two representatives of EGDU’s supervisory board

Area forums of the SCP areas (open membership)

Neighbourhood Management Offices (EGDU)

Residents

Voluntary Sector Organisations

Four local councillors

Chairs of each local area forum in the SCP areas

Determined by the Council of Duisburg

Discuss project activities and topical issues in the neighbourhoods

Welfare organisations

Local retail

Faith organisations

Notes: EGDU – Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg; DCC – Duisburg City Council; SCP – Social City Programme.

as an antechamber in which resolutions to be adopted by the council were prepared and formulated: “Well, we are usually sure about their capacities.The things are usually thought through, everything they produce is usually well founded. It is often the case that administrative papers, resolutions or official notes are exchanged before the 100

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

official meetings.… Everything is usually as much prepared as necessary to table resolutions.” (Councillor, DCC) According to the interviewees, most resolutions made and discussed by the area committee passed the council with a majority of votes from all parties. So, in these cases, area committees prepared and formulated decisions to be adopted by the council. The only forum that was open to residents and local VSOs used to be area forums, which were established at the beginning of the SCP. According to the interviewees, the forums served as regular meetings for a network of various organisations and residents in the areas, including VSOs, churches and EGDU’s neighbourhood offices, to discuss issues of and opportunities for the area: “We meet regularly to look at where the next crisis is happening; what needs to be discussed. We try to raise attention for those issues that are usually overseen by the council. Then we ask local people what issues should be raised. This is actually a never-ending process.” (Community Worker, VSO) Therefore, local councillors are invited to discuss the latest public and private developments, statements for topical issues in the areas are formulated, and small-scale initiatives are initiated. Every two years, the participants of each forum elect a chair. An executive board is responsible for the management and organisation of the meetings as well as communication with the DCC and the press. Reviewing this governing structure of forums and committees, at least two observations can be formulated. First, area forums, the main forums for residents and local VSOs, had no direct influence on any strategic decisions over funding priorities and/or steering decisions of the SCP. The only way to influence strategic decisions of the SCP implementation consisted of formulating resolutions put forward by the chair at the local area committees. However, through their representatives, the area forums had just one vote for strategic decisions on this committee: “In fact, a number of doubts had been expressed as to whether citizens had been given the right weight for decisions. Actually, there is only one voting member of the area forum represented who faces seven [sic] politicians.This

101

Regenerating deprived urban areas

indeed creates an imbalance.” (Neighbourhood Manager, Intermediary) The local area committees, therefore, were not bound to the decisions of the local area forums, which had no formal decision-making power in contrast to the area committees. Second, the area committee – the main strategic body for steering the programme – served as an outsourced decision body for the DCC, which focused on the management of the implementation process: “Well, I had different expectations when I joined the area committee. Because what we do is essentially discuss funding applications from, for example, sport associations and schools and looking for their eligibility, so whether they relate to the neighbourhood, engage with local residents etc … I expected to think more about the planning process, not only the physical planning, but the networks in the neighbourhoods, which groups are new, how can we engage with them and so on. That we would discuss funding applications; I was really surprised by that.” (Councillor, DCC) Apart from this, it was also noted that the EGDU had a considerable influence on the subjects and proposals that were discussed in the area committees: Community worker,VSO: “The area committee decides, whether certain things are going to be implemented or not.The proposals for this are nevertheless coming from the DCC.” Interviewer:“Well, do you mean the proposals come from the DCC or from the EGDU?” Community worker, VSO: “Right, from the EGDU in fact.There’s a big mismatch. At the EGDU, everything is planned, perhaps reacting to some requests or local public anger but the plans are prepared and then transferred to the area committee. There, the plans are discussed and usually adopted.” Even though the proposals formulated by the area committees had not usually been the subject of major discussions in the DCC, they were still seen as recommendations. This was also stressed in DCC 102

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

official documents, in which area committees were considered as ‘area committees of the EGDU’ (Stadt Duisburg, 2009e). The general reluctance to allocate too much decision-making power outside the formal system of politics in Duisburg is also stressed by the fact that every major project of investment had to be decided in the DCC: “If we think, for example, of the greenbelt. This is a relatively large project. In these cases, the area committee has no decision-making power at all” (Head of Administration, DCC).4 Reflecting on these observations, it can be concluded that even though area committees had been promoted as the ‘first steps towards the formal involvement of the local community’ (Weck and ZimmerHegmann, 2000: 39), this arena effectively turned out to be a closed shop for local councillors. This does not necessarily mean that the EGDU was reluctant to take up suggestions. Indeed, all VSOs interviewed highlighted that, in particular, proposals for ‘non-investment’ measures have usually been implemented by the EGDU. Any other forms of informal collaboration, including direct approaches to speak with project officers and, in particular, the area offices, were generally seen as fruitful and positive. However, we have to clearly reject the EGDU’s claim that through area committees, ‘public participation as the goal and essential condition for success of an integrated neighbourhood renewal (“Renewal from the bottom”) has been institutionalised’ (EGDU, 2001: 11). According to a local VSO, the public was instead more informed about the SCP processes than part of its implementation: “At the moment, many people have the feeling that they can only react to something, but one would also like to contribute or to operate independently.This is a permanent issue over here because it’s a big problem. Particularly huge projects like the greenbelt usually make mischief because some felt too bowled over by the decisions or taken for a ride, I might say.” (Community Worker,VSO) Considering the limited formal influence of residents and VSOs on decision-making processes for the SCP implementation, it can rather be seen as a highly controlled form of consultation. Programmewide evaluations of the SCP reveal that the ambitious objective to activate residents and foster self-help also remained a challenging task for other SCP areas. Even though early evaluations paint a positive picture in stabilising ‘active cores’ of local residents (Hanhoerster and Reimann, 2007), some reports note that as regards the ‘involvement 103

Regenerating deprived urban areas

of the migrants, little progress becomes visible in many areas, despite considerable efforts undertaken’ (Aehnelt et al, 2004: 10). Many activities would therefore remain mainly ‘middle-class affairs’ (Becker et  al, 2002: 36). In 40% of the SCP areas, new voluntary initiatives emerged and the cooperation with the housing sector intensified, but only around 20% of the SCP partnership respondents fully agreed with the statement that residents were activated through the SCP (Becker et al, 2006a). Consequently, it can be concluded that the mobilisation capacity built up by the SCP in Duisburg primarily enhanced the needs and processes of the DCC. Newly established forums have been used to generate a political consensus among councillors for SCP project proposals, upon which the DCC itself eventually decided. This also corresponds with a study on the ‘political culture’ in the SCP areas in Duisburg, which noted that, in Marxloh in particular, there was no shortage of bodies and discussions, but rather a shortage of transparency regarding how the results of these processes fed into development strategies of the area (Von Alemann et al, 2003). This observation was also reinforced by an evaluation of the SCP implementation in Duisburg, which stated that local actors outside of the council had only marginal influence on SCP objectives and priorities (Kloth, 2006b: 32). The scope for social learning, therefore, has to be considered as only relevant for councillors and the DCC as well as its major intermediary, the EGDU. As the following sections will illustrate, the SCP implementation has not built up significant relationships with non-state actors, such as VSOs and residents.

Consolidating the political process: inter-organisational relationships in the Social City Programme partnership The preceding sections have shown that knowledge resources in the SCP were primarily generated through the EGDU to meet the needs of the DCC.The strong role of the DCC for the SCP implementation was also stressed by reviewing the forms of interaction and rules of engagement in the governing forums for implementing the SCP, which influenced the way in which relational resources have been built in this partnership. The institutional set-up of steering bodies allocated nonstate actors, such as VSOs and residents, a minor role for influencing priorities of the programme. Through the SCP implementation, the EGDU not only strengthened its relationship with its subordinated local department, but also established strong relationships with other organisations of the DCC. Due to the strong personal and historical 104

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

interrelationships, the EGDU is considered more as part of the council than an external agency: “I would say that the EGDU is somehow part of the local administration.The organisation doesn’t report to the Lord Mayor though. But there is also the supervisory board, which is, because of its structure, part of the council. Apart from this, since the beginning, all major officers practically used to work for the council.” (Councillor, DCC) Despite its status as a limited liability company (GmBH), it is considered as a part of the council due its function and existing work relationships with the DCC.This is also reflected in the extract of the sociogram in Figure 6.3 on reciprocal trust. Reviewing these inter-organisational relationships, at least three major observations can be drawn. First, the EGDU is seen by all council departments as a trustworthy partner for new initiatives and projects. The EGDU served as a reliable partner, moderator and producer of services for the DCC. Work relationships have been built up on many levels: at the project office level, when projects needed to be planned and coordinated with statutory agencies; as well as at the executive level, for example, as the EGDU’s chief executive was invited to the weekly interdepartmental meetings of DCC’s chief officers. The EGDU also developed a specialised expertise on funding procedures, which was ‘retrieved’ not only by the DCC’s urban planning department, but also by a number of other local departments: “How do I see our relationship to the EGDU? Extremely positively. It’s real work to understand and cope with these funding application forms.We couldn’t have done this with our stock of personnel. Due to this close cooperation with the EGDU, we have signed an agreement for cooperation. They carry out operations on our behalf.” (Head of Department, DCC) Since funding applications, such as for EU funding, could only be made by the DCC, the EGDU was seen as a reliable and competent agency of the council to prepare these applications. However, the EGDU’s close connection to DCC departments as well as to local parties was seen as a hindrance to smaller political parties joining and strategically influencing development decisions:

105

Regenerating deprived urban areas Figure 6.3: Reciprocal trust between organisations of Duisburg City Council and the EGDU SPD

DCC Urb Linke DCC Youth NUREC DCC Housing

CDU

Immeo DCC Bruckhausen

DCC Marxloh

Evonik

Area Office Marxloh

EGDU

Area Office Bruckhausen

Notes: SPD – Social Democratic Party; CDU – Christian Democratic Union; DCC Youth – Duisburg City Council Department of Youth Services; DCC URB – Duisburg City Council Department of Urban Development and Project Management; DCC Housing – Duisburg City Council Department of Social Welfare and Housing; EGDU – Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg; DCC Marxloh – Duisburg City Council Markloh borough administration; DCC Bruckhausen – Duisburg City Council Bruckhausen borough administration.

“To be honest, there is a close circle that has been built during the years between the SPD and the local administration. The executive management of the EGDU, particularly, is well aware of it and integrated within this network. As an outsider, it’s sometimes really hard to join in with them.” (Councillor, DCC) For example, Figure 6.3 shows that the Linke, as one of the smaller parties in Duisburg, would approach a number of actors in the SCP partnership, but that this was not a reciprocal relationship. This can be explained by considering the legacy of the EGDU as being active for over 30 years in a city whose council has been dominated by two 106

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

parties, the SPD and CDU. Over the years, the EGDU developed an expertise in knowing how to approach departments and local parties alike: “Well, we strongly depend on collaborations. When we started in 1999, we had to present ourselves and approach different local departments. If some people grew up with politics in Duisburg, this makes things much easier.” (Manager, Intermediary) An exception to the relationship between the EGDU and the DCC has to be made when it comes to the borough administrations (DCC Marxloh, DCC Bruckhausen). Neither the EGDU head office nor its area management offices would approach this tier of local government, which is administratively closest to the SCP area. A decisive cleavage between the SCP delivery bodies and the borough administrations can therefore be noted. This critical relationship became particularly relevant at the end of the SCP initiative, as alternative funding for the SCP services had to be sought. Second, Figure 6.3 also shows that the collaboration and reciprocal trust between local departments of the DCC is extremely high. Apart from the Department of Youth Services Duisburg (DCC Youth), all other relationships between the Department of Urban Development and Project Management (DCC URB), the Department of Social Welfare and Housing (DCC Housing) and the borough administrations (DCC Marxloh and DCC Bruckhausen) are built upon reciprocal trust. The central role of the DCC URB clearly reflects its formal role as being the accountable body of the DCC for the SCP, to which the EGDU is aligned. According to several heads of department, this reciprocal trust has been built because of a commonly seen necessity of facing financial constraints, intensifying issues that needed to be addressed: “Well, other cities are too well off, they are only concerned with their own internal fights. But over here, we learned it early on that we need to try to collaborate and create something with the few resources we have. So, the motto is to still achieve things with lesser resources.” (Head of Department, DCC) Another head of department confirms the relationship between interdepartmental cooperation and the scarcity of financial resources: “One can formulate a general rule relating to this: the more serious the problems, the lower is the barrier or the higher is the readiness to collaborate at the project level. Because at 107

Regenerating deprived urban areas

a certain point you realise that together we are strong. And generally, the collaborations are more intense in the absence of the executive management. Yes, the front-line staff on the ground collaborate and they transfer their agreements on the executive level. We are still informed and we welcome this.” (Head of Department, DCC) So, apart from the necessity to collaborate because of financial constraints, according to another head of department, the range of issues found at the neighbourhood level is an important factor in bringing involved front-line staff to the point where they can seek partners. Finally, Figure 6.3 also highlights the reciprocal trust between the housing companies (Evonik, Immeo) and major council departments (DCC Housing, DCC URB, DCC Youth), the main political parties (SPD and CDU) and the EGDU head office. The main reasons for this strong interrelationship between departments of the DCC and the interviewed housing companies can be seen in the necessity of housing companies to find financial compensations: “As a social housing association it was not our intention to force out people when they could not pay their rents. Something had to be done to save them.Therefore, in these cases, the Department for Social Welfare and Housing used to be a reliable partner for years.… So, in 90% of the cases, it was just the money that was missing and in these cases, we would approach the council in order to avoid homelessness for the family. We have been working extremely well together and this remains unchanged to the present day.” (Manager, Business) Reviewing these relationships, we can therefore conclude that SCP implementation has produced a considerable capacity for local state actors to collaborate using an intermediary as a preparing, planning and executing body guiding these collaborative processes. However, the limitations of this pragmatic but controlled approach are in achieving an administrative and political consensus for development measures through an intermediary, especially when it comes to the issue of commitment to sustaining new services in the SCP areas.

108

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

Beliefs and practices of anchoring and mainstreaming: the fading legacy of the Social City Programme in Duisburg The duration of the grants shall be limited and the grants must be reviewed at regular intervals with respect to the manner in which they are used. The financial assistance must be designed with descending annual contributions. (German Basic Law, Art 104b)

This article of the German Basic Law stipulates that every grant agreement provided by the federal government for measures such as the SCP is time-limited and subject to annual spending cuts. However, as the general responsibility for identifying areas for the SCP and its financial management lies in the hands of the state governments, the state ministries decide when and where to withdraw the funding. In comparison with the early days of the SCP, when the federal government issued a number of guidelines for implementation (DIFU, 2002, 2003a; ARGEBAU, 2005), documents on how to sustain projects after the withdrawal of funding were not issued until 2006 (Becker et  al, 2006b). From this point onwards, mainstreaming and anchoring have mainly been promoted as possible approaches for succession (Verstetigungstrategien). These two approaches have been introduced to the discussion among development practitioners in Germany through the reference to the Kvarterløft urban regeneration programme in Denmark, whose programme implementation used to be structured into three stages: the so-called neighbourhood planning, implementation and anchoring stages (Leonardsen et al, 2003; Cole and Etherington, 2005). Anchoring can be understood as: ‘finding or building sustainable institutional arrangements for the running and maintenance of innovative projects’ (ENTRUST, 2003: 12). Focusing on the neighbourhood level, a strategy for how to sustain the projects after the withdrawal of funding would therefore be needed. Mainstreaming had been seen as:‘taking innovative steps from experimental programmes and projects and generalising and rationalising them within long-term mainstream programmes’ (ENTRUST, 2003: 11). Being more focused on citywide processes, mainstreaming should promote an area-based orientation (Sozialraumorientierung) in local public-service provision and a local monitoring system in order to ensure that the need for local economic development in deprived urban areas becomes an overall priority of a city. These definitions have also 109

Regenerating deprived urban areas

been adapted by the SCP delivery bodies as well as practitioners and researchers in Germany (Guentner et al, 2005; DIFU, 2007; Aehnelt et al, 2008;Böhme et al, 2008). Whereas a discourse on possible succession strategies emerged, the actual practices in the SCP areas seemed to be unaffected by this. A status report published by the federal ministry in 2008 drew the conclusion that only around 30% of the SCP areas had addressed this issue by 2005 (Böhme et al, 2008). Difficulties were particularly seen in the provision of alternative funding to support the projects and the endowment funds. Since around half of the 56 SCP areas in the state of NRW had already joined the SCP by 1999/2000, NRW was one of the first states in Germany in which the withdrawal of SCP funding was announced. As official guidance for succession strategies had not been issued by the state ministry of NRW, it was up to the SCP delivery bodies to clarify how to sustain the implementation efforts of SCP measures after the withdrawal of SCP funding. Arguments promoted at conferences of practitioners in NRW favoured solutions in which local councils and housing associations would guarantee the succession of SCP processes and projects (Kamp-Murböck, 2006; Ruiz and Sauter, 2007; Duhem, 2009). Under the motto ‘The social city is a permanent task but without a permanent solution’ (Kamp-Murböck, 2006: 53), several reports from SCP delivery bodies suggested that organisational solutions should be formulated and guided by the councils in each city: ‘The objective is to make integrated urban (neighbourhood) development a continuing interdepartmental task for councils beyond the special funding programmes of the Federal/State Programme Social City’ (Sauter, 2009: 211). In Duisburg, a specific discussion on succession strategies for the SCP projects in Duisburg North has not taken place in the council. Ways to mainstream the implementation efforts of the SCP were seen as an objective of the EGDU. The continuing existence of this organisation has, in fact, been seen as a possible result of a mainstreaming process. An evaluation of the SCP implementation in NRW explicitly highlighted the EGDU as one exceptional example of how area-based policies for deprived urban areas can be mainstreamed in public-service administration: Most of the administrations see integrated neighbourhood development programmes as special temporary programmes, the development agency EGDU in Duisburg founded in 110

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

1999 is the only exception.… An alternative to a stronger area-based orientation in public administration are the development agencies, with which permanent, outsourced structures for the implementation of area-based development approaches can be created – beyond the administration but closely tied to it. (Aehnelt et al, 2008: 103) So, following this view, the existence of a development agency would not require further succession strategies. After the inter-ministerial taskforce of the state government decided in 2006 that older SCP areas in Duisburg, Marxloh and Bruckhausen would face gradual cuts in their funding in subsequent years, the EGDU started an internal discussion process on how to react to this challenge. As the EGDU was financially responsible for the provision of the area management offices in Bruckhausen and Marxloh, the discussion was focused on how to finance these positions in the future. As a result of these considerations, the EGDU decided to keep the area office in Bruckhausen and to close the area office in Marxloh (BMVBS, 2009b). Other considerations about how to sustain other projects funded by the SCP and implemented by one of the partner organisations have not been made. The fact that no succession strategies have been formulated does not mean that the SCP had no effects on the way in which public services are delivered in Duisburg. The following sections show that some activities of the SCP have actually been taken up by local-development actors even though overarching institutional pressures, such as the local budget crisis, have undermined their permanent manifestation.

Something useful, something convenient, something prohibitive: Social City Programme legacies in Duisburg “The federal programme [SCP] says something else than the practice of our budget law. There is an unsolved goal conflict.” (Project Officer, Intermediary)

This quote, taken from an interview, summarises concisely the way in which we can appraise the extent of the mainstreaming of SCP approaches in Duisburg. The major argument developed in the following sections is that the institutional capacity created through the SCP implementation has changed the way in which VSOs cooperate in the SCP areas and are being heard by more powerful development actors in Duisburg. The few existing SCP projects that deliver social 111

Regenerating deprived urban areas

services are undermined by an overarching transformation of the local planning system, which threatens the planning autonomy of the local state. Three distinctive forms of institutional change can be distinguished: continuing the SCP legacy through an institutionalisation of SCP activities; reconfiguring activities deriving from the SCP; and an incapacity to sustain SCP projects and activities. Continuing Social City Programme legacies: informing the planning process The adoption of the ‘intercultural urbanity’ guideline by the council, to be considered by all local departments, is one example of how elements of the SCP have been institutionalised. It was issued against the background of a long-term planning process started in 2007 called Duisburg 2027 (Stadt Duisburg, 2009d: 1). Even though this document does not refer explicitly to the SCP initiative implemented in Marxloh and Bruckhausen, a number of recognisable elements can be found. As the areas with the highest proportion of residents with a migrant background in Duisburg, it is not surprising that a considerable number of projects highlighted in the guidelines are based in the former SCP areas.The document draws particular attention to the relation between ‘the impulses of the intercultural urbanity’ (Stadt Duisburg, 2009d: 3) and the economic development of the city. Ethnic entrepreneurship has been discovered as a new policy field during the SCP implementation and is seen as ‘an integral part of intercultural societies and contribute therefore considerably to the economic stability and also to the development of neighbourhoods. This entrepreneurship builds on local, regional and supra-regional networks that unlock a competitive advantage’ (Stadt Duisburg, 2009d: 4). The guideline explicitly highlighted partnerships with VSOs and immigrant organisations as an important trigger to realise these potentials. A second reference to the SCP legacy in the document can be found in its attention to the ‘multifaceted building culture’ as a characteristic part of an intercultural urbanity (Stadt Duisburg, 2009d: 7). A diversity in architectural styles would therefore contribute to the attractiveness of public space in Duisburg and reflect the cultural diversity of the city while providing certain spaces of identification for its immigrant population (Stadt Duisburg, 2009c: 7). This reference to public space has to be seen in relation to the construction of the biggest mosque in Germany in 2007, the Merkez mosque in Marxloh (Ehrkamp, 2007). This construction project, mediated by the EGDU, has been 112

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

celebrated in press articles as the ‘miracle of Marxloh’ and promoted as one of the major SCP flagship projects of the EGDU (DITIB, 2008; EGDU, 2008b; Jenkner, 2008; Schmuelling, 2008). Significantly, there were no protests against this mosque during the construction, unlike in other cities in Germany (Hohmann, 2007; Beinhauer-Koehler and Leggewie, 2009). So, we see that none of these activities are bound to any financial obligations for the council. In addition, they do not bind development actors to any formal rules in the future. Rather, what was adopted by the council were the normative elements of the SCP that acknowledged a role for ethnic entrepreneurs as well as cultural and a variety of religious expressions and their physical manifestations in public space. Changing the raison d’être: using planning forums as a platform for public consultation Another example of institutionalisation of SCP projects can be seen in the continued use of area forums as permanent governance forums. Established by the EGDU for the SCP implementation and facing the withdrawal of the SCP, the way in which these forums are still used exemplifies the extent that their role has been acknowledged by development actors and local councillors in particular. According to the interviewees, area forums are considered to be “remarkably stable and well frequented” (Community Worker, VSO). Residents and VSOs attend these meetings in order to exchange information and coordinate on ongoing project activities in the areas. These forums in Marxloh and Bruckhausen are not only used by local residents, but other development actors, such as local councillors, also increasingly accept invitations from the forums. One of the reasons why area forums have become more accepted is that with the announced withdrawal of SCP funding, the role of the area committees gradually diminished, as a representative of a local VSO pointed out: “The important point is that political parties are now joining the roundtables.We regularly invite local councillors to discuss topical issues of the neighbourhood. The major difference is, however, that the area committee does not play such a leading role as it used to.” (Community Worker, VSO) So, with the devaluation of the area committees, which were bound to the management of the SCP implementation, area forums have

113

Regenerating deprived urban areas

received more attention from political actors as they unify the majority of VSOs, as a local councillor admitted: “At least one crucial effect [of the SCP] in Marxloh is obvious: someone, somewhere is taking notice of current political issues and of politicians, who carry the responsibility of political decisions. I think this is not too bad at all. I would say that with the area forum, we were able to achieve many more things than with the area committee.… You cannot only speak directly with immigrant organisations, the whole team of Marxloh is actually assembled there.” (Councillor, DCC) Another councillor confirmed this observation and suggested rationalising the current structure that was created by the SCP implementation: “Well, when there is no money left to distribute, the existence of an area committee doesn’t make sense any more. We should consider streamlining the structure, for example, by valorising the area forum, where you could discuss topical issues.The rest can be done by the council.” (Councillor, DCC) Even though previous sections noted that these forums had only a marginal influence on the strategic decisions over the SCP period, they still offer the only opportunity for exchange between VSOs in Duisburg North. Evidence suggests, therefore, that the more other agendas have been addressed in these forums and the more they dissociated themselves from processes primarily connected with the SCP implementation, the more VSOs valued the role of these forums. Thus, these forums, originally created by the SCP to consult local VSOs, are now used for different purposes, including the coordination of projects undertaken by VSOs. However, it has been expressed by local VSOs that these area forums would not be able to perform the same tasks as the area committees because of the different purposes and capacities of its members: “Most of the people who sat on the area committee are paid by their organisations. It’s their job more or less. Everyone who participates at the area forum is unpaid, it’s voluntary. The area forum could not manage the things that 114

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

the area committee used to do. This doesn’t work unless a committed and very young retired, ex-council worker can be found, who supports our interests and has a permanent income. How can you do this otherwise?” (Community Worker,VSO) This important issue expressed here – the discrepancy between the professional requirements for managing development projects and the capacity of VSOs – pinpoints the limitations of development approaches that seek to decentralise responsibilities to the third sector. It is not only the issue of time that has a strong implication for voluntary workers conducting planning roles; the professional experience has a decisive impact as well. As urban development in Duisburg has been conducted for years in strong accordance with administrative rules and procedures, actors without this specific knowledge are not likely to perform the same tasks. Losing the Social City Programme heritage: the local budget crisis A final illustration of what happened to activities deriving from the SCP in Duisburg includes the deinstitutionalisation of SCP projects. The closure of the area office in Marxloh and the questioning of noninvestment measures as voluntary government tasks further highlight the importance of state actors and their planning rationales for process of institutionalisation. With the withdrawal of the federal government funding for SCP activities, the EGDU planned the closure of the area office in Marxloh and the temporary retention of the office in Bruckhausen. No organisation, whether of the DCC or the third sector, both delivering comparable services, has agreed to take over the advisory services provided by these offices. For the local administration, this reluctance can be explained by the fact that area offices are seen as a competing service, as the head of the borough administration, to which the area of Marxloh belongs, summarised: “I’m not a friend of fragmentation, either of parallel societies or of parallel organisations such as the area offices. I say that the neighbourhood offices, if we take their role seriously, are borough administrations. These offices try to deliver what we used to provide.” (Head of Administration, DCC)

115

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Services such as those provided by area offices are usually provided by the borough administration in so-called citizens’ advice centres (Buergerbueros) for the whole borough. In order to streamline public services, these functions have, in turn, been increasingly transferred to departments of the DCC covering the whole city. So, the area offices deliver services that are needed but at a scale that is too small to be considered as a mainstream service. Given the fact that local welfare organisations have traditionally delivered personal social services on behalf of the DCC, the question arises as to why these organisations are also reluctant to take over services created by the SCP. According to a representative of a local welfare organisation based in Bruckhausen, this reluctance has to be seen in the context of the general budget cuts in Duisburg: “Youth work, for example, is now seen as a voluntary selfgovernment task.The Department of Youth is therefore under extreme pressure. At the moment, any new project proposals are rejected and the existing staff come under scrutiny” (Community Worker, VSO). The reference to youth work as a voluntary self-government task shows to what extent the financial crisis and rescaling of responsibilities for local investment decisions to the state level has already taken effect in Duisburg. Over the years, the DCC, along with other cities in NRW, has accumulated increasing debts due to the decline of its population, increase of unemployment and decrease of business tax (Junkernheinrich et al, 2007; IM NRW, 2009). The economic decline has therefore led to a situation in which over-indebtedness and the exhaustion of financial assets will be reached by 2012 (BezDU, 2008; Stadt Duisburg, 2009b). In cases in which a local government cannot pass a balanced annual budget, the state government and its subordinate local audit commission (kommunale Finanzaufsicht) is entitled to force local governments to formulate ways to reduce the budget deficit through submitting a proposal (Haushaltsicherungskonzept). If a local authority is not able or willing to meet this – since with the reduction of expenses comes a decisive reduction of services – the right for local autonomy will be diminished decisively, as the president of the government district of Duesseldorf, to which Duisburg belongs, announced in 2008: The threatening over-indebtedness of the city [of Duisburg] forces us to change direction.The city is virtually bankrupt and has now to drastically reduce its services and increase its revenues as a consequence so that the on-going consumption of its capital resources that leads to its overindebtedness is stopped. (BezDU, 2008) 116

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

Consequently, Duisburg is only entitled to finance and provide those services under the supervision of the local audit commission ‘to which they are legally bound to’ (GO NRW, 1994: 82). In practice, this means that a list of future expenses has to be submitted by the DCC to the state government, which decides in agreement with the regional council upon the spending priorities for the city. Spending priorities are, in turn, differentiated between expenses belonging to either mandatory or voluntary self-government tasks. However, this distinction is not legally differentiated. So far, mandatory self-government tasks are seen, for example, in the provision of urban land-use planning, waste and wastewater treatment, roads, and primary schools. Everything else can be seen as voluntary tasks, such as cultural amenities like museums and libraries, as well as leisure facilities such as sport grounds (Hoppe and Uechtritz, 2007). When it comes to social services, such as youth centres, a number of legal cases have been reported as to whether to allocate this to mandatory or voluntary local-government tasks (Burgi, 2010). All social services (non-investment measures) financed by the SCP fall effectively into this grey legal area of voluntary self-government tasks. In Duisburg, this overarching conflict regarding cutting expenses had a direct influence on the decision to sustain social services created by the SCP in both areas: “The federal programme [SCP] says something else than the practice of our budget law. There is an unsolved goal conflict. The programme wants to have this connection between investment and non-investment measures.… This core is undermined by the necessity to consolidate the budget.” (Project Officer, Intermediary) Even though Duisburg had already faced several waves of economic decline in recent decades, the different nature of the current budget crises was highlighted by all interviewees in Duisburg. As this budget crisis has led to a conflict about the planning sovereignty of the local government in NRW, fears of losing this core element of local autonomy have been expressed: “Everyone knows that the majority of councils [in NRW] are likely to run into total bankruptcy in the following years” (District Mayor, DCC). Given the fact that funding regimes, such as the SCP, usually require a considerable financial contribution of local authorities – 34% of the total investments in the SCP – it is also uncertain to what extent such localist experiments can be pursued in the future. As investment 117

Regenerating deprived urban areas

decisions are expected to be taken only with the consent of the state ministry, a de facto ‘golden leash’ (Goldene Zuegel) has been created. Thus, the state government of NRW not only administers funding made available through the EU or the federal government, but also interferes directly in investment decisions at the local level. This fact has, in turn, changed the relationship between local development actors in Duisburg and the state ministry of NRW to the extent that ‘good contacts’ are much more required than in the past to plan and implement urban policies in Duisburg: “Luckily, we do have a very good contact to the state ministries whether it is to the Ministry for Building and Traffic, the Ministry of the Environment or the Ministry of Trade and Commerce.This is also an effect of the 1990s, from the IBA period” (Head of Department, DCC) So, in sum, the reluctance of statutory agencies to sustain services created by the SCP stems from the incoherence of SCP areas with administrative service coverage, from the contradiction between SCP projects and ongoing administrative reforms, and, finally, from the financial crisis into which the whole planning system for public services in Duisburg has slid.

The Social City Programme in Duisburg: a fading legacy Reviewing the implementation of the SCP reveals the major role of the DCC and its intermediary, the EGDU, for the outcome of this initiative, but also as the major beneficiaries of the initiative. In fact, the SCP implementation has further strengthened the role and capacity of the EGDU as the main broker of the DCC to deal with ABIs in the city. However, outsourcing the delivery of the SCP to an agency did not mean detaching it from formal political processes.The whole SCP implementation and the EGDU was highly steered and controlled by local councillors and the formal political processes of the DCC. Knowledge resources being built during the SCP implementation were strongly aligned to the needs of the DCC and its planning bodies. The EGDU, as the traditional agency to deal with the implementation of urban policies and holder of institutional memories, generated everything that was needed to reach a consensus in the council and to promote a council decision on planning issues.

118

Local-government experiments to cope with structural change

The mobilisation capacity built up by the SCP in Duisburg enhanced the needs and processes of the DCC. Newly established forums have been used to generate a political consensus among councillors for SCP project proposals, upon which, however, the DCC itself eventually decided. The major steering body of SCP measures in Duisburg, the area committees, therefore served as a quasi-antechamber of the DCC – at least for minor investment decisions. Interests of non-state actors, such as residents and VSOs, were able to be expressed at so-called local area forums (forums for exchange, but with no decision-making power or management responsibilities for the SCP). Relational resources built during the SCP implementation show that inter-organisational relationships between council departments and its intermediary, the EGDU, have been much further developed than between the DCC and local VSOs. Even though reciprocal trust between the area offices of the EGDU and VSOs in the two SCP areas can be found,VSOs were generally seen as minor actors for the implementation of SCP measures in the areas.Against this background, a general cleavage can be noted between VSOs and the head office of the EGDU and particularly the borough administrations of the DCC, the closest government tiers to the SCP areas. Reacting to institutionalisation, we have seen that the outsourcing of the SCP implementation in Duisburg to an intermediary effectively absolved the council of responsibility for finding financial solutions for sustaining the services created by the SCP. Even though the DCC had a major influence on the implementation of the SCP in Duisburg, its reluctance to strategically address the issue of succession reveals the problematic feature of intermediary organisations in the provision and maintenance of public services, even when strongly serving the needs of the council.The accountability for SCP measures created in Duisburg had been safeguarded by the DCC but as soon as the funding was about to be withdrawn, the perceived responsibility effectively, though not explicitly, shifted from the DCC to the EGDU. We can therefore conclude that the SCP implementation has not led to a distinct formulation of a development strategy of the council for Marxloh and Bruckhausen or any other deprived urban areas in Duisburg. Despite the fact that some services deriving from the SCP are considered to be desirable, other institutional pressures do not allow projects created by the SCP to be pursued. Due to the financial crisis into which the DCC has slid, the council social services, including those created by the SCP, are being scrutinised. This not only signals the vulnerability of the SCP legacy, but also heralds another spatial reconfiguration of governing arrangements as the state government of 119

Regenerating deprived urban areas

NRW and its local audit commission gain more power in influencing local investment priorities. It can be concluded that the congruence of projects deriving from the SCP with administrative planning rationales, as well as reform processes, is a crucial factor for the extent of their institutionalisation. In this case, the budget crisis has shifted this power over the definition of ‘legitimate services’ from regular service providers of the DCC to the state government of NRW. Notes The Rhine–Ruhr Agglomeration is used in this study as a categorisation based upon the economic interrelationship between the cities deriving from their former steel and coal production. Administratively, North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) consists of a state (Laender) government, six sub-regional governments and councils (Arnsberg, Detmold, Düsseldorf, Köln oder Münster), which ensures the coherence of state policies implemented in its 379 local authorities. At the local level, the local authorities comprise the council, with its administrative departments, and several borough administrations (‘Bezirksverwaltungen’), with their districts (‘Ortsteile’). 1

This percentage includes people with a foreign nationality, people that became naturalised and people of German and another nationality.

2

Being created as a fully owned agency of the DCC, a change in the state government regulations for urban-renewal measures in 2008 made it necessary to find a new shareholder for at least 50% of the shares. As the new regulation stipulates that only those agencies not more than 50% owned by local councils are eligible for funding take-ups, the Civic Trust Duisburg bought into the organisation as a 50% shareholder (Stadt Duisburg, 2008b). 3

The creation of the greenbelt is envisaged to be finished in 2017 and foresees the demolition of around 300 apartment houses as well as the relocation of around 2,500 residents in the location near to the industrial sites in Duisburg North. The total cost of €71.9 million is shared by funds from the state and federal government as well as by the EU (EGDU, 2010a). 4

120

seven

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg: a cross-case comparison Having reviewed and analysed the forms of institutional change deriving from the implementation of two Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) in Bristol (England) and Duisburg (Germany), and having embedded these experiences in the overall socio-economic and political transformation of both cities, this chapter further pursues a distinct comparison. The following sections are therefore dedicated to compiling and contrasting evidence about the role of both ABIs in the overall reform of local public-service delivery and the way in which these policy initiatives have created and transformed institutional capacities.

The transformation of local state spaces The New Localism(s) observable in different localities in England and Germany are crystallised in recent central-government initiatives fostering a new way in which, in our case, ABIs are managed. The transformation of local state spaces has to be seen in the context of each locality in which these new policy initiatives were implemented.Thus, evaluating the impacts of these New Localism(s) in different localities requires critically interrogating the historical legacies of urban policies and local-development strategies for deprived urban areas in both cities. In both localities, several turning points in the transformation of local state spaces can be identified. In these phases, both central–local relationships and the relations between local authorities and non-state actors have been transformed. Reviewing the transformation processes in each case and comparing them reveals that the identified turning points introduced a phase during which organisational practices were gradually adapted to new institutional demands. In other words, these turning points can be considered as path-shaping incidents in which the local state, in particular, had a considerable influence on the outcome of these adoption processes. As Table 7.1 summarises, turning points and events can be identified in both cities that distinctly transformed their 121

Regenerating deprived urban areas Table 7.1: Turning points in the transformation of local state spaces in Bristol and Duisburg Turning points in the transformation of: Central–local relations

Relations between the local state and non-state actors

Bristol Bristol’s defeat in opposing Urban Development Corporation practice in the 1980s and losing two bidding rounds for the City Challenge in the mid-1990s

Duisburg Decline of the steel industry in the mid-1980s and the local financial crisis in the late 2000s Partnership models and development agencies introduced in the mid-1990s

state spaces, respectively, the relationships between the local authority and upper-government tiers as well as between the local state and non-state actors. The transformation of Bristol’s local state space has primarily been triggered by its conflictual relationship with the Conservative central government. After Bristol’s defeat in opposing the creation of an Urban Development Corporation (UDC) in Bristol by a re-elected Conservative central government and its failure to win two bids for the City Challenge programme, a considerable shift in local policies can be noted.The former aversion of the Bristol City Council (BCC) to public–private partnerships (PPPs) was replaced and a number of partnerships with Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs) and businesses were formed. Since then, ABIs, such as the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) and New Deal for Communities (NDC), are constant features in Bristol’s local economic development. The New Localism expressed in Bristol is therefore characterised by a strong search for national funding opportunities, a torn administration that does not trust either its political decision-making bodies or its partner agencies involved in the implementation of urban policies, and a number of intermediary organisations and delivery organisations created through various ABIs, such as the NDC, competing for funding and whose fate is uncertain. In Duisburg, two major events have been noted that transformed relationships with upper-government tiers, respectively the state and federal government. Due to the decline of the steel industry in the 1980s, funding schemes provided by upper-government tiers to cope with the socio-economic effects of this decline emerged as an attractive source of funding. By using a federal programme for job creation (ABM), Duisburg invented its own ABI as early as 1983. Subsequent funding schemes provided by ABIs, such as the Social City Programme 122

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg

(SCP), were used to consolidate Duisburg’s pre-existing ABIs. Until the late 2000s, the Duisburg City Council (DCC) was in a strong position to steer and formulate strategies for its local economic development. Due to an emerging local financial crisis, the state government is gaining more and more influence over local decisions. Duisburg’s relationships to non-state actors changed in the mid-1990s after the DCC created a number of PPPs and development agencies, which marked the end of the traditional local corporatism in Duisburg. So, the New Localism found in Duisburg is crystallised in the growing role in financial as well as planning terms of upper-government tiers, most notably the state government of North Rhine Westphalia (NRW), and a growing role of state-controlled intermediaries for the management of policy interventions. Even though the availability of funding deriving from uppergovernment tiers was clearly a trigger for the emergence of ABIs in both cities, both local authorities still had a considerable influence at the beginning of the NDC and SCP on how these policies were going to be implemented. In both cities, development agencies, such as the Bristol Regeneration Partnership (BRP) and the DCC development agencies in Bruckhausen and Marxloh, steered the design processes of the future delivery structure. So, the transformation process was moderated and, in the case of Duisburg, somewhat controlled by the local authority. However, despite these similarities, the cases show considerable differences when it comes to the extent of the influence of local authorities in these transformation processes. Four examples can be given to highlight these differences. First, the discovery of ABIs as a policy and funding stream differs considerably in both cases. Whereas the introduction of ABIs in Bristol can clearly be seen as a result of a top-down policy adoption attached to generous funding regimes, Duisburg invented its own ABI as a trigger to obtain federal funding schemes. The crucial difference in this bottom-up process lies in the fact that only a few conditions have been attached to the ABIs and, in particular, the SCP. Second, whereas the DCC made sure that every major decision, such as the delivery structure for the SCP, was based upon a council resolution, the BCC effectively outsourced the whole management of the funding and selection procedure to the BRP. It can be argued that the BCC handed over its sovereignty in driving this process to its development agency in an attempt to circumvent political conflicts. So, even though the BCC had an influence on the decisions at the founding moment, it chose not to engage because of fears of evoking 123

Regenerating deprived urban areas

further political conflicts in an unstable local council. The reluctance of the BCC to interfere in the founding moment of the NDC delivery structure and, in contrast, the strong position of the DCC in the decision-making bodies of the Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg (EGDU) is also reflected in the implementation process of both ABIs. Third, in both cases, guidelines produced by upper-government tiers for funding take-up for both ABIs were produced. In Bristol, these requirements, formulated by the Department for Environment, Transport and Regions (DETR), were much more precise on how the delivery structure at the local level should be built. Again, something new, something innovative, had to be created, if needed, by removing the ‘petty rules, regulations and bureaucracies that stand in their way’ (DETR, 1999: 7). In Duisburg, the SCP was instead merged into the pre-existing delivery structures of Duisburg’s own ABIs. In comparison, therefore, Duisburg enjoyed a greater degree of autonomy in this founding moment. This difference clearly corresponds to the constitutional framework in Germany already highlighted, which prevents the federal government from intervening in local affairs. These differences are also of particular importance for interpreting the institutionalisation process of elements deriving from the NDC and SCP. The extent of autonomy also contributed to a stronger continuity in local structures and policies. Against this background, the recent loss of planning powers due to the indebtedness of the local authority in Duisburg has to be considered as an outstanding turning point in Duisburg’s legacy of urban policies. Finally, in both cases, elements of partnership-working with nonstate actors have been proactively fostered. In Bristol, the enhanced cooperation with non-state actors is clearly seen in the context of the conflicts between the BCC and the Conservative central government. It can be argued that without adapting a new way of engaging with non-state actors, Bristol would have further jeopardised the prospective funding provided by the SRB and NDC rounds. So, elements of a coercive isomorphism in adapting new practices can be noted. In Duisburg, the increased promotion and establishment of partnership approaches in the city’s legacy of urban policies after the steel crisis was rather driven by the DCC’s attempt to mimic some of the state-promoted flagship projects. The state government also promoted new methods of public management, but it did not enforce their establishment. So, in this case, we can note a rather mimetic isomorphism. Again, these different ways of institutionalisation can also be traced back to the stronger legal and financial autonomy that Duisburg used to have in comparison with Bristol. 124

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg

Generally, we can note that the New Localism(s) have some remarkable similarities.Turning points in these transformation processes effectively allowed local authorities to actively engage with the creation of a new set of institutions and organisational practices. However, the capacities and willingness to do so in different localities influenced the outcomes of this institutional change. It can be concluded that the local autonomy in the German case has led to greater influence and representation of the local authority in the design of the ABI implementation. So, the degree of local autonomy and the political willingness to actively engage in transformation processes can be seen as decisive factors for the differences of the New Localism(s) in both localities.

Area-Based Initiatives in comparison: same objectives in different regulatory frameworks The review of the implementation processes has revealed some profound differences between both ABIs. A first basic difference is the fact that ABIs in Germany ‘trickled up’ the government tiers from the local via the state to the federal-government level, whereas ABIs in England belonged to the traditional repertoire of central governments from the late 1960s. This simple fact has, in turn, some profound implications at the local level. The review of SCP experiences in Duisburg has shown that the SCP was fully integrated in pre-existing implementation structures and development approaches. Even though Bristol had also participated in a number of nationally initiated ABIs, the NDC asked for, and was implemented through, the establishment of new delivery structures. So, whereas it was possible to find a strong continuity of development structures and approaches in Duisburg, a repeating pattern of project-bound delivery structures and activities as well as short-lived development interventions were dominant in Bristol. Another difference can be seen in their scope of interventions. Despite their claim of being multi-sectoral initiatives, the NDC funded broader activities than the SCP, which became stuck in traditional bricks-and-mortar approaches. At least two explanations can be given for this deep-seated difference. First, the NDC was not formulated under a straightjacket of earmarked funding, as was the SCP, where the traditional federal Ministry for Construction,Transport and Urban Development Department managed the programme and provided funding for investments in the built environment. Consequently, the NDC enabled a broader range of activities to be implemented in Bristol. Second, the amount of funding available for NDC activities 125

Regenerating deprived urban areas

(£2 billion for 19 neighbourhoods) was considerably higher than for SCP areas (€2.3 billion for around 400 neighbourhoods). Overall, both ABIs offered local development actors a window of opportunity to address multiple issues of urban deprivation in an extraordinary way, beyond the usual planning repertoire and policy choices of local authorities. However, as the next section demonstrates, because of the perception of ABIs as special initiatives beyond the regular planning and delivery of mainstream services, most of the services provided by ABIs turned out to be somewhat short-lived.

The transformation of local institutional capacities The cases presented in this study have demonstrated how institutional capacities have been transformed through the implementation of ABIs. By exploring the micro-social processes in relation to these transformative tasks, it was shown how perceptions about development priorities and solutions have been shared, formal and informal rules of behaviour have been established, power over development processes has been exerted, and inter-organisational trust has been built. Table 7.2 summarises the evidence presented in both cases. Comparing the way in which knowledge resources have been generated in both partnerships leaves us with the following observation. In both cities, the main delivery agencies for the ABIs were the main producers and distributors of information. The main differences, though, are the recipients of these knowledge-generating activities. In the case of Bristol, the reporting and monitoring regime, which was set up by central government and supervised by the Government Office for the South West (GOSW), created an almost exclusive circle of communication between Community at Heart (CaH), its partnership board, the BCC Corporate Finance department and the GOSW. In Duisburg, the DCC was the main recipient of all knowledgegenerating activities. Most of the information had to be translated into the administrative as well as political processes of the council. The ‘translation’ of these processes was undertaken by the EGDU, which was seen as the main holder of institutional memories for this particular policy field in Duisburg. Comparing both processes, it can be concluded that the extent to which knowledge was generated and shared was heavily influenced by the regulatory framework within which the main delivery agency and funding regime were embedded. Whereas in England the NDC delivery agency had considerable autonomy in engaging in different policy areas due to its juridical status as well as the availability of non126

Opportunity structure • CaH’s partnership board as the main and the ‘rules of arena for participation as well as engagement’ decision-making body • Residents were elected and local VSOs were free to join • Most influential organisations: Power and influence Government Office of the South West over design and and CaH implementation • Minor influence of VSOs Trust between state • CaH as a trustworthy partner for a actors and their number of statutory agencies intermediaries • Low level of trust between BCC departments Trust between the • Low level of trust between BCC and state and VSOs VSOs • CaH as a buffer between BCC and VSOs Trust among VSOs Mistrust between major VSOs (CaH and BHS)

Mobilisation capacity

• Low level of trust between DCC and VSOs • EGDU’s area offices as mediator between VSOs and the DCC • High level of trust between housing companies and the DCC, the main political parties (SPD and CDU) and the EGDU head office • Consolidation of pre-existing organisations as well as further differentiation of the organisational landscape • Increased collaboration between well-established but less collaboration between new (Turkish) organisations

• EGDU seen by all council departments as a trustworthy partner • High level of trust between DCC departments

• Most influential organisations: Ministry for Building and Traffic of North Rhine Westphalia and EGDU • Minor influence of VSOs

• DCC as the main beneficiary of knowledge-generating activities • EGDU as holder of institutional memories for neighbourhood regeneration • Area committees as an antechamber of the DCC to decide upon SCP projects • Local area forums as arenas for participation but without any influence on funding decisions

Duisburg

Notes: CaH – Community at Heart; DCC – Duisburg City Council; EGDU – Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg; VSOs – Voluntary Sector Organisations; SCP – Social City Programme; BCC – Bristol City Council; BHS - Barton Hill Settlement; SPD – Social Democratic Party; CDU – Christian Democratic Union.

Relational resources

Knowledge-generating CaH as the gatekeeper of information activities and knowledge

Bristol

Knowledge resources

Institutional capacity

Table 7.2: Assessing the transformation of institutional capacities in both case studies

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg

127

Regenerating deprived urban areas

earmarked NDC funding, the SCP implementation was strictly bound to the formal divisions of labour in public administration, both between sectoral departments as well as between tiers of government. Considering the mobilisation capacities, particularly the rules of engagement for implementing both ABIs, the following can be noted. In Bristol, engaging with NDC implementation was strongly influenced by rules formulated by central government for the delivery of the NDC. It can be acknowledged that, in contrast with the Duisburg case, decisions on the priorities of spending in Bristol have been taken by elected residents of the NDC partnership board. However, the forces of isomorphism for residents and VSOs to join this decision-making body evolved as barriers. Decisions in the SCP in Duisburg depended heavily on the formal political processes of the DCC. In other words, nothing could be done without the consent of, or even going against, the wishes of the DCC. Local VSOs and residents had only minor influence on the delivery of the initiative. So, whereas the NDC implementation in Bristol built up mobilisation capacity according to the requirements of central government, the SCP served as a vehicle for the council to build a consensus among local parties for regeneration issues in Duisburg North. It can therefore be concluded for both cases that rules formulated by state administrations strongly influenced the ways in which non-state actors could participate in the implementation. The crucial difference, however, is that the SCP implementation in Duisburg strengthened the mobilisation capacity of the local council, whereas the NDC implementation in Bristol enhanced the capacity of the local intermediary, CaH – at least for the time of the NDC implementation. Reviewing the extent to which relational resources have been generated in both case studies reveals at least four interesting similarities. First, in both cases, the inter-organisational network analysis has shown that upper state-government tiers, the GOSW and the State Ministry of North Rhine Westphalia (MBVNRW), were seen as the most influential organisations for the design and implementation of the initiatives.The delivery agencies, CaH, and the EGDU, are also seen as being very influential. Considering the financial regimes and delivery mechanisms in both cases, both initiatives were paid for by upper-government tiers and, in both cases, new intermediaries were created to implement the programmes; this commonality is not surprising. However, a more unexpected commonality can be seen in the fact that, in both cases, other local VSOs were seen as actors with a minor influence on the design and implementation.

128

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg

The creation of a new intermediary structure in Bristol, run by local residents, did not lead to a further empowerment of local VSOs, however. Considering the somewhat limited function of area forums for the SCP implementation in Duisburg, the minor influence of VSOs is, in contrast, not unexpected. It can therefore be concluded that ABIs, as implemented in both case studies, have not led to an increased influence of non-state actors, in particular, VSOs, but have rather consolidated the influence of state authorities: the central government in the NDC and the local as well as regional government in the SCP. Second, CaH and the EGDU are both seen as trustworthy partners by a considerable number of statutory agencies in Bristol and by all council departments in Duisburg. However, the level of trust between departments of local councils differs considerably. Whereas BCC departments involved in the NDC implementation would not approach each other, a dense network of trust between local departments in Duisburg was found. The evidence suggests that with the EGDU as a trustworthy mediator, council departments in Duisburg recognised the necessity of collaboration for the acquisition of new funding regimes. We can therefore conclude that ABIs, as implemented in both case studies, have enhanced the relational resources between state actors and their intermediaries. Third, in both cases, local council departments are less inclined to approach VSOs. In Bristol, CaH was described as a ‘buffer’ between the council and local residents, absorbing requests. Even though the EGDU’s area offices served as a trustworthy partner for local VSOs and residents, the most direct tier of the DCC to the neighbourhoods (the borough administrations) does not approach VSOs in the SCP area. Therefore ABIs, as implemented in both case studies, have not built up relational resources between state actors and local VSOs. Finally, it is striking to see that VSOs working in the NDC area would not approach each other for the discussion of new ideas. Interviewees bemoaned an exhausting process of collaboration and the creation of another competitor in the area, CaH. The inter-organisational trust between VSOs in the Duisburg case can be considered as ambivalent. According to the interviewees, a number of new VSOs have been created and supported through various financial schemes facilitated by the EGDU, which use the local area forums to exchange ideas and develop and coordinate small-scale measures in the area. However, the increase of VSOs has led to a competitive organisational environment. Thus, the ABIs, as implemented in both case studies, have led to an increased competitive environment for VSOs.

129

Regenerating deprived urban areas

So, overall, we see that, in Bristol, the implementation of an ABI has led to the strengthening of a new organisation without interference from the local council but influenced by rules set up by central government. The ABI in Duisburg has further strengthened the role and capacity of the EGDU as the main broker of the DCC to deal with ABIs in the city. However, in contrast to the Bristol case, outsourcing the delivery of the SCP to an agency did not mean detaching it from formal political processes. The whole SCP implementation and the EGDU was highly steered and controlled by local councillors and the formal political processes of the DCC.

Institutional change: processes of (de)institutionalisation Combining and comparing evidence from the two cases allows us to formulate some distinct similarities and differences between the two cases. In both cases, strategies for mainstreaming services created by the ABIs were not addressed until the intermediaries were facing the withdrawal of funding in response to requests from upper-government tiers. In Bristol, CaH formulated a strategy to save its own organisation in Barton Hill and the EGDU focused its attention on another new SCP area in Duisburg. Neither implementation process, therefore, has led to the formulation or adoption of a distinct development strategy for the target areas or for deprived urban areas in both cities. Again, the outsourcing of responsibilities to non-state actors – one of the core elements of the New Localism(s) – can be seen as an experiment to identify to what extent alternative delivery mechanisms for public services can be found. However, both case studies have illustrated the clear limitations of these experiments, particularly when it comes to the long-term provision of public services by non-state actors. As these organisations rely on short-term funding regimes, they are not able to commit to sustaining projects, particularly social services. Decentralising the creation of public services from statutory agencies to intermediary organisations might effectively dissolve the responsibility to maintain these created services in the long term. In other words, we can conclude that attempts to create new public services in deprived urban areas to overcome socio-economic challenges are highly constrained by the very means of delivering them, and, therefore, by outsourcing state responsibilities to intermediary organisations. The New Localism(s) studied here show us that more formalised planning frameworks and corresponding governance arrangements may be required to support the development of a stronger 130

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg

strategic framework for creating and sustaining additional public services in deprived urban areas. Taking this view, strategic planning is still ‘a necessary activity, managing short- and long-term change in our economic system, preventing system breakdown and managing conflicts that arise. It has potential for redistributing resources, and for becoming a democratic arena for decision making over resource allocation’ (Rydin, 1993: 375). What is different in these succession strategies, however, is the consolidation of inter-organisational relationships.Whereas the EGDU consolidated its role as the major development actor for future urban regeneration projects in Duisburg, CaH was transformed into a neighbourhood management office but found itself in competition with other VSOs and new partnerships being set up by the council, such as the neighbourhood regeneration partnership. The spatial attachment of the organisations and the acknowledgement of their role by more powerful development actors in both cities can be seen as the major reasons for this difference.Whereas the successor organisation of CaH evolved as a development actor still working in the former NDC areas, thus expanding it to two wards (Easton and Lawrence Hill), the EGDU consolidated its role as a citywide regeneration agency.This, in turn, had major implications for the way in which more powerful development actors, such as statutory agencies, acknowledged the organisations.The EGDU is seen as a service agency providing institutional alternatives to formal administrative processes, allowing local departments to conduct flexible short-term projects across the city. However, apart from its role in administering the resources accumulated during the NDC implementation, the purpose and function of CaH’s successor organisation is not clarified. Consequently, a continuity of interorganisational cooperation between the local state and its intermediary in Duisburg is much more warranted than in Bristol. More generally, we can acknowledge that the ABI implementations in both cases have transformed institutional capacities of local development actors to respond to development challenges in the target areas. But these observable changes in the scope of inter-organisational cooperation, activation of local residents and creation of new public services in the target areas are, in turn, extremely vulnerable to the policy initiatives and decisions of more powerful development actors, such as local statutory agencies in Bristol and the DCC and the state government of NRW in Duisburg.This vulnerability is clearly reflected in each of the patterns of institutionalisation that have been identified in both cases.

131

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Reviewing and comparing the way in which institutional capacities have been transformed through the (de)institutionalisation of certain activities funded by the ABIs in Bristol and Duisburg leaves us with some remarkable similarities and differences, as depicted in Table 7.3. When it comes to activities funded by the ABIs that have been fully adopted, we see that only norms – or what could be termed ‘soft policies’ that do not bind any actors and/or redistribute any financial resources – have been institutionalised in both cases.1 Both the Race Equality and Community Cohesion Action Plan (RECAPP) principles in Bristol and the ‘intercultural urbanity’ guideline in Duisburg filled a policy gap  in both cities, particularly for services for new target groups, such as new immigrants. It was, however, up to the decisions of the councils either to take up these solutions delivered by their intermediaries or discard them. The non-binding character of these activities clearly shows us the limited impact of these initiatives on actual public-service delivery. In fact, these guidelines can be seen as lowcost solutions for regular service providers to respond to new servicedelivery gaps in public services.The ABIs have therefore provided fields for policy experimentation through which new solutions can clearly emerge, but they did not lead to a considerable expansion of publicservice delivery for either deprived urban areas or for households in need. Again, ABIs may contribute to the identification of needs and first experiences of new solutions but the non-binding character of the scope of institutionalisation suggests that their impacts on public-service provision in deprived urban areas are rather short-lived or strongly depend on the goodwill of mainstream service providers. Even though it can be argued that the outsourcing of management responsibilities to intermediary organisations has broadened the identification of issues to be tackled and solutions to be implemented to a certain degree, it was also shown that it has limited the commitment to the long-term financing of the created services. Since an outsourcing of service-delivery mechanisms from the local state to non-state actors has, in these cases, entailed outsourcing financial responsibilities, the majority of projects now rely on short-term funding regimes predominantly provided by upper-government tiers.With the further tightening of funding regimes due to the financial crisis, it seems very unlikely that these services, particularly in Duisburg, will be treated as equal to the mandatory services delivered by the local state. However, above all other processes of institutionalisation, the role of state agencies is clearly reflected in the way in which, in both cases, activities have been reconfigured, rejected or neglected by regular public-service providers and/or local state actors. As soon as activities 132

The crystallisation of New Localism(s) in Bristol and Duisburg Table 7.3: Patterns of (de)institutionalisation of Area-Based Initiative activities in Bristol and Duisburg

Bristol

Duisburg

Patterns of institutional change Adoption

Activities allocated to the dimensions of institutional capacity Knowledge Relational Mobilisation resource resources capacity Adopting RECCAP as a citywide – model for collaboration

Selection

PCT funds certain posts at the Wellspring Healthy Living Centre

Bypassing

Planning legacies of the NDC are not included in the development of LDF or LAAs Adoption of a guideline – ‘intercultural urbanity’

Adoption Conversion

–

Undermining

Neighbourhood management model and area offices inconsistent with local administrative reforms Recentralisation of planning power due to local budget crisis

Local area forums sustained for different purposes

Notes: RECCAP – Race Equality and Community Cohesion Action Plan; PCT – Primary Care Trust; NDC – New Deal for Communities; LDF – Local Development Framework; LAAs – Local Area Agreements.

are incompatible with the rules of regular public-service bodies, they tend to dissolve and disappear. For the Duisburg case, we can therefore reconfirm our former conclusions that political-administrative actors tend to control the agenda-setting and management process in the context of neighbourhood regeneration (Turok et al, 1998). The SCP served as a supporting initiative for the citywide marketing strategy promoting a vague but strongly desired ‘structural change’ in order to uncouple NRW from its industrial past. Despite the highly fragmented nature of urban-governance processes in Bristol, it became clear that statutory agencies influence considerably the extent to which new services are sustained after the withdrawal of NDC funding. CaH enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy during the NDC implementation, but it was shown that this autonomy was only shortlived. So, the projects of these ABIs turned out to be highly susceptible to interventions of state actors, whether from the local council or statutory agencies in Bristol or the state government in NRW. 133

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Apart from these similarities, which essentially show that state actors still remain powerful and extremely important actors in these governance experiments, we were also able to discover a major difference between both cases, notably, the extent to which mobilisation capacities and relational resources have been sustained. In contrast to the Bristol case, the area forums established in Duisburg to consult local VSOs and residents are still recognised and used as forums for coordination. A major reason for their institutionalisation can be seen in their functional transformation as their major purpose shifted from consultation bodies of the SCP implementation to independent forums for local VSOs. It can be argued that a continuous activation of citizens does not necessarily involve the allocation of management responsibilities for the implementation of public policies or provision of public services. The evidence of the local area forum in Marxloh rather suggests the contrary. This is because area forums in Duisburg have not had to face such isomorphic pressures as the CaH partnership board in Bristol; it found another, more intrinsic, purpose.The way in which this forum transformed can be seen as an illustrative example of an institutional conversion process. The function of this forum has been gradually redirected from a consultation body of the SCP to new goals, functions and purposes (Mahoney and Thelen, 2010b). Note This term is based upon Nye’s conceptualisation of soft power, which describes ‘the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments’ (Nye, 2004: 256). P.M. Jones (2009) transformed this label into soft policies in order to describe policies that try to influence perceptions, values and personal goals without creating compulsory requirements.

1

134

eight

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s) as an analytical window for comparative urbanism: concluding reflections The overall aim of this study was to assess the impacts of Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) on local-development strategies and processes for deprived areas in Bristol in England and Duisburg in Germany. The evidence presented in the previous chapters suggests that the local council in Duisburg and the intermediary organisation in Bristol primarily benefited from the implementation process of ABIs. In both cases, only those activities deriving from these initiatives that did not bind, in particular, regular service providers to any formal rules have been mainstreamed. Overall, it has become clear that the more projects are detached from the planning rationales of regular public-service providers, the more vulnerable they are to closures after the withdrawal of funding. However, evidence suggests that arenas for interaction and participation are more likely to survive when they are not bound by day-to-day management procedures of delivery organisations. The transformation of institutional capacities deriving from the implementation of both ABIs in Bristol and Duisburg was analysed and compared. It was revealed that ABIs, as implemented in both case studies, have not led to an increased influence of non-state actors, in particular, Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs); rather, they have consolidated the influence of state organisations, respectively, the central government in the New Deal for Communities (NDC) and the local and regional government in the Social City Programme (SCP). The previous chapters also evaluated the extent to which activities funded by the ABIs have been mainstreamed in regular public-service delivery in Bristol and Duisburg. It was shown that activities were more likely to endure when they were oriented to the system of regular public-service delivery. However, only norms or ‘soft policies’ have been fully adopted and thus institutionalised. Other created services, particularly social services, however, are likely to cease because of the financial considerations of regular public-service providers or wider institutional pressures to reform public administration. 135

Regenerating deprived urban areas

In the following section, I clarify the value of neo-institutional frameworks for studying institutional change, their insight for the future refinement of state theories, the implications for implementation evaluation research and the prospects of ABIs in a time of financial austerity.

The value of neo-institutional frameworks for the study of contrasting pressures for institutional change One of the major contributions of the presented juxtaposition of experiences in Bristol and Duisburg for the study of institutional change, particularly in the context of the New Localism(s), is to reveal the variety of institutional factors that influenced the transformation of institutional capacities, as well as the institutional pressures that collided at the local level and led to the transformation of local state spaces. Factors that influenced the creation of institutional capacities in the implementation of these ABIs at the local level encompassed: • • • •

Constitutional rules on the scope of local autonomy; Financial incentives from upper-government tiers; Availability of local institutional scripts; Congruence of ideas and practices with planning rationales of local public-service providers; • Political willingness of the councils to actively engage in transformation processes; • Engagement and expectations of civil society groups, such as residents and VSOs; and • Engagement and expectations of businesses in public-service provision, for example, in the housing sector and so on. Apart from these factors, a number of contemporary institutional pressures at the local level were identified, such as: • Neo-liberal reform pressures in public administration based upon New Public Management (NPM) principles; • Austerity measures and local budget cuts in relation to the financial crisis; • Increased competition for funding in the third sector; • Social change, as, for example, through changing demographics; • Changing political majorities; and

136

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s)

• Investment or disinvestment decisions in the housing sector and so on. The complex variety of institutional factors and pressures on local state spaces was only possible to determine through the application of a neo-institutionalist approach. We understand the stability of new forms of urban governance much better when we consider the specificity of local institutional pressures deriving, for example, from the availability of local scripts, their congruence with ideas and practices of local public-service providers, and expectations of public and private actors. It was shown that these new urban governance arrangements were influenced by forces to correspond with practices from their organisational environment (sociological view) as well as by adopted local scripts that suggested a set of practices and solutions on ‘how to do/solve things’ (historical view). A third contribution of this research is to build a case for a ‘robust comparative methodology that can cope with the diversity of urban experiences in the world of cities’ (Robinson, 2011: 4). A neoinstitutional framework that focuses on the analysis of institutional contexts is very sensitive to the geographical context and the time in which these policy initiatives emerged and were embedded. So, being sensitive to the different circumstances, exploring the source of these differences through neo-institutional theory also helps to further develop methodologies for a comparative urbanism (Robinson, 2004; Nijman, 2007; McFarlane, 2010). The comparison of both cases has also shaped our understanding of how ideas and practices, such as understandings of NPM practices, concepts of mainstreaming and so on, circulate across countries and professions and how they find expressions in the reality of local contexts. The evidence of this research – that neo-liberal ideas, such as the attempt to increase the role of non-state actors in public-service delivery, are indeed fast-travelling and highly adaptive to each locality, but are eventually just one of many institutional pressures – hints towards the need for a further refinement of state theories, as argued in the next section.

Comparing New Localism(s) across Europe This cross-national comparison has demonstrated that neo-liberal ideas promulgated through NPM principles have indeed found their way onto the reform agendas in both countries. Against the background of looming austerity measures announced in both countries as a response to the financial crises, an increase in these institutional pressures deriving 137

Regenerating deprived urban areas

from upper-government levels is likely. On this basis, it seems accurate at first sight to confirm the dominant claim of state theories that these New Localism(s) can be seen as an outcome of (central) neo-liberal statecraft (Brenner and Theodore, 2002b; Peck and Tickell, 2002). We might argue that the implementation of both initiatives has clearly led to a further bureaucratisation of intermediary organisations and attempts to harmonise third-sector organisations to rules, objectives and procedures of the state, both central government in England and state governments in Germany. Moreover, the financial crisis in Duisburg and the fragmented governance arena in Bristol have effectively led to a reliance of local-development actors on upper-government tiers for financing local-development projects. In both cases, golden leashes have been established as local-development priorities become much more reliant on upper-government tiers. Even though the coordinated approach between regional, national and local levels in Germany has been praised as an advantage for ‘finding effective policy solutions to the problems of deprived communities’ (Weck, 2009: 533), the local financial crisis eventually undermined this task-sharing and these relationships. This evidence might also support claims that these New Localism(s) are a new form of centralism (Lowndes, 2003) and/or the ‘cousin[s] of the centralist approach’ (Powell, 2004: 29). With their focus on promoting particular ideas and principles for local governance, we can also acknowledge a neo-liberalisation of governance practices at the local level promoted by upper-government tiers (Brenner and Theodore, 2002b). However, at least three considerations suggest that the New Localism(s) studied are not simply an outcome of a monolithic neoliberalisation across Europe. First, NPM principles, such as the increased involvement of non-state actors in the planning and delivery of public services, have been interpreted differently across countries and implemented differently in the localities. In England, these principles were transformed into management practices to monitor and steer the policy implementation at the neighbourhood level. In Germany, claims to increase the efficiency of administration were combined and absorbed into discourses on civic community. However, both case studies have shown the limited scope of these diffusion processes. The strategy of decoupling and the incapacity to adapt these practices ‘to run like a business’ show the limited extent to which VSOs were ‘economised’ (Clarke, 2008). Against this background, we do have to acknowledge interpretations that see neo-liberal outcomes as

138

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s)

exceptions to other local outcomes and dominant systems of economic and political regulation (Ong, 2006). Second, I have also pointed to the variety of contemporary institutional pressures for the transformation of local state spaces. This variety of pressures and the differences between the actual forces exerted in different localities suggests a more complex institutional crystallisation than a uniform neo-liberal outcome. It is against this background that this study agrees with attempts to perceive these New Localist expressions not as a single, deterministic outcome of neo-liberal statecraft, but as the outcome of more complex processes, which are also influenced by ‘local desires and capabilities’ (Clarke, 2009: 501). The attractiveness of this approach lies in the study of the dynamics, forms and outcomes of the competing institutional pressures at the local level: Tensions and contradictions between a national policy dynamic which seeks to encourage locally contingent solutions to be developed for localised problems, and the centralising tendencies of the national state which result in ‘blueprints’ and ‘models’ being developed for local policy delivery and a requirement to meet centrally derived targets. (Coaffee and Headlam, 2008: 1586) Neo-liberal ideas, such as those enshrined in NPM principles or those adopted in the design of urban policies, are indeed powerful, but they are not the only institutional pressures leading to a transformation of local state spaces. In these transformative processes, different institutional pressures collide and are combined or reconfigured by different actors at a certain points in time. In order to stress the diversity of institutional contexts that influence this outcome, we could rather speak of spaces of assemblages than of neo-liberalisms (Allen and Cochrane, 2007; Ong, 2007; McFarlane, 2009). Studying the expressions and outcomes of the New Localism(s) therefore includes addressing the interplay of different institutional pressures and the spatial contingency of its forces. However, arguing for a contingent view of the outcome of these New Localism(s) does not exclude the increased concern about, and observation of, converging tendencies. A neo-liberal idea is still fast-travelling (Peck, 2002; Peck and Tickell, 2002): ‘Because it is heteroglossic and multiple. It always has something to offer and that something promises to be universal, modern, and efficient. It has also been successful at colonizing the transnational networks of transmission and translation’ (Clarke, 2008: 142). 139

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Ideas, particularly those circulated through European City Networks, offer a set of allegedly ‘easy’ solutions to complex problems, such as outsourcing state functions to VSOs to reduce government spending and increase social capital in deprived urban areas. But these are still subject to local interpretation and have to stand the test of time to survive in these institutional assemblages characterised by ambivalent, multiple institutional pressures as well as overlapping and intersecting processes and events (Massey, 2005). Third, evidence from both case studies hints towards the considerable role that local formal politics and democratic electoral processes played, not only for the outcomes of the ABIs under study, but also as buffers and ‘substantial impediments to the achievement of neo-liberal goals’ (Johnston and Glasmeier, 2007: 14). Even though both cases differ considerably in the extent of engagement of local politics during the implementation processes of both initiatives – to the extent that BCC influence was less marked than the DCC’s, which steered the SCP implementation – even the Bristol case showed the potential role of the BCC to steer the design processes and its decisive and powerful position to decide upon the fate of projects after the withdrawal of NDC funding. In sum, assuming that these roles are primarily responses to processes of neo-liberalisation contributes to the ‘failure to think through how distinctive forms of contemporary democratic politics shape pathways of economic development and capital accumulation’ (Barnett, 2010: 277). To repeat what has already been concluded in previous chapters, the turning points identified in the legacy of urban policies and transformation of local state spaces in both cities can be considered as path-shaping incidents in which the local state and its actors, in particular, have had a considerable influence on the outcome of these transformative processes.

Methodological reflections for implementation of evaluation research This study has demonstrated that in order to uncover the complexities of local institutional contexts and the pressures on current governance arrangements, considerable attention has to be paid to the context in which these cases are situated. In this respect, the Institutional Capacity Building Framework (ICBF) used in this study offers a promising way to pursue future implementation evaluation research (Healey et  al, 2003). A study design encompassing in-depth case studies proved to be extraordinarily useful for this research endeavour. Its combination 140

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s)

with more quantitative-oriented methods, such as Social Network Analysis (SNA), as applied for the organisational survey, invites further investigations into the possibilities of adopting a mixed-methods approach to network analysis. Combining these methods ‘can enable researchers to explore the structure (or form) of networks from an “outsider’s” view, and the content and processes of networks from an “insider’s” view’ (Edwards, 2010: 2). It contributes to the search for methodological frameworks that achieve fuller accounts of social networks, highlighting their ambivalent situations, complexities and contingent natures (Emmel, 2009). However, without embedding SNA data within the context of the governance processes, and without acknowledging and interpreting the reflections of the interviewee in simplifying his/her social relations into dichotomous traits of absent or present ties, this single approach exerts somewhat limited explanatory and interpretive power (Crossley, 2009). Retracing the implementation process of such initiatives can therefore be seen as an indispensable way of generating knowledge about ‘what happened’ during these policy initiatives and allows us to generate ‘the type of context-dependent knowledge that research on learning shows to be necessary to allow people to develop from rule-based beginners to virtuoso experts’ (Flyvbjerg, 2006: 221). Attempts at contemporary policy evaluations that avoid this detailed analysis, for example by using and comparing key performance indicators mandated by central government (Fordham et al, 2010, Batty et al, 2010), fail to reveal how institutional capacities are being built, who benefited from them and to what extent projects are being sustained. However, having reviewed contemporary evaluations of these initiatives, they clearly show the danger of having ‘soft’ evaluation criteria instead of ‘harder’ impact indicators, particularly when evaluations are designed to inform the implementation process of policy initiatives. The way in which both initiatives in the case study areas have been subject to evaluation reveals the importance of these studies for the course of implementation. Targeted at deprived urban areas, it raises the question as to whether, and to what extent, initiatives such as the SCP contribute ‘to improve local living conditions and erect ideally self-supporting structures’ (Becker et al, 2002: 9). But the SCP did not establish ‘hard’ indicators against which the initiative could be evaluated. For example, investigations into the influence of the initiative on the employment rate in the target areas have not taken place in Duisburg, as was done by the NDC (Noble et al, 2005). Evaluation studies of the initiatives conducted in Duisburg focused rather on ‘soft’ assessment criteria, such 141

Regenerating deprived urban areas

as the level of public participation in newly established governance forums and a description of services being created (Smith, I., 2005; Kloth, 2006a, 2006b). It can be argued that a more flexible set of objectives against which an impact assessment can be applied may allow more room for manoeuvre for delivery bodies, in particular for complex solutions that need to be first identified by a variety of organisations and actors. Additionally, in Duisburg, small-scale monitoring has only recently been established, which might have impeded adequate data collection. We also have to consider whether the existence of a ‘hard’ indicator set would not have generally tightened monitoring regimes and aggravated the forces of isomorphism for local VSOs, as in the Bristol case. But the lack of socio-economic objectives, such as the reduction of the unemployment rate in Duisburg, effectively decoupled unemployment as one of the major drivers of socio-economic deprivation. A number of projects have created supporting services, such as personal counselling or skills training, but these were not the major ‘flagship projects’ of the initiative. In fact, the majority of investment was spent on the built environment (see Appendix VI). It can therefore be argued that the use of socio-economic objectives, such as the number of residents receiving skills training or employment counselling, would further align such initiatives to their proclaimed purpose. However, this remarkable drift, or the difference between the expectations for and the impacts of ABIs, suggests a reconsideration of the scope and limitations of area-based approaches in general.

Prospects for area-based policies in Europe in times of financial austerity Policies towards Places are not redundant, but they should operate within a context of Policies towards People. (Joshi, 2001: 1352)

These concluding remarks on the academic discourse on the role and impacts of the ABIs implemented in the 1990s in England can be seen as a reoccurring expression of the scope and limitations of these policy initiatives (Pattie, 2001; Andersson and Musterd, 2005). Around ten years later, this discussion can be continued, highlighting either their potentials for deprived urban areas (Parkinson, 1998; Smith, G.R., 1999) or their inaccurate interpretation of socio-economic processes and suggested solutions (Oatley, 2000; Andersen, 2001; Burrows and Bradshaw, 2001; McCulloch, 2001; Meegan and Mitchell, 2001), as 142

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s)

well as criticising the basic analytical premises upon which they are formulated:‘a concentration on area-based explanations of deprivation is likely to obscure the fundamentally structural rather than spatial or pathological origins of deprivation’ (Hamnett, 1979: 257). This ambivalence is also reflected in the results of this study. Having highlighted that the impacts of such policy initiatives rely upon locally contingent practices and solutions, however, a general disavowal of these initiatives seems inaccurate. Against this background, I suggest differentiating between two general views on ABIs. On the one hand, ABIs seen as local development strategies for deprived urban areas are most likely to fail to meet raised expectations unless they are part of citywide development strategies, particularly based on regular publicservice delivery and planning. Designed as isolated and temporary initiatives that develop and test new public services, the problematic issue of how to sustain these experiments is inherently built into the programmes.This is further increased the more these experiments are detached from regular public-service provisions and announced as ambitious ‘silver bullet solutions’. On the other hand, ABIs seen as temporary policy workshops can clearly contribute to the disclosure of public-service delivery gaps in deprived urban areas.They invite us to address public attention to social changes, to demands of new urban citizens and to malfunctions of mainstream public-service providers and contemporary planning frameworks. As shown in this study, ABIs can indeed evoke the minor, but still emerging, collective action of so far marginalised and/or new interest groups. They offer windows of opportunities to build and strengthen inter-organisational relationships between different sectors as well as build up institutional capital. However, this study has also shown that the attractiveness of ABIs for policymakers lies in their broad and somewhat open capacity to unify different policy agendas. Being designed as initiatives to test governance experiments, these types of policies can be used to address a variety of contemporary issues in central–local relationships. It can be assumed that out of the political agendas emerging to cope with the financial crisis and dawning austerity measures affecting public services, ABIs as initiatives to promote local ‘showcases’ will continue to remain a constant policy feature across Europe. Since the demand to outsource management functions for the delivery of public services to the third sector has apparently been reinvigorated by the Coalition government in the UK in 2010, we can expect that the promotion of local ‘best practices’ through central funding regimes is going to be continued. Thinking of the financial 143

Regenerating deprived urban areas

‘generosity’ of the NDC and the austerity measures announced in the aftermath of the financial crisis, however, it is likely that the extent of funding made available for these experiments will be reduced. Since the federal election in Germany in 2009 and the emergence of the federal coalition between the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Free Democratic Party (FDP), the fate of the SCP as the single and only federal ABI remains uncertain. Even though the SCP had been enshrined as a permanent – but temporarily granted – feature of federal urban development funding, the austerity measures announced in 2010 not only foresee a cut of 50% of the available funding, but also earmarked the remaining funds for the SCP entirely for capital investments (investment measures) in the built environment. With the termination of so-called non-investment measures, the SCP might therefore devolve into a sole construction programme. Given the evidence collected in this study, this evolution consequently seems to follow the trajectory given by the spending and regulatory framework under which it predominantly operated. But this changing focus also devalues its original purpose to promote new neighbourhood services in deprived urban areas. The role of the SCP as a source of funding and federal ABI can, however, be expected to diminish. Since the federal government has continued its initiative, coined as a national urban policy (Nationale Stadtentwicklungspolitik), a number of small-scale funding programmes for the promotion of ‘best practices’ have instead been launched, which will probably succeed the SCP (BMVBS, 2008, 2009a, 2009c). Apart from these national contexts, the prospects for ABIs have to be seen in relation to the policy mobilities and circuits created during recent years across Europe. These policy circuits are constituted and promoted across different scales and show a remarkable continuity. At the European level, it can be expected that the role of European City Networks promoted by the European Commission, for example, to exchange local experiences, such as to deal with the financial crisis, will continue to grow (URBACT, 2010). These circuits are attractive platforms and arenas for politicians at all government levels. To what extent development outcomes at the local level are actually influenced by these exchanges remains an interesting future research subject. There also seems to be an insatiable thirst of some national governments, at least in Germany, in exchanging or transferring policy approaches from neighbouring countries, in particular, from Britain: Best-Practice-Examples in urban development do not only exist in Germany. Urban policies and planning have always 144

The neo-institutional study of New Localism(s)

been constituted through international exchange of ideas and practices. A remarkable example in this respect is the ‘Urban Task Force’ of the British Government. Results of this task force inform urban policy strategies of the British Government. (BMVBS, 2007a: 26) Refocusing contemporary research on urban policy transfers across countries from a somewhat Anglo-American-dominated context to urban policy exchanges across Europe therefore represents another interesting future research endeavour (Hambleton, 1995; Dolowitz and Marsh, 1996; James and Lodge, 2003). At the local level, individual case studies are needed to explore whether area-based policies for deprived urban areas will be further promoted. The introduction of a neighbourhood focus in Bristol, echoed by the announcement of the new central government to introduce so-called neighbourhood-planning frameworks, might suggest that further area-based approaches will be implemented. Whether and how these initiatives are also provided with financial resources to shift and/or create public services, for example, through area-based grants, remains the subject of further investigations. In Duisburg, it is unlikely that non-investment measures are going to be further financed by SCP funds. As local public services in those cities affected by the local budget crisis in North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) are generally under scrutiny, recent policy discourse hints towards another governance experiment, which would transform and rescale the local state: that of inter-city cooperation models for shared public services. So far, these models to share public services between German cities have been discussed for call centres and other IT-bound services (Klinger, 2007). However, suggestions to expand this model to social services, such as hospitals, have also been expressed, but so far not put into practice (Jasper and Recke, 2010). In England, ideas on sharing functions between boroughs, such as cleaning and planning, are also emerging as a result of central government financial cutbacks (CoW, 2010). Hence, the increased circulations of ‘best practices’ in urban policies across Europe through different scales and actors, as well as the increasing pressure to change local public-service delivery, definitely invite us to study further the transformation of central–local relationships and the emergence of many other New Localism(s) in the Europe of the future.

145

appendices

Appendix I: Research design The research approach adopted throughout this study can be broadly described as a mixed-methods strategy of inquiry, collecting at least three types of data simultaneously during a single data-collection phase. As Figure A.1 illustrates, a comparison of the two in-depth cases studies has been conducted, in which quantitative as well as qualitative data has been used to strengthen the analysis. The data collection for this research consists of three methods: semistructured interviews with key stakeholders; a review of documents, such as minutes of meetings, evaluation reports and publications; and an organisational survey conducted with all organisations involved in the implementation of the Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) in both cities. The review of key documents on the implementation of both ABIs in both localities was of great importance to prepare the ground for the collection of primary data.These included programme documents, policy papers, minutes of meetings, annual reports, evaluation reports and press clippings. Figure A.1: Data collection and analysis For evaluating and comparing the implementation of ABIs in Bristol and Duisburg Case study 1: NDC Bristol

Data collection

Data analysis

Review of programme documents

Case study 2: SCP Duisburg North

56 semistructured expert interviews

Descriptive content and discourse analysis

Survey of 47 organisations Interorganisational network analysis

Integration and interpretation Notes: SCP – Social City Programme; NDC – New Deal for Communities; ABIs – Area-Based Initiatives.

147

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Thirty-two interviews were conducted in Germany and 24 in England. Three months were spent in each case-study site in 2009 to collect data (Duisburg: January–March 2009; Bristol:April–June 2009). Observations and preliminary findings were also discussed with both delivery agencies at the end of both fieldwork periods in order to assess whether findings were considered to be accurate. Interview guides as quasi-questionnaires for the researcher were produced in English and German.The following themes were addressed during the interviews: • Background information on the organisation and the role of the interviewee; • The history of urban policies and ABIs in the localities; • The emergence and difference of the current ABI (New Deal for Communities [NDC] or Social City Programme [SCP]) to former implemented approaches; • The process of partnership-working (structure of the network and process of cooperation between the state organisations as well as between local authority and non-state actors); and • The challenges for the future of urban regeneration in both localities. The selection of interviewees was done by reviewing key documents, such as minutes of meetings, and following recommendations of key informants, such as the executive managers of the delivery organisations. Against this background, a snowballing sample was applied to expand an initial list of potential organisations and key experts (Goodman, 1961). Digital recordings of the 56 semi-structured interviews were imported into a qualitative analysis program (NVIVO 8). A third method applied in this study is an organisational survey with key organisational representatives, which provided the ground for an inter-organisational network analysis. It has already been highlighted that this method is embedded in a broader qualitative-oriented research endeavour to understand how and why inter-organisational practices and relations have been changed during the implementation of ABIs in both localities. As the application of this inquiry forms a crucial part of the mixed-methods approach, a detailed clarification of the value of such a combination is given. Being particularly interested in inter-organisational relations, the design of the organisational survey applied in this study was inspired by methods formulated to conduct an Inter-organisational Network Analysis (IoNA).

148

❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Government Office of South West

Community at Heart Bristol

Resident board members (Community at Heart)

Liberal Democrats

Other institutions at local, regional or national level (Please list if appropriate)

Heard of but not in contact so far (2)

Audit Commission

(1)

Never heard of

Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

How often would you say you have been personally in contact with each of these organisations during the last two years (Please tick)?

The following list contains some organisations that might be connected to the implementation of the New Deal for Communities (NDC).

Date:

Professional title:

Name:

Organisation:

Cooperation Matrix

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Several times per month (3)

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Once per month (4)

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Once every six months (5)

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Once per year (6)

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

(7)

Once every other year

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Which organisations have you already been in contact with before the start of the NDC? (Please tick if appropriate)

Figure A.2: Extract of the standardised questionnaire for the organisational survey

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

If you had some first ideas about a new project or initiative, which organisations would you include confidentially in the discussion of your ideas? (Please tick)

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

❑

Which organisation would you consider as being very influential on the design and implementation of the NDC? (Please tick)

Project Ref: REP(GGS)/08/09-14

University of London

Research design

149

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Information deriving from the standardised questionnaire had to be transformed into binary data first. This information was then entered into a spreadsheet using MS Excel. This data were subsequently processed through software packages, UCINET 6 and Netdraw 2.069, to visualise the relationships. Two measures have been used in this analysis: the degree of influence1 and the level of reciprocal trust after ten years of inter-organisational cooperation2 among the partnerships in both localities. Of particular interest was to reveal the relationships between: • State actors, such as between local and upper government tiers; • Local state actors and non-state actors, such as intermediaries, business and Voluntary Sector Organisations (VSOs); and • Local VSOs. The nodes in these sociograms can be given different colours in accordance with the attributes of actors, such as central-government agency, local council, intermediaries, businesses,VSOs and so on. A tie between the nodes illustrates a relationship between two actors. In this Figure A.3: Example of nodes and ties in a network analysis BCC Corporate Finance

GOSW

DCLG

Nodes (actors/ organisations)

Police

Tie (relationship)

CaH resident board members

CaH

Notes: BCC – Bristol City Council; GOSW – Government Office for the South West; DCLG – Department for Communities and Local Government; CaH – Community at Heart.

150

Research design

case, it depicts which organisations named another as a trustworthy partner for joined activities. Using Social Network Analysis (SNA) to study inter-organisational relationships within a whole network, therefore, gives the researcher a tool to identify the existence or lack of ties between actors, allowing interpretations about the position (and power) of each actor within the network as well as the strength (and trust) between actors. Mapping such inter-organisational relationships provides a point of departure to understand the complexity of inter-organisational dynamics approaching the end of both initiatives in both localities. Being interested in the impacts of these ABIs, special attention is put on this IoNA to gain a first insight into the power and trust structure within these partnerships at the time when the research was undertaken. The significantly small population that was used in this IoNA (NDC: 25; SCP: 21) made it possible to refrain from using more sophisticated mathematical measures for bigger numbers of nodes (Wasserman and Faust, 1994; Milward and Provan, 1998; Carrington et al, 2005). For bigger networks, graph theory allows us to measure network properties such as the ‘density’, ‘centrality’, ‘brokerage’ and ‘closure’ of certain nodes within a network (Burt, 2005). Conducting an IoNA at the end of both ABIs in both cases allowed us to get a time-bounded snapshot of the relationships, and thus a visual expression as to what extent the initiatives have fostered inter-organisational cooperation, reflected in reciprocal trust. This information was, however, complemented with the data derived from the interviews as well as document reviews. By doing this, it was possible to embed these inter-organisational relationships in an historical perspective and provide further contextual information about the network dynamics. Data deriving from the interviews and document review can explore the ‘content’ and perception of the network, thus providing an ‘insider view’. Studies applying such a strategy of combining data from qualitative interviews and from IoNA approaches can already be found (Bidart and Lavenu, 2005; Bellotti, 2008), but only a few in the context of ABIs (Chiu and West, 2007) and so far none in a crossnational comparison. Permission to conduct the studies was granted by the delivery agencies in charge of the ABIs investigated in this research. All data collection and analysis was both carried out in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and used the ethical research guidelines provided by the British Sociological Association (BSA, 2002).

151

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Information sheets and consent forms in English and German were used throughout all stages of the research process, which stated the type of involvement as well as expected time commitments. Consent forms highlighted that participation in this study was voluntary and potential respondents were free to withdraw from the investigation at any time. The consent forms were all signed before the interview with each participant started. Privacy and confidentiality was secured throughout the study. Interviewees are only referenced with identification numbers and no information is provided that could identify particular respondents. Notes Q4: Which organisation would you consider as being very influential on the design and implementation of the NDC/SCP? 1

Q3: If you had some first ideas about a new project or initiative, which organisation would you include confidentially in the discussion of your ideas? 2

152

Appendix II: Sociogram depicting interorganisational trust among the New Deal for Communities partnership (n = 21)

153

154

Vivid

Sovereign Housing

CaH

SRC

BCC Neighbourhoods

BCC Safer Bristol

BCC Partnership

PCT

Beacon Centre

Police

DCLG

BDA

City Academy

Creating Excellence

GOSW

CaH resident board members

BEST

BCC Corporate Finance

Central departments BCC Other statutory agencies Local parties Businesses VSOs Intermediaries

Notes: BCC - Bristol City Council; BCC Partnership - Bristol City Council Partnership; BCC Safer Bristol - Bristol City Council Safer Bristol; BCC Neighbourhoods - Bristol City Council Neighbourhoods; BCC Corporate Finance - Bristol City Council Corporate Finance; BDA - Black Development Agency; BHS - Barton Hill Settlement; CaH - Community at Heart; DCLG - Department for Communities and Local Government; GOSW - Government Office of the South West; LibDem - Liberal Democrats; SRC - Somali Resource Centre; PCT - Primary Care Trust.

BHS

Labour

LibDem

If you had some first ideas about a new project or initiative, which organisations would you include confidentially in the discussion of your ideas?

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Appendix III: Sociogram depicting interorganisational trust among the Social City Programme partnership (n = 25)

155

156

Evonik

IfS

EGDU

DCC Marxloh Mayor

DCC Housing

Area Office Marxloh

IdeaMarx

Gruene

SPD

DCC Urb

GfB

NUREC

DRK Bruck

DCC Bruckhausen

DCC Youth

Area Office Bruckhausen

DCC Marxloh

SCNRW

ILS NRW

MBV NRW

DIRU

BBR

BMMBS

Federal departments State departments DCC Local parties Businesses VSOs Intermediaries

Notes: BMVBS - Federal Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Affairs; BBR - Federal Office for Building and Regional Office; CDU - Christian Democratic Party Duisburg; DCC Bruckhausen - Duisburg City Council Administration Meiderich/Beeck-Bruckhausen; DCC Housing - Duisburg City Council Department of Social Welfare and Housing Duisburg; DCC Marxloh - Duisburg City Council Administration Hamborn - Marxloh; DCC Marxloh Mayor - Duisburg City Council Mayor of Borough Hamborn - Marxloh; DCC-Urb - Duisburg City Council Department of Urban Development and Project Management; DCC Youth - Duisburg City Council Department of Youth Services Duisburg; DRK Bruck - German Red Cross (speaker of Area Forum Bruckhausen); DIFU - German Institute for Urban Affairs; EG DU - Development Agency Duisburg; Evonik - Evonik Housing Trust; GfB - Agency for Economic Promotion; Gruene- Green Party Duisburg; IdeaMarx - Idea atelier (speaker of Area Forum Marxloh); IfS - Institute for Urban Affairs Berlin; ILS - Institute for Regional and Urban Development Research of the Land North Rhine Westphalia; Immeo - Housing Trust Immeo; Linke -The Left Party in Duisburg; MBVNRW - Ministry for Building and Traffic of North Rhine Westphalia; SCNRW - Social City Network NRW; SPD - Social Democratic Party.

Immeo

CDU

Linke

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Appendix IV: Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities Bristol between 2000 and 2010

157

Themes of New Deal for Communities (NDC) Bristol Employment and Economy

158

Adult learning at the Beacon Centre Adult learning at the Barton Hill Settlement

Improvements to shop fronts Neighbourhood Shop (£60,000 per year)

East Bristol Advice Services Bristol East Side Traders

Project title Renovation of The Old Bank building Employment Links

Head office of CaH and a ‘one-stop shop’ for local residents to get support and guidance with anything they are struggling with, whether filling in a benefits form, making a phone call or writing a CV. The shop has free access to a computer, photocopier, telephone and trained support workers. CaH funded regular free or low-cost courses for adults in the area. This included courses like English and IT to improve residents’ skills, confidence and job prospects. CaH funded regular free or low-cost courses for adults in the area. This included courses like English and IT to improve residents’ skills, confidence and job prospects. (continued)

CaH funded a post for a worker in the NDC area. They supported businesses and promoted Church Road as a shopping district. They assisted in the setting up of the Church Road Action Group. CaH provided a funding pot to which local traders could apply to improve their shop fronts.

Description Community at Heart (CaH) bought and renovated a building and turned it into a ‘one-stop shop’ for advice and support. The building generates income for the charity from rents. This service based in The Old Bank supports people with finding work and training. Clients are given an individual caseworker to support them. This service, based in The Old Bank, provides free advice on debt and finance.

NDC projects 2000–10

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Themes of New Deal for Communities (NDC) Bristol Community Development (merged with former local theme, Arts)

Volunteer Unit

The People’s Hive Community Work Team

The Lighthouse

Animation Festival Bristol Community Radio Grass Roots Community Newspaper Soundin’ Out

Arts Projects

Project title Arts Programme

CaH funded a music project for young people, giving them the opportunity to write and record their own music. CaH funded a community building at Barton Hill Settlement. The building is home to meeting rooms and a computer room. The People’s Hive was a group that supported residents to get involved in the community. Based at Barton Hill Settlement, this team of workers organised a range of community activities, including a Lunch Club, Multicultural Feasts and trips, all offered free or for a low cost to local people. Based at Barton Hill Settlement, this team helped arrange volunteer placements for local people to enable them to gain skills and experience to improve their confidence and job prospects. (continued)

Description CaH funded an arts team to deliver a range of activities, including regular low-cost classes, public art projects (eg Barton Hill Mural), events and festivals. The arts team worked with other projects to bring art into this community, for example art in the gardens of the blocks, Barton Hill Primary School and Children’s Centre art project, and art in The Dings and Lilla Park. The arts team organised an annual animation festival. CaH funded Radio 19, a community-run radio station that received the licence to broadcast community radio across Bristol and became BCfm. CaH funded a community newspaper, which was published for the area and run by local residents. Since 2007, local residents have managed this journal and formed their own independent company.

NDC projects 2000–10

Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities ...

159

Themes of New Deal for Communities (NDC) Bristol Community Development (merged with former local theme, Arts) (continued) Community Safety

160

Drug and alcohol addiction prevention and support Domestic abuse caseworker Nuts and Bolts

CaH funded a worker and materials to make homes in the NDC area safer by installing new locks and security lights. (continued)

CaH funded one worker from Safer Bristol and a team of Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) dedicated to policing the NDC area. The worker carried out awareness-raising projects on ways to prevent crime and how to report it, as well as identifying crime ‘hotspots’ and gathering information from residents about problem cases. As part of a major redevelopment scheme for Barton Hill, CaH funded and delivered a number of physical measures including CCTV, security-controlled access to the blocks, improved street lighting, clearance of vegetation used for hiding illegal activities and the demolition of ‘problem’ blocks. CaH provided funding to several projects (CAAAD, Switch, IDEAL and Nilaari) to help addicts with recovery and rehabilitating drug users, as well as working with drug dealers to help them reenter society and therefore reduce crime. CaH provided funds for a dedicated domestic abuse worker in the NDC area.

New Deal Police Team

Block Security and Environmental Improvement Project

Description CaH funded an extension to Hannah More Primary School to provide them with a community facility, which is open to local residents and is used for out-of-school activities and rented out to local groups to generate income for the school.

Project title Hannah More Community Building

NDC projects 2000–10

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Themes of New Deal NDC projects 2000–10 for Communities (NDC) Bristol Project title Description Education Barton Hill Primary CaH contributed to the funding required to build a school facility in Barton Hill for 0 to 11 year School and Children’s olds. Centre Play area for Barton CaH provided funds to build an outdoor play area. Hill Primary and Children’s Centre Education support CaH education team developed and funded a number of projects to increase attainment in local projects schools, which included the Awards and Incentives Scheme at City Academy, the Reading Recovery Programme at Barton Hill Primary, parent support projects and a Somali Attainment Strategy. Hannah More Primary CaH provided funds for a new community building at Hannah More Primary School, which is used community room for out-of-school activities. Environment Neighbourhood CaH provided support and office space to this project, which involved residents in tackling issues Solutions such as litter, graffiti and fly-tipping. Green Solutions As part of the work to improve the green spaces in the area, CaH supported a resident group to look at how to improve parks and green spaces. Improvements to local CaH funded and delivered improvements to several parks in consultation with local people. parks Gaunts Ham Park (£199,900), Lilla Park and Dings Park (£321,942) got new play equipment, landscaping and public art. Urban Park CaH succeeded in securing additional funding from the EU to create a play area in the middle of the blocks in Barton Hill. (continued)

Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities ...

161

Themes of New Deal NDC projects 2000–10 for Communities (NDC) Bristol Project title Description Environment (continued) GroundForce This project provided local people with opportunities to get involved in gardening across the NDC area. The team organised events, such as a dog show (to raise awareness of responsible dog ownership), Bloomin’ Solutions garden competition and Ambler’s Walks programme. The volunteer sessions helped create and maintain green spaces in the NDC area, such as in Cobden Green. Project Pathfinder CaH worked with partners to fund a special team to focus on clearing up the NDC area, including waste collection, street cleansing, grounds maintenance, household bulky collections, gully emptying and recycling services. Health and Wellbeing Wellspring Healthy CaH funded the planning and development of a health centre providing a doctors’ surgery, dentist, Living Centre pharmacy, meeting rooms, complementary therapy clinic, wellbeing project, learning kitchen, crèche, art room, garden, resource area and sessions from other health professionals (eg midwives, school nurses, district nurses and health visitors). The centre has become an independent company employing its own staff and is managed and run by a resident board. Wellbeing team CaH funded a range of additional projects to improve the health and wellbeing of residents. This included a men’s health project, a young people’s health project, a Somali family support worker and more. The team organised arts sessions, drop-in events with specialist health providers, support groups and advice services. Complementary This project was set up in response to requests from residents to have access to low-cost Health Clinic complementary therapies. The project was awarded funding from the Primary Care Trust to deliver NHS services locally. The clinic offers appointments for massage, reflexology, hypnotherapy, homeopathy, acupuncture and Indian head massage at low cost to people from across Bristol. (continued)

Regenerating deprived urban areas

162

Themes of New Deal NDC projects 2000–10 for Communities (NDC) Bristol Project title Description Housing 180 new homes In cooperation with the Sovereign Housing Association, CaH contributed to the development of around 180 new homes on brownfield sites in the Barton Hill area. New shops CaH funded the development of four new shops and Sovereign Housing Association covered the cost of 12 flats on the site of the old Corbett House Surgery. CaH owns the shops and the rent generates income for the charity. Housing Solutions CaH funded a worker to assist residents in setting up a group to look at improving services for council-owned properties in the area. The group then went on to set up as an official Tenant Management Organisation, which aims to deliver services on behalf of the landlord. Planning Solutions CaH funded a worker who developed and supported a resident group, which meets and draws together comments on planning applications from local people to feed back to the council. Lincoln Gardens Very CaH contributed funds to a facility for older and more vulnerable people in the area. The scheme Sheltered Housing provides 55 high-support flats as well as community facilities. Dings Home Zone CaH implemented a commuter traffic and speeding scheme to reclaim the area for residents and provide parking and social space for local residents. Repairs and CaH set up a special fund to get homes in the area up to a decent standard. conversions project Local Lettings Policy CaH supported residents in setting up a local lettings policy to ensure local people had priority for local homes. (continued)

Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities ...

163

Themes of New Deal NDC projects 2000–10 for Communities (NDC) Bristol Project title Description Sports Netham Pavilion CaH partly funded a new sports pavilion on the Netham Common. The building provides a meeting space, changing rooms, an outdoor terrace area and a kitchen. Sports Development CaH employed a team of sports workers to support new clubs and groups and to promote sport. Team They administered sports grants for local clubs and trained residents in coaching and other sports skills. The team offered start-up and ongoing support to clubs in the area, for example Barton Hill Boxing Club, and is now funded by Bristol City Council. Sports activities The sports development team organised a whole range of activities and events while employed by CaH. These included regular fitness classes, football tournaments, school holiday activities for young people and sports sessions at community events. Sports grants CaH provided funding for sports grants that groups could apply for to help them with equipment and other associated costs. Residents formed a panel to decide on who was awarded funding. Volunteering The sports development team supported local people who were interested in helping with a club opportunities and provided them with accredited training. Race Equality Reducing racial CaH funded a Support Against Racial Incidents (SARI) caseworker for the NDC area to support incidents victims of racial harassment. CaH buildings were also used as Hate Crime Reporting Stations. Refugee Advice and CaH employed a bilingual caseworker to help refugees in the NDC area to find information, fill in Advocacy Project forms, read letters and make appointments. (£398,473) Somali Resource Members of the local Somali community set up the Somali Resource Centre on Avonvale Road Centre (£55,000) and CaH provided funding to employ a part-time Centre Manager and Administrator. (continued)

Regenerating deprived urban areas

164

Description CaH funded a team to ensure that the NDC programme met equality standards and to promote community cohesion through events, poster campaigns, working with partner organisations and researching the NDC area to identify need among the different communities. This plan was devised by the tackling racism team and adopted by all collaborating organisations Race Equality and Community Cohesion in the area. The plan set out a series of actions for projects and agencies to ensure that they were Action Plan (RECCAP) delivering accessible services. Community The team supported and organised events and activities to promote community cohesion and development integration for new communities. Some examples include Multicultural Feasts, Dings Fun Days, Kick It Out football tournament, exhibitions, conferences and producing a Community Cookbook. The Crypt In Barton Hill the crypt of St Luke’s Church has been converted into a youth club for young people between the ages of eight and 19. Safe ‘Ouse/Dings CaH funded the Dings Safe ‘Ouse for young people. The youth workers devise a monthly Container programme of activities, which is agreed with the young people. Young Advisors CaH developed the Bristol Young Advisors, a group of young regeneration consultants who are trained and employed to offer support with consultation, running conferences, evaluation and more. The Advisors are now a self-supporting social enterprise. Young People’s Forum CaH set up a Youth Forum, which comes together to discuss issues that affect youth in the area. The Forum also set up a panel to review applications for the Young People’s Grants. Play CaH developed play spaces for 8- to 14-year-olds. It also provided Play Rangers in the Urban Park and the Dings Park in order to make the parks safer for children. Youth and health CaH ran a Young People’s Health project, which delivered complementary therapies to young people with sessions held at The Crypt, and supported young people with substance misuse issues. Holiday activities CaH provided a school holiday programme.

Project title Tackling racism team (£776,199)

NDC projects 2000–10

Sources: CaH (2009a, 2009b, 2009c, 2009d, 2009e, 2009f, 2009g, 2009h, 2009i, 2009j, 2009k) and Marshall (2005).

Young people

Themes of New Deal for Communities (NDC) Bristol Race Equality (continued)

Implemented projects financed by New Deal for Communities ...

165

Appendix V: Key project spending in New Deal for Communities Bristol, 2000–10 Core New Deal for Communities (NDC) themes Advice, Business, Learning and Enterprise Revenue Support to help people into work Revenue Advice services Revenue Developing partnership-working Revenue Support for small businesses Revenue Lifelong learning courses Capital Improving shops and providing office space Community Safety Revenue Projects to improve community safety Revenue Support for victims of domestic violence Revenue Support for victims of racially motivated incidents Revenue Additional policing team for the area Capital CCTV in the blocks Education Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Capital Capital

Projects to raise attainment in primary schools Linking parents and schools Raising attainment projects at secondary level Barton Hill Settlement Family Playcentre Community buildings at Hannah More Primary School New Barton Hill Primary School and Children’s Centre

£1,545,892 £1,635,653 £192,296 £1,119,340 £2,126,375 £2,404,283 £9,023,839 (18%) £1,452,094 £175,533 £215,117 £857,154 £2,227,716 £4,927,614 (10%) £1,968,731 £321,626 £1,038,953 £1,487,339 £747,536 £1,305,756 £6,869,941 (13%)

Health and Wellbeing Revenue Community health projects Revenue Complementary health projects Revenue Community-based drug and alcohol project Capital Wellspring Healthy Living Centre

£1,238,010 £337,620 £1,086,772 £3,645,000 £6,307,403 (12%) (continued)

167

Regenerating deprived urban areas Core New Deal for Communities (NDC) themes (continued) Housing and the Environment Revenue Improving the local environment £285,120 Revenue Improving the quality of housing in the area £1,119,302 Capital Improvements to local parks £1,137,686 Capital Improving the safety of the areas around the £4,541,836 blocks Capital Improving the quality of housing in the area £1,192,862 £8,276,806 (16%) Local themes Arts and Media Revenue Community arts projects £1,454,491 Revenue NDC communications £601,554 Revenue Community media £298,225 £2,354,270 (5%) Community Services Revenue Community development £2,040,539 Revenue Small grants £430,989 Capital The Lighthouse: offices and ICT training £1,524,782 rooms £3,996,310 (8%) Race Equality Revenue Promoting race equality and community £977,683 cohesion £977,683 (2%) Sports Revenue Community sports activities £335,096 Capital Netham Pavilion – a multi-use sports and £750,000 community building £1,085,096 (2%) Young People’s Services Revenue Work with young people who are at risk £524,171 Revenue Providing services for young people £1,553,297 Revenue Activities for young people during school £255,012 holidays Capital Improving youth work facilities in the area £169,808 £2,502,287 (5%) Managing the NDC programme Revenue £4,950,000 Management & Administration £4,950,000 (10%) TOTAL £51,271,249 Source: CaH (2010).

168

Appendix VI: Key project spending in Social City Programme Duisburg, 1996–2009

169

Project description/financial positions Value (€) Improvement of the housing and living conditions through the creation of sustainable social and urban structures; 1,098,000.00 development of a broad-scale greenbelt; area management. 2008 Redevelopment of public spaces, parks and pedestrian areas; promotion of resident-led projects. 165,400.00 2007 Redevelopment of public spaces, parks and pedestrian areas; promotion of resident-led projects. 1,000,000.00 2007 Measures for children and youth in the areas of health and food; educational and cultural projects; promoting 699,000.00 literacy; inter-cultural projects. 2006 Redevelopment of public spaces, parks, roads and pedestrian areas; promotion of resident-led projects; area 700,000.00 management. 2005 No specification. 1,050,000.00 2002 528,000.00 2010 Bruckhausen Liberal arts education for children and youth ‘MUS-E’. 400,000.00 2009 Improvement of the housing and living conditions through the creation of sustainable social and urban structures; 4,118,000.00 development of a broad-scale greenbelt; area management; Liberal arts education for children and youth ‘MUS-E’. 2007 Liberal arts education for children and youth ‘MUS-E’; public participation; area management. 137,000.00 2007 Measures for children and youth in the areas of health and food; educational and cultural projects; promoting 529,000.00 literacy; inter-cultural projects. 2006 Cooperation with schools in liberal arts education for children and youth ‘MUS-E’; public participation; area 571,000.00 management. 2005 No specification. 1,318,000.00 2004 Multi-cultural school project; investments in the public space. 1,612,000.00 2004 No specification. 1,260,000.00 2003 2,840,000.00 2002 230,000.00 (continued)

Year Area 2009 Beeck

Regenerating deprived urban areas

170

2005 2004 2004 2003 2002 2001

2007 2007 2006

Area management; Stadtteilmanagement, pilot project ‘Kletterbunker’. Redesign of roads and public spaces; strengthening of the local economy and integration. Project Rhinepark; redesign of roads and public spaces; strengthening of the local economy and integration; renewal of private external housing spaces. No specification. Project Rhinepark. Project Rhinepark; redesign of roads and public spaces; strengthening of the local economy and integration; renewal of private external housing spaces. No specification. Project ‘Duisburg am Rhein’; creation of the community centre ‘Feuerwache’; investments in the public space. No specification. No specification. No specification. No specification.

Greenbelt project; area rehabilitation; sustaining resident-led structures in Marxloh and Bruckhausen.

Area Project description/financial positions Bruckhausen No specification. (continued)

Duisburg North 2009 Hochfeld 2008 2007

Year 2001 2000 1999 1998 1996 2008

4,500,000.00 4,556,000.00 1,533,000.00 6,600,000.00 2,111,000.00 1,791,000.00 (continued)

2,814,000.00 300,000.00 3,300,000.00

848,000.00 3,013,000.00 4,532,000.00

Value (€) 535,500.00 540,000.00 900,000.00 990,000.00 900,000.00 247,500.00

Key project spending in Social City Programme Duisburg, 1996–2009

171

172

Project description/financial positions Improvement of the housing and living conditions through the creation of sustainable social and urban structures; greenbelt project; creation of a tourism concept ‘Erlebnis.NRW’; area management. Renewal of private external housing spaces; design of school yards; strengthening of the local ethnic economy; creation of resident-led structures through area management. Measures for children and youth in the areas of health and food; educational and cultural projects; promoting literacy; inter-cultural projects. Support of the mosque creation project; renewal of private external housing spaces; design of school yards; strengthening of the local ethnic economy. No specification. Area management and investments in the public space. No specification.

1,100,000.00 1,015,000.00 1,014,000.00 2,691,000.00 2,365,000.00 1,809,000.00 1,480,000.00 1,921,000.00 900,000.00 750,000.00 500,000.00 76,874,400.00

609,000.00

623,000.00

517,000.00

Value (€) 1,314,000.00

Note: Values up to the year 2001 have been published in German Marks (DM). The values have been converted into euro using the former exchange rate of 1 DM/0.5 euro. Sources: MBV NRW (2006b, 2007, 2008, 2009) and MSWKS NRW (1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004).

2005 2004 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 TOTAL

2006

2007

Year Area 2009 Marxloh

Regenerating deprived urban areas

References AC (Audit Commission) (1989) Urban regeneration and economic development: the local government dimension, London: HMSO. AC (2002) How is Bristol City Council performing?, London: Audit Commission. Available at: http://cpa.audit-commission.gov. uk/Scorecards2002/ScorecardPDFs2002/101176.pdf (accessed 25 November 2009). AC (2006) Corporate assessment Bristol City Council, London: Audit Commission. Available at: http://www.audit-commission. g ov. u k / S i t e C o l l e c t i o n D o c u m e n t s / I n s p e c t i o n O u t p u t / CorporateAssessments/BristolCCCorperateAssessment11Apr06REP. pdf (accessed 25 November 2009). Adburgham, R. (1998) Bristol – partnership in governance – 10 years of The Bristol Initiative, Bristol: Bristol Chamber of Commerce and Initiative. Aehnelt, R., Häußermann, H., Jaedicke, W., Kahl, M. and Toepel, K. (2004) Interim Appraisal of the Federal-Länder-Programm ‘Districts with special development needs – the Social City’ (‘Soziale Stadt’), Berlin: IfS Institut für Stadtforschung und Strukturpolitik GmbH. Aehnelt, R., Kahl, M., Berendt, U., Kloth, M. and Ruiz, M. (2008) Analyse qualitativer Prozesse bei der Umsetzung des Programms ‘Soziale Stadt NRW’. Studie im Rahmen der Evaluation des integrierten Handlungsprogramms ‘Soziale Stadt’ in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Projektbericht, Essen: Stadt Essen. Alcock, P. (2004) ‘Participation or pathology: contradictory tensions in area-based policy’, Social Policy & Society, 3, 87–96. Alcock, P. (2010) ‘Building the Big Society: a new policy environment for the third sector in England’, Voluntary Sector Review, 1, 379–389. Alemann, U.V. (1981) Neokorporatismus, Frankfurt/New York, NY: Campus Verlag. Alexander, J. and Nank, R. (2009) ‘Public–nonprofit partnership: realizing the new public service’, Administration Society, 41, 364–386. Alisch, M. (1998) Stadtteilmanagement- Voraussetzungen und Chancen fuer die soziale Stadt, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Alisch, M. and Dangschat, J.S. (1993) Die solidarische Stadt- Ursachen von Armut und Strategien fuer einen sozialen Ausgleich, Darmstadt:Verlag fuer wisschenschaftliche Publikation. Alisch, M. and Dangschat, J.S. (1994) ‘Ziele und Strukturen einer Stadtentwicklung des Sozialen Ausgleichs in Hamburg’, in R. Froessler and K. Selle (eds) Lokale Partnerschaften: die Erneuerung benachteiligter Quartiere in europaeischen Staedten, Basel, Boston, Berlin: Birkhäuser. 173

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Alisch, M. and Dangschat, J.S. (1998) Armut und soziale Integration. Strategien sozialer Stadtentwicklung und lokaler Nachhaltigkeit, Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Allen, J. and Cochrane, A. (2007) Beyond the territorial fix: regional assemblages, politics and power. Regional Studies, 41, 1161–75. Allen, R. (1999) ‘“New Public Management’: pitfalls for Central and Eastern Europe’, Public Management Forum 1, 1-15. Althoff, R., Bendrich, S., Olejnczak, M., Poehling, W., Ricken, D. and Westeroth, R. (2005) Duisburg und seine Stadtteile. 1000 Stuecke aus der Stadtgeschichte, Duisburg: Mercator Verlag. Ambrose, P. (2005) ‘Urban regeneration: who defines the indicators?’, in D. Taylor and S. Balloch (eds) The politics of evaluation, Bristol: The Policy Press. Amin, A. and Thrift, N. (1995) ‘Institutional issues for the European regions: from markets and plans to socioeconomics and powers of association’, Economy and Society, 24, 41–66. Andersen, H.T. (2001) ‘The new urban politics of Europe: the areabased approach to regeneration policy’, in H.T. Andersen and R.V. Kempen (eds) Governing European cities: social fragmentation, social exclusion and urban governance, Aldershot: Ashgate. Andersson, R. and Musterd, S. (2005) ‘Area-based policies: a critical appraisal’, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 96, 377–89. Anttila, C. and Wright, G. (2004) Multiple deprivation in New Deal for Communities areas: applying the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004 to NDC areas, Oxford: Social Disadvantage Research Centre, Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Oxford. ARGEBAU (2005) Leitfaden zur Ausgestaltung der Gemeinschaftsinitiative, Soziale Stadt, Bremen: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der für das Bau- und Siedlungswesen zuständigen Minister und Senatoren der Länder. Arnstein, S.R. (1969) ‘A ladder of citizen participation’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216–24. Aspden, J. and Birch, D. (2005) ‘New localism – citizen engagement, neighbourhoods and public services: evidence from local government’, Local and Regional Government Research Unit, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Atkinson, R. (1999) ‘Discourses of partnership and empowerment in contemporary British urban regeneration’, Urban Studies, 36, 59–72. Austermann, K. and Zimmer-Hegmann, R. (2000) Analyse der Umsetzung des integrierten Handlungsprogramms fuer Stadtteile mit besonderem Erneuerungsbedarf, Dortmund: Institut fuer Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen.

174

References

Bachmann, R. and Zaheer, A. (2008) ‘Trust in inter-organizational relations’, in S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham and P.S. Ring (eds) The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Backhaus-Maul, H. (1999) ‘Kommunale Sozialpolitik. Sozialstaatliche Garantien und die Angelegenheiten der oertlichen Kommune’, in H. Wollmann and R. Roth (eds) Kommunalpolitik. Poltisches Handeln in den Gemeinden, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Bailey, N. (2003) ‘Local strategic partnerships in England: the continuing search for collaborative advantage, leadership and strategy in urban governance’, Planning Theory & Practice, 4, 443–57. Ball, M. and Maginn, P.J. (2004) ‘The contradictions of urban policy: the case of the Single Regeneration Budget in London’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 22, 739–65. Bailey, N. and Pill, M. (2011) ‘The continuing popularity of the neighbourhood and neighbourhood governance in the transition from the “big state” to the “big society” paradigm’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29, 927–42. Ball, M. and Maginn, P.J. (2005) ‘Urban change and conflict: evaluating the role of partnerships in urban regeneration in the UK’, Housing Studies, 20, 9–28. Banting, K. and Costa-Font, J. (2010) ‘Decentralization, welfare, and social citizenship  in contemporary democracies’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28, 381–8. Barnett, C. (2010) ‘Publics and markets. What’s wrong with neoliberalism?’, in S.J. Smith, R. Pain, S.A. Marston and J.P. Jones (eds) The Sage handbook of social geographies, London: Sage. Barton Hill History Group (1997) Barton Hill, Stroud: Tempus. Barton Hill History Group (2005) Barton Hill revisited, Stroud:Tempus. Bassett, K. (2001) Discovering cities. Bristol, Sheffield: Geographical Association. Batley, R. and Edward, J. (1978) The politics of positive discrimination: an evaluation of the urban programme 1967–77, London: Tavistock. Batty, E., Beatty, C., Foden, M., Lawless, P., Pearson, S. and Wilson, I. (2010) The New Deal for Communities experience: a final assessment.The New Deal for Communities evaluation: final report – volume 7, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. BBR (Bundesamt fuer Bauwesen- und Raumordnung) (2000) Urban development and urban policy in Germany – an overview, Bonn: Federal Office for Building and Regional Planning. BCC (Bristol City Council) (1998) Bristol City centre strategy – section 1: introduction and summary, Bristol: Bristol City Council. 175

Regenerating deprived urban areas

BCC (2000a) The Bristol Local Plan. Sustainability appraisal.Updating the Bristol local plan, Bristol: Bristol City Council Planning,Transport and Development Services. BCC (2000b) ‘New Deal for Communities: reporting back and sharing good practice wards: Lawrence Hill and Easton. Report of the Head of Regeneration’, Bristol. Available at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ committee/2000/xa/xa004/0703_h_12.pdf (accessed 3 december 2009). BCC (2001a) The Bristol Local Plan. 2001–2011. Aiming for a sustainable city, Bristol: Bristol City Council Planning, Transport and Development Services. BCC (2001b) ‘Census 2001 key statistics’, Bristol. Available at: http:// www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/content/Council-Democracy/StatisticsCensus-Information/2001-census-data.en (accessed 16  November 2009). BCC (2002) ‘External funding initiatives in Bristol 2002’, Bristol. Available at: http://www.bristolregeneration.org.uk/files/docs/ externalfund-Aug2002.pdf (accessed 25 November 2009). BCC (2003) First deposit proposed alterations to the Bristol Local Plan. Schedule of proposed alterations to the Written Statement with an explanation for those changes undertaken, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BCC (2005) Bristol City centre strategy and area action plan 2005–2010 – section 1: introduction and summary, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BCC (2006) Quality of life in Bristol 2006, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BCC (2007a) ‘Bristol local development scheme’, Bristol. Available at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/cms-service/download/asset/?asset_ id=33461072 (accessed 10 June 2009). BCC (2007b) Deprivation in Bristol 2007, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BCC (2008a) Bristol’s local area agreement 2008–2011, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BCC (2008b) Lawrence Hill 2008 ward profile, Bristol. Available at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/WardFinder/pdfs/lawrence-hill-profile. pdf (accessed 9 November 2009). BCC (2009a) ‘Bristol brief ’, Bristol. Available at: www.gos.gov. uk/497666/docs/220636/309014/Br isstatbrf.doc (accessed 9 November 2009). BCC (2009b) ‘Neighbourhood partnership statistical profile Ashley, Easton and Lawrence Hill’, Bristol. Available at: http://www.bristol. gov.uk/ccm/cms-service/stream/asset/?asset_id=30465242 (accessed 9 November 2009). BCC (2009c) The population of Bristol, Bristol: Bristol City Council.

176

References

BCC (2009d) Shaping Bristol over the next 20 years. Bristol development framework – core strategy. Draft development principles, Bristol: Bristol City Council. BdW (Bundesverband deutscher Wohnungsunternehmen e.V.) (1998) Überforderte Nachbarschaften. Zwei sozialwissenschaftliche Studien über Wohnquartiere in den alten und den neuen Bundesländern, Köln/ Berlin: Bundesverband deutscher Wohnungsunternehmen e.V. Beatty, C., Crisp, R., Foden, M., Lawless, P. and Wilson, I. (2009) Understanding and tackling worklessness: lessons and policy implications evidence from the New Deal for Communities Programme, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Becker, H., Franke, T., Löhr, R.-P. and Rösner, V. (2002) ‘Socially Integrative City Programme – an encouraging three-year appraisal’, German Institute of Urban Affairs commissioned by the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing (BMVBW) for the congress ‘Die Soziale Stadt – Zusammenhalt, Sicherheit, Zukunft’ in Berlin, 7–8 May. Becker, H., Bock, S., Böhme, C. and Franke, T. (2006a) Dritte bundesweite Befragung. Programmgebiete ‘Soziale Stadt’ Endbericht zur Auswertung, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung (BMVBS). Becker, H., Franke, T. and Strauss, W.-C. (2006b) Verstetigungsansätze zum Programm Soziale Stadt, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen. Behrendt, U., Hoebel, R. and Kloth, M. (2004) Gemeinsam für den Stadtteil – Kooperation von Freier Wohlfahrtspflege und Kommunen zur Stabilisierung benachteiligter Quartiere, Dortmund: Ministerium für Gesundheit, Soziales, Frauen und Familie des Landes NordrheinWestfalen. Beinhauer-Koehler, B. and Leggewie, C. (2009) Moscheen in Deutschland. Religioese Heimat und gesellschaftliche Herausforderung, Muenchen: C.H. Beck. Bellotti, E. (2008) ‘What are friends for? Elective communities of single people’, Social Networks, 30, 318–29. Benington, J. (2001) ‘Partnerships as networked governance? Legitimation, innovation, problem-solving and co-ordination’, in M. Geddes and J. Benington (eds) Local partnerships and social exclusion in the European Union, London: Routledge.

177

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Benington, J. and Geddes, M. (2001) ‘Introduction: social exclusion, partnership and local governance – new problems, new policy discourses in the European Union’, in M. Geddes and J. Benington (eds) Local partnerships and social exclusion in the European Union, London: Routledge. Benington, J. and Harvey, J. (1998) ‘Transnational local authority networking within the European Union: passing fashion or new paradigm?’, in D. Marsh (ed) Comparing policy networks, Buckingham: Open University Press. Bensch, G. (1986) Duisburg 1961–1995: Szenarien struktureller Entwicklung, Duisburg: Amt fuer Statistik und Stadtforschung der Stadt Duisburg. Berkes, F. (2009) ‘Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning’, Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1692–702. Bernt, M. (2003) Rübergeklappt! Die Behutsame Stadterneuerung” im Berlin der 90er Jahre, Berlin: Schelzk&Jeep BezDU (Bezirksamt Duesseldorf) (2008) Duisburg droht Überschuldung – Bezirksregierung weist Haushaltssicherungskonzept 2008 zurück, Duesseldorf: Bezirksregierung Duesseldorf.Available at: http://www. bezreg-duesseldorf.nrw.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/2008/12Deze mber/163_2008.html (accessed 28 January 2009). Bianconi, M., Gallent, N. and Greatbatch, I. (2006) ‘The changing geography of subregional planning in England’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24, 317–30. Bidart, C. and Lavenu, D. (2005) ‘Evolutions of personal networks and life events’, Social Networks, 27, 359–76. Birkenhauer, J. (1984) Das Rheinisch-Westfaelische Industriegebiet: Regionen-Genese-Funktionen, Paderborn: UTB fuer Wissenschaft. Blair, T. (2003) ‘The Third Way: new politics for the new century’, in A. Chadwick and R. Heffermann (eds) The New Labour reader, Cambridge: The Polity Reader. Blair, T. and Schroeder, G. (2003) ‘Europe: the Third Way/Die neue Mitte’, in A. Chadwick and R. Heffermann (eds) The New Labour reader, Cambridge: The Polity Reader. Blanke, B., Evers, A. and Wollmann, H. (1986) ‘Einleitung- neue Formen lokaler Arbeits- und Sozialpolitik’, in B. Blanke,A. Evers and H. Wollmann (eds) Die Zweite Stadt- neue Formen lokaler Arbeits- und Sozialpolitik, Basel/Boston/Berlin: Birkhaeuser Verlag.

178

References

BMVBS (Bundesministerium fuerVerkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung) (1999) Verwaltungsvereinbarung über die Gewährung von Finanzhilfen des Bundes an die Länder nach Artikel 104 a Absatz 4 des Grundgesetzes zur Förderung städtebaulicher Maßnahmen (VV-Städtebauförderung 1999), Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2005) Massnahmen im Bundesprogramm Soziale Stadt, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2006) Staedtebauliche Aufwertungsstrategien in benachteiligten Stadtquartieren. Gute Praxisbeispiele in Europa, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2007a) Auf dem Weg zu einer nationalen Stadtentwicklungspolitik. Memorandum, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2007b) Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities, Berlin: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2008) Nationalen Stadtentwicklungspolitik. Eine Intitative zur Staerkung der Zukunftsfaehigkeit deutscher Staedte, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2009a) 3. Bundeskongress Nationale Stadtentwicklungspolitik, Berlin: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2009b) Jubiläumskongress. 10 Jahre Soziale Stadt. Das BundLänder-Programm in der Praxis, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuerVerkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBS (2009c) Nationale Stadtentwicklungspolitik. Positionen, Berlin: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. BMVBW (2004) Die Soziale Stadt. Ergebnisse der Zwischenevaluierung. Bewertung des Bund-Länder-Programms ‘Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt’ nach vier Jahren Programmlaufzeit, Berlin: Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen. Boddy, M. (2003) ‘The changing city’, in M. Boddy (ed) Urban transformation and urban governance, Bristol: The Policy Press. Boddy, M. and Lovering, J. (1986) ‘High technology industry in the Bristol sub-region: the aerospace/defence nexus’, Regional Studies, 20, 217–31. Bodenschatz, H., Heise, V. and Korfmacher, J. (1983) Schlusss mit der Zerstoerung? Stadterneuerung und staedtische Opposition in West-Berlin, Amsterdam und London, Giessen: Anabas Verlag. Bogumil, J. (2006) ‘Administrative modernisation and the logic of politics. Impact of the new steering model on relations between local government politics and administration’, German Journal of Urban Studies, 45, 1-12. 179

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Bogumil, J. and Holtkamp, L. (2002) Die Bürgerkommune als Zusammenspiel von repräsentativer, direkter und kooperativer Demokratie. Erste Ergebnisse einer explorativen Studie, Hagen: FernUniversität. Böhme, C., Franke,T. and Strauss,W.-C. (2008) Statusbericht 2008 zum Programm Soziale Stadt, Berlin: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung (BMVBS). Boland, P. (1996) ‘Regional development strategies in Europe: a summary of key issues’, in J. Alden and P. Boland (eds) Regional development strategies. A European perspective, London: Cromwell Press. Booth, P. and Green, H. (1993) ‘Urban policy in England and Wales and in France: a comparative assessment of recent policy initiatives’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 11, 381–93. Boston, J. (1998) ‘Public sector management, electoral reform and the future of the contract state in New Zealand’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 57, 32–43. Bourdieu, P. (1977) Outline of a theory of practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bovermann, R., Goch, S. and Priamus, H.-J.R. (1996) Das Ruhrgebiet, ein starkes Stück Nordrhein-Westfalen. Politik in der Region 1946–1996, Essen: Klartext. BP (Bristol Partnership) (2003) Minutes of meeting 31  March 2003, Bristol: Bristol Partnership. BPCT (Bristol Primary Care Trust) (2007) Health deprivation and disability domain by electoral ward, Bristol: Bristol Primary Care Trust. Available at: http://www.bristolpct.nhs.uk/PublicHealth/ healthofbristol/deprivation/health_deprivation_disability_domain_ by_electoral_%20ward.asp (accessed 16 November 2009). Brenner, N. and Theodore, N. (2002a) ‘Cities and the geographies of “actually existing neoliberalism”’, Antipode, 34, 349–79. Brenner, N. and Theodore, N. (2002b) ‘Preface: from the “new localism” to the spaces of neoliberalism’, Antipode, 34, 341–7. Brenner, N. and Theodore, N. (2010) ‘Cities and the geography of “actually existing neoliberalism”’, in G. Bridge and S. Watson (eds) The Blackwell city reader, (2nd edn), Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. Brombach, K., Jessen, J., Küchel, L., Lang, T. and Sonntag, M. (2005) ‘Von England lernen? Vier Fallstudien zum Stadtumbau in englischen Städten: urban regeneration in Sheffield, Middelsbrough, St. Helens und Whitehaven’, Gemeinsame Studie des Instituts für Regionalentwicklung und Strukturplanung und des StädtebauInstituts der Universität Stuttgart Erkner/Stuttgart.

180

References

BSA (British Sociological Association) (2002) ‘Statement of ethical practice for the British Sociological Association’, British Sociological Association. Available at: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/equality/ Statement+Ethical+Practice.htm (accessed 2 September 2008). Buennig, J. (1983) ‘Stahlstadt Duisburg’, in J. Buennig, J. Hartmann, U. Hoeffkes and S. Jaeger (eds) Stahlkrise – Regionalkrise. Ursachen,Verlauf und regionale Auswirkungen der Stahlkrise mit einer Dokumentation der Lösungskonzepte, Duisburg: Revier Verlag. Bull, A.C. and Jones, B. (2006) ‘Governance and social capital in urban regeneration: a comparison between Bristol and Naples’, Urban Studies, 34, 767–86. Bulmer, S. and Burch, M. (1998) ‘Organizing for Europe:Whitehall, the British state and European Union’, Public Administration, 76, 601–28. Burgers, J., Vranken, J., Friedrichs, J. and Hommerich, C. (2003) Anleitung fuer ein erfolgreiches Stadtentwicklungprogramm- Beispiele aus neun europaeischen Laendern, Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Burgi, M. (2010) ‘Kommunalisierung staatlicher Aufgaben – Möglichkeiten, Grenzen und Folgefragen aus rechtlicher Sicht’, in J. Bogumil and S. Kuhlmann (eds) Kommunale Aufgabenwahrnehmung im Wandel, Wiesbaden,VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Burrows, R. and Bradshaw, J. (2001) ‘Evidence-based policy and practice’. Environment and Planning A, 33, 1345–8. Burt, R.S. (2005) Brokerage and closure. An introduction to social capital, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bußmann, U., Esch, K. and Stöbe-Blossey, S. (2003) Neue Steuerungsmodelle – Frischer Wind im Jugendhilfeausschuss? Die Weiterentwicklung der neuen Steuerungsmodelle: Tendenzen und Potenziale am Beispiel der Jugendhilfe, Opladen: Leske + Budrich. CA (Creating Excellence) (2004) Designing a healthy living centre, Bristol: Creating Excellence.Available at: http://www.creatingexcellence.org. uk/print-section-article85.html (accessed 10 April 2008). CA (2008) Slum upgrading up close: experiences of six cities, Washington: The Cities Alliance. CaH (Community at Heart) (2002) Community at Heart – Barton Hill, Redfield, Lawrence Hill and the Dings. New Deal for Communities Bristol, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2004a) Community at Heart.Tackling racism team: mapping exercise findings report, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2004b) Looking back – the early days of Community at Heart, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2005a) Endorsement – Community at Heart strategic plan 2005– 2010, Bristol: Community at Heart. 181

Regenerating deprived urban areas

CaH (2005b) Revised strategic plan 2005–2010, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2009a) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000–2010: advice, business, learning and employment, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http://www.communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2009/02/able.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009b) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: arts, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http://www. communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/arts.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009c) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000–2010: community development, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http://www.communityatheart.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2009/02/community-development.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009d) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000–2010: crime and safety, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http:// www.communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ crime-and-safety.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009e) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: education, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http:// www.communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ education.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009f) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: environment, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http:// www.communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ environment.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009g) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: health, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http://www. communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/health.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009h) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: housing, Bristol: Community at Heart.Available at: http://www. communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/housing.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009i) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: sports, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http://www. communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/sports.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010).

182

References

CaH (2009j) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000–2010: tackling racism, Bristol: Community at Heart.Available at: http://www. communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/tacklingracism.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009k) Community at Heart. New Deal for Communities 2000– 2010: young people, Bristol: Community at Heart. Available at: http:// www.communityatheart.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ young-people.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010). CaH (2009l) Life after New Deal.The future plans for Community at Heart, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2009m) Succession delivery plan 2010–2015. Using neighbourhood management to make Easton and Lawrence Hill a better place to live and work, Bristol: Community at Heart. CaH (2010) New Deal for Communities. Final report, Bristol: Community at Heart. Cameron, D. (2010) ‘David Cameron’s Conservative conference speech in full’, The Telegraph.Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ politics/david-cameron/8046342/David-Camerons-Conservativeconference-speech-in-full.html (accessed 6 October 2010). Carrington, P.J., Scott, J. and Wasserman, S. (2005) Models and methods in social network analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CDP (Community Development Project) (1977) Gilding the ghetto, the state and the poverty experiments, London: Community Development Project Inter-project Editorial Team. Cerny, P.G. (2008) ‘Embedding neoliberalism: the evolution of a hegemonic paradigm’, The Journal of International Trade and Diplomacy, 2, 1–46. Chatterton, P. and Bradley, D. (2000) ‘Bringing Britain together? The limitations of area-based regeneration policies in addressing deprivation’, Local Economy, 15, 98–111. Cheshire, P., Carbonaro, G. and Hay, D. (1986) ‘Problems of urban decline and growth in EEC countries: or measuring degrees of elephantness’, Urban Studies, 23, 131–49. Chien, S.-S. (2008) ‘The isomorphism of local development policy: a case study of the formation and transformation of national development zones in Post-Mao Jiangsu, China’, Urban Stud, 45, 273–94. Chiu, L.F. and West, R.M. (2007) ‘Health intervention in social context: understanding social networks and neighbourhood’, Social Science & Medicine, 65, 1915–27. Clarke, J. (2008) ‘Living with/in and without neo-liberalism’, Focaal – European Journal of Anthropology, 51, 135–47. 183

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Clarke, N. (2009) ‘In what sense “spaces of neoliberalism”? The new localism, the new politics of scale, and town twinning’, Political Geography, 28, 496–507. Clarke, S.E. (1993) ‘The new localism: local politics in a global era’, in E.G. Goetz and S.E. Clarke (eds) The new localism. Comparative urban politics in a global era, London: Sage. Cleaver, F. (1999) ‘Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development’, Journal of International Development, 11, 597–612. Coaffee, J. (2005) ‘New localism and the management of regeneration’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18, 108–13. Coaffee, J. and Headlam, N. (2008) ‘Pragmatic localism uncovered: the search for locally contingent solutions to national reform agendas’, Geoforum, 39, 1585–99. Coaffee, J. and Healey, P. (2003) ‘My voice, my place: tracking transformations in urban governance’, Urban Studies, 40, 1979–99. Cochrane,A. (1993) Whatever happened to local government, Buckingham: Open University Press. Cochrane, A. (2004) ‘Modernisation, managerialism and the culture wars: reshaping the local welfare state in England’, Local Government Studies, 30, 481–96. Cochrane, A. (2007) Understanding urban policy: a critical introduction, Malden, MA: Blackwell. Cohen, M.D., March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1972) ‘A garbage can model of organizational choice’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1–25. Cole, A. and John, P. (2001) Local governance in England and France, London: Routledge. Cole, I. and Etherington, D. (2005) ‘Neighbourhood renewal policy and spatial differentiation in housing markets: recent trends in England and Denmark’, International Journal of Housing Policy, 5, 77–97. Coleman, J.S. (1988) ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, The American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120. Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. (2001) ‘The case for participation as tyranny’, in B.Cooke and U. Kothari (eds) Participation.The new tyranny?, New York, NY:Yed Press. Couch, C., Fraser, C. and Percy, S. (2003) Urban regeneration in Europe, Oxford: Blackwell. Couch, C., Sykes, O. and Börstinghaus,W. (2011 ‘Thirty years of urban regeneration in Britain, Germany and France: the importance of context and path dependency’, Progress in planning, 75, 1-52.

184

References

Coulson, A. (2004) ‘Local politics, central power: the future of representative local government in England’, Local Government Studies, 30, 467–80. CoW (City of Westminster) (2010) Joint statement from Westminster Council, Hammersmith and Fulham Council and Kensington and Chelsea, London: City of Westminster. Available at: http://www.westminster. gov.uk/press-releases/2010-10/joint-statement-from-westminstercouncil-hammersmi/ (accessed 10 January 2011). Cox, K.R. (2002) ‘“Globalisation”, the “regulation approach”, and the politics of scale’, in A. Herod and M.W. Wright (eds) Geographies of power: placing scale, Oxford: Blackwell. CRESR (Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research) (2002) ‘New Deal for Communities, national evaluation: NDC partnership reports – a synthesis’, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield. Crossley, N. (2009) ‘The social world of the network. Combining qualitative and quantitative elements in social network analysis’, Sociologica, 1/2010, 1-12. Cullingworth, J.B. and Nadin, V. (2006) Town and country planning in Britain (14th edn), London: Routledge. Dahme, H.-J., Schuetter, S. and Wohlfahrt, N. (2008) Lehrbuch Kommunale Sozialverwaltung und Soziale Dienste, Weinheim: Juventa Verlag. Danielzyk, R. and Wood, G. (1993) ‘Restructuring old industrial and inner urban areas: a contrastive analysis of state policies in Great Britain and Germany’, European Planning Studies, 1, 123–47. Dargan, L. (2009) ‘Participation and local urban regeneration: the case of the New Deal for Communities (NDC) in the UK’, Regional Studies, 43, 305–17. Davies, J.S. (2002) ‘The governance of urban regeneration: a critique of the “governing without government” thesis’, Public Administration, 80, 301–22. Davies, J.S. (2004) ‘Conjuncture or disjuncture? An institutionalist analysis of local regeneration partnerships in the UK’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28, 570–85. Davies, J.S. and Pill, M. (2012) ‘Hollowing out neighbourhood governance? Rescaling revitalisation in Baltimore and Bristol’, Urban Studies, 49, 2199–217. Davis, H. and Martin, S. (2002) ‘Evaluating the Best Value pilot programme: measuring “success” and “improvement”’, Local Government Studies, 28, 55–68.

185

Regenerating deprived urban areas

DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government) (2002) NDC programme note 7: asset management and long term sustainability, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2005) Local Area Agreements and communities. A resource for government offices, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2006a) NDC programme note 34: NDC succession strategies and use of assets, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2006b) NDC programme note 38: NDC succession and use of assets, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2007) Negotiating new Local Area Agreements, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2008a) Delivering succession strategies. Some lessons from the New Deal for Communities programme, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2008b) Programme note 44: sustaining the benefits and improvement in the NDC areas: guidance on requirements for succession strategies and the approval process, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. DCLG (2011) A plain English guide to the Localism Act, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Deas, I. and Ward, K. G. (2000) ‘From the “new localism” to the “new regionalism”? The implications of Regional Development Agencies for city-regional relations’, Political Geography, 19, 273–92. Deas, I., Robson, B. and Bradford, M. (2000) ‘Re-thinking the Urban Development Corporation “experiment”: the case of Central Manchester, Leeds and Bristol’, Progress in Planning, 54, 1–72. Deas, I., Robson, B., Wong, C. and Bradford, M. (2003) ‘Measuring neighbourhood deprivation: a critique of the Index of Multiple Deprivation’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21, 883–903. De Groot, L. (1992) ‘City challenge: competing in the urban regeneration game’, Local Economy, 7, 196–209. Deloitte (2007) Vorbereitende Untersuchungen zum Sanierungsverfahren Duisburg-Nord, Essen: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. DETR (Department of the Environment,Transport and the Regions) (1999) New Deal for Communities: phase 1 – proposals guidance for applicants, London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. Deutscher Bundestag (2000) ‘Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany’, text edition – status, December, Berlin. 186

References

Deutscher Bundestag (2009) Stadtentwicklungsbericht 2008. Neue urbane Lebens- und Handlungsräume. Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Bundestagsdrucksache 16/13130, Berlin: Bundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung. Deutscher Bundestag (2010) Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Sören Bartol, Uwe Beckmeyer, Edelgard Bulmahn, weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion der SPD – Drucksache 17/1794 – Fortführung des Programms Soziale Stadt, Drucksache 17/2234, Deutscher Bundestag, Berlin. Deutscher Staedtetag (2005) Zum 100. Geburtstag des Deutschen Städtetages – ein chronologischer Überblick, Koeln: Deutscher Staedtetag. DIFU (Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik) (2000) ‘Leitfaden zur Ausgestaltung der Gemeinschaftsinitiative “Soziale Stadt”’, in DIFU (ed) Programmgrundlagen.Arbeitspapiere zum Programm Soziale Stadt Bd. 3, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik. DIFU (2002) Die Soziale Stadt- Eine erste Bilanz des Bund-LänderProgramms “Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt”, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen. DIFU (2003a) Good practice im Neubau. Eine Analyse im Rahmen des Bund-Länder-Programms “Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt”, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik. DIFU (2003b) Socially integrative city strategies, Berlin: Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing (BMVBW). Available at: http:// www.sozialestadt.de/en/veroeffentlichungen/endbericht/1.1.phtml (accessed 1 February 2004). DIFU (2003c) Strategien für die Soziale Stadt. Erfahrungen und Perspektiven – Umsetzung des Bund-Länder-Programms “Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt”, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen. DIFU (2007) ‘Verstetigung und Monitoring in der Sozialen Stadt’, Soziale Stadt info, Deutsches Institut fuer Urbanistik, Berlin. DiGaetano, A. (1997) ‘Urban governing alignments and realignments in comparative perspective: developmental politics in Boston, Massachusetts, and Bristol, England, 1980–1996’, Urban Affairs Review, 32, 844–70. DiGaetano,A. and Klemanski, J.S. (1993) ‘Urban regimes in comparative perspective: the politics of urban development in Britain’, Urban Affairs Review, 29, 54–83.

187

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Dimaggio, P.J. and Powell, W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited – institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, 48, 147–60. DITIB (Türkisch-Islamische Union der Anstalt für Religion e.V.) (2008) ‘Das Wunder von Marxloh’, Duisburg. Available at: http:// www.elisenhof-marxloh.de/rosenartikel/solingen.pdf (accessed 21 September 2009). DoE (Department of Environment) (1977) White Paper: Policy for the inner cities. Note by the Secretary of State of the Environment, Catalogue Reference CAB/129/196/11, London: The national Archive. Dolowitz, D. and Marsh, D. (1996) ‘Who learns what from whom: a review of the policy transfer literature’, Political Studies, 44, 343–57. Duhem, G. (2009) ‘“Soziale Stadt” und “danach”: Was bedeutet das für die Wohnungswirtschaft?’, vhw FWS, 3, Mai-Juni 2009, 151-152. Duisburg Marketing (2010) ‘Historie der Duisburg Marketing GmbH’, Duisburg. Available at: http://www.duisburg-marketing.de/de/ ueberuns/historie.html (accessed 4 February 2010). Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994) ‘From old public administration to new public management’, Public Money & Management, 14, 9–16. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. and Tinkler, J. (2006) ‘New public management is dead – long live digital-era governance’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 467–94. Durose, C. and Lowndes, V. (2010) ‘Neighbourhood governance: contested rationales within a multi-level setting – a study of Manchester’, Local Government Studies, 36, 341–59. Edwards, G. (2010) ‘Mixed-method approaches to social network analysis’, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Review paper, Manchester, National Centre for Research Methods, NCRM/015. Available at: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/842/1/Social_Network_ analysis_Edwards.pdf (accessed 10 Marhc 2010). Edwards, J. and Deakin, N. (1992) ‘Privatism and partnership in urban regeneration’, Public Administration, 70, 359–68. EGDU (Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg) (2001) Geschaeftsbericht 1999–2000, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2004a) Dokumentation-Lokales Kapital für soziale Zwecke Duisburg Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2004b) Stadtteiler neuerung Duisburg Bruc khausen. Weiterentwicklung des integrierten Stadterneuerungsprogramms, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2005) Dokumentation-Lokales Kapital für soziale Zwecke Duisburg Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg.

188

References

EGDU (2006) Dokumentation-Lokales Kapital für soziale Zwecke Duisburg Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2007) Dokumentation-Lokales Kapital für soziale Zwecke Duisburg Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2008a) Dokumentation-Lokales Kapital für soziale Zwecke Duisburg Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGDU (2008b) Neubau Moschee – Begegnungsstätte Marxloh, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. Available at: http://www. duisburg.de/micro/eg-du/projekte/projekt_Moscheeneubau_mxl. php (accessed 25 September 2009). EGDU (2010b) Projektübersicht Fit für Europa, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg. EGM (Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg Marxloh) (1996) Projekt Marxloh Projektbericht fuer die Zeit vom 01.07.1994 bis zum 30.04.1996, Duisburg: Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg Marxloh. Ehrkamp, P. (2007) ‘Beyond the mosque: Turkish immigrants and the practice and politics of Islam in Duisburg-Marxloh, Germany’, in C. Aitchison, P. Hopkins and M.-P. Kwan (eds) Geographies of Muslim identities, Aldershot: Ashgate. Eid, A.A. (2004) Needs analysis of Somali community and capacity building of Horn Africa Forum and member organisations, Bristol: Horn of Africa Forum. Emmel, N. (2009) The methods used in connected lives: investigating networks, neighbourhoods and communities, NCRM Working Paper Series 06/09, Leeds: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods. ENTRUST (Empowering Neighbourhoods Through Recourse of Urban Synergies) (2003) ENTRUST thematic report. Mainstreaming and anchoring, Empowering Neighbourhoods Through Recourse of Urban Synergies.Available at: http://www.ensure.org/entrust/Thematic%20 Reports/mainstreaming_and_anchoring.pdf (accessed 2 June 2009). ERS (2007) ABLE theme evaluation. Community at Heart, Bristol: ERS. ERS (2009) BSEIP and CCTV project evaluation, Bristol: ERS Research and Consultancy. Farwick, A. (2001) Segregierte Armut in der Stadt: Ursachen und soziale Folgen der räumlichen Konzentration von Sozialhilfeempfängern, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Pettigrew, A. and Fitzgerald, L. (1996) The new public management in action, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fix, F., Mueller, D. and Zimmer-Hegmann, R. (1998) Entwicklungsgesellschaften und Stadtteilprojekte als Motoren der integrierten Stadtteilerneuerung in Duisburg, Dortmund: Institut fuer Landes- und Stadtentwicklungforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. 189

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) ‘Five misunderstandings about case-study research’, Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 219–45. Fordham, G., Ardron, R., Batty, E., Clark, C., Cook, B., Fuller, C., Meegan, R., Pearson, S. and Turner, R. (2009) Improving outcomes? Engaging local communities in the NDC programme. Some lessons from the New Deal for Communities programme, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Fordham, G., Lawless, P., Pearson, S. and Tyler, P. (2010) What works in neighbourhood-level regeneration? The views of key stakeholders in the New Deal for Communities programme, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Franke,T. and Löhr, R.-P. (2001) ‘Neighbourhood management – a key instrument in integrative urban district development’, paper delivered at the EURA Conference ‘Area-based initiatives in contemporary urban policy – innovations in city governance’, Copenhagen, 17–19 May. Franke, T., Löhr, R.-P. and Sander, R. (2000) ‘Soziale Stadt – Stadterneuerungspolitik als Stadtpolitikerneuerung’, Archiv für Kommunalwissenschaften, 39, 1-23. Friedrichs, J. (1996) ‘Intra-regional polarization: cities in the Ruhr Area, Germany’, in J. O’Loughin and J. Friedrichs (eds) Social polarization in post-industrial metropolises, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Friesecke, F. (2007) ‘The role of partnerships in urban regeneration – similarities and differences between Germany and United Kingdom’, Strategic Integration of Surveying Services, FIG Working Week 2007, Hong Kong SAR, China, 13–17 May. Froessler, R. and Wagner, J. (1995) Die integrierte Erneuerung benachteiligter Stadtquartiere in Grossbritannien, Dortmund: ILS-Schriften. Froessler, R., Lang, M., Selle, K. and Staubach, R. (1994) ‘Was tun/ Anregungen fuer die deutsche Praxis’, in R. Froessler and K. Selle (eds) Lokale Partnerschaften: die Erneuerung benachteiligter Quartiere in europaeischen Staedten, Basel: Birkhaüser. Fukuyama, F. (2001) ‘Social capital, civil society and development’, Third World Quarterly, 22, 7–20. Funder, M. (1996) Industrielle Beziehungen und regionaler Strukturwandel. Das Beispiel ‘Ruhrgebiet’ im Spiegel der Literatur, Arbeit: Zeitschrift für Arbeitsforschung, Arbeitsgestaltung und Arbeitspolitik. Gabriel, O.W. and Eisenmann, S. (2004) ‘Germany: a new type of local government?’, in B. Denters and L.E. Rose (eds) Comparing local governance.Trends and developments, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

190

References

Gaffikin, F. and Warf, B. (1993) ‘Urban policy and the post-Keynesian state in the United Kingdom and the United States’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 17, 67–84. Ganser, R. and Williams, K. (2007) ‘Brownfield development: are we using the right targets? Evidence from England and Germany’, European Planning Studies, 15, 603–22. Geddes, M. (2005) ‘Neoliberalism and local governance – cross-national perspectives and speculations’, Policy Studies, 26, 359–77. Geddes, M. (2006) ‘Partnership and the limits to local governance in England: institutionalist analysis and neoliberalism’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30, 76–97. Gissendanner, S. (2004) ‘Mayors, governance coalitions, and strategic capacity: drawing lessons from Germany for theories of urban governance’, Urban Affairs Review, 40, 44–77. Glock, B. (2005) Stadtpolitik in schrumpfenden Staedten. Duisburg und Leipzig im Vergleich, Wiesbaden:VS-Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Goderbauer, E. (2005) Stadtumbau in europäischen Städten mit Strukturkrisen, Bonn: Bundesamt fuer Bauwesen und Raumordnung (BBR). Goetz, E.G. (1993) ‘The new localism from a cross-national perspective’, in E.G. Goetz and S.E. Clarke (eds) The new localism. Comparative urban politics in a global era, London: Sage. Goldsmith, M. (2002) ‘Central control over local government – a Western European comparison’, Local Government Studies, 28, 91–112. GO NRW (Gemeindeordnung Nordrhein-Westfalen) (1994) Gemeindeordnung für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen. Bekanntmachung der Neufassung vom 14. Juli 1994, Duesseldorf: Der Innenminister des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Available at: https://recht.nrw.de/ lmi/owa/br_bes_text?anw_nr=2&gld_nr=2&ugl_nr=2023&bes_id =6784&aufgehoben=N&menu=1&sg=0#det221924 (accessed 1 February 2010). Gonzalez, S. and Healey, P. (2005) ‘A sociological institutionalist approach to the study of innovation in governance capacity’, Urban Studies, 42, 2055–69. Goodman, L.A. (1961) ‘Snowball sampling’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32, 148–70. Granovetter, M. (1973) ‘The strength of weak ties’, American Journal of Sociology, 78, Issue 6 (May, 1973), 1360-1380. Greese, D. (1999) ‘Kommunale Kinder- und Jugendpolitik’, in H. Wollmann and R. Roth (eds) Kommunalpolitik. Politisches Handeln in den Gemeinden, Opladen: Leske+Budrich.

191

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Grimshaw, L. and Smith, I. (2007) ‘Evaluation, knowledge and learning in neighbourhood governance: the case of the New Deal for Communities’, in I. Smith, E. Lepine and M.Taylor (eds) Disadvantaged by where you live? Neighbourhood governance in contemporary urban policy, Bristol: The Policy Press. Guentner, S. (2007) Soziale Stadtpolitik- Institutionen, Netzwerke und Diskurse in der Politikgestaltung, Bielefeld: transcript. Guentner, S., Helfen,T., Henkel, K., Kast,A., Schammer, B., SchuemerStrucksberg, M. and Walther, U.-J. (2005) ‘Sozialrorientierte Stadter neuerungspolitiken in Europa. Beispiele aus dem Forschungsverbund ENTRUST’, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 2, 159–73. Gulati, R. and Gargiulo, M. (1999) ‘Where do interorganizational networks come from?’, American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1439–93. Habermas, J. (1984) The theory of communicative action.Vol 1. Reason and the rationalization of society, Boston: Beacon Press. Hall, N. (1993) ‘In the face of urban colonialism: participation in estate regeneration in England’, in R. Froessler (ed) From policy to practice – international perspective on housing and social renewal, Dortmund: IRS-Verlag. Hall, P. (1966) ‘Rhine-Ruhr’, in P. Hall (ed) The world cities, London: World University Library. Hall, P. (1982) ‘Enterprise zones: a justification’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6, 416–21. Hall, P.A. and Taylor, R.C.R. (1996) ‘Political science and the three new institutionalisms’, MPIFG Discussion Paper 96/6, Max-PlanckInstitut für Gesellschaftsforschung. Hambleton, R. (1995) ‘Cross-national urban policy transfer – insights from the USA’, in R. Hambleton and H. Thomas (eds) Urban policy evaluation. Challenge and change, London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Hambleton, R., Savitch, H.V. and Stewart, M. (2002) Globalism and local democracy. challenge and change in Europe and North America, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Hämer, H.-W. (1990) ‘Behutsame Stadterneuerung’, in S.F.B.-U. Wohnungswesen (ed) Stadterneuerung Berlin, Berlin: Senatsverwaltung für Bau- und Wohnungswesen. Hamnett, C. (1979) ‘Area-based explanations: a critical appraisal’, in D.T. Herbert and D.M. Smith (eds) Social problems & the city. Geographical perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hamnett, C. (1994) ‘Social polarisation in global cities: theory and evidence’, Urban Studies, 31, 401–24.

192

References

Hanesch, W. (1997) Ueberlebt die soziale Stadt? Konzeption, Krise und Perspektiven kommunaler Sozialstaatlichkeit, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Hanhoerster, H. and Reimann, B. (2007) Evaluierung der Partizipation im Rahmen der Quartiersverfahren, Berlin: Deutsches Institut fuer Urbanisitik (DIFU). Hardy, C., Philipps, N. and Lawrence,T. (1998) ‘Distinguishing trust and power in interorganizational relations: forms and facades of trust’, in C. Lane and R. Bachmann (eds) Trust within and between organizations. Conceptual issues and empirical applications, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Harlander, T. (1998) ‘Stadtplanung und Stadtentwicklung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Entwicklungsphasen seit 1945’, DISP, 132, 4–9. Harloe, M., Pickvance, C.G. and Urry, J. (1990) Place, policy and politics, London: Hyman. Häußermann, H. (2000) ‘Die Krise der “sozialen Stadt”’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 10, 13–21. Häußermann, H., Holm, A. and Zunser, D. (2002) Stadterneuerung in der Berliner Republik. Modernisierung in Berlin-Prenzlauer Berg, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Häußermann, H., Kronauer, M. and Siebel, W. (2004) An den Rändern der Städte. Armut und Ausgrenzung, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Häußermann, H., Laepple, D. and Siebel, W. (2008) Stadtpolitik, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Healey, P. (1998) ‘Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning’, Environment and Planning A, 30, 1531–46. Healey, P. (2003) ‘Collaborative planning in perspective’, Planning Theory, 2, 101–23. Healey, P. (2006) Collaborative planning: shaping places in fragmented societies (2nd edn), New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillian. Healey, P. (2007) ‘The new institutionalism and transformative goals of planning’, in N.Verma (ed) Institutions and planning, Oxford: Elsevier. Healey, P., De Magalhaes, C., Madanipour, A. and Pendlebury, J. (2003) ‘Place, identity and local politics: analysing initiatives in deliberative governance’, in M.A. Hajer and H. Wagenaar (eds) Deliberative policy analysis. Understanding governance in the network society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heineberg, H. (1988) ‘Die Stadt im westlichen Deutschland – Aspekte innerstädtischer Struktur und Funktionsveränderung in der Nachkriegszeit’, Geographische Rundschau, 40, 20–9.

193

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Heinelt, H. (2004) ‘Governance auf lokaler Ebene’, in A. Benz (ed) Governance- Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen, Wiesbaden:VS Verlg fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Heitmeyer,W. and Anhut, R. (2000) Bedrohte Stadtgesellschaft, Weinheim und München: Juventa. Hendriks, F. and Tops, P. (1999) ‘Between democracy and efficiency: trends in local government reform in the Netherlands and Germany’, Public Administration, 77, 133–53. Hirst, P. (2000) ‘Democracy and governance’, in J. Pierre (ed) Debating governance.Authority, steering and democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hohmann, R.P. (2007) Konflikte um Moscheen in Deutschland. Eine Fallstudie zum Moscheebauprojekt in Schlüchtern (Hessen), Saarbruecken: VDM Verlag. Hoppe,W. and Uechtritz, M. (2007) Handbuch Kommunale Unternehmen, Koeln:Verlag Dr Otto Schmidt, 2 Auflage. Hrbek, R. and Bodenbender, J.C. (2008) ‘Municipal–federal relations in Germany’, in H. Lazar and C. Leuprecht (eds) Spheres of governance. Comparative studies of cities in multilevel governance systems, Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Hughes, J. and Carmichael, P. (1998) ‘Building partnerships in urban regeneration: a case study from Belfast’, Community Dev J, 33, 205–25. Hull, D. (1999) ‘Tackling social exclusion: what role for area-based policies?’, New Economy, 6, 183–7. Hult, K.M. and Walcott, C.E. (1990) Governing public organizations: politics, structures, and institutional design, Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co. Huttenloher, C. (2005) ‘Drittes europäisches Gipfeltreffen der Städte in Noordwijk: Ohne starke Städte keine starke EU’, Europa kommunal, 1, 19–22. Huxham, C. (1996) Creating collaborative advantage, London: Sage Publications. Huxham, C. and Beech, N. (2008) ‘Inter-organizational power’, in S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham and P.S. Ring (eds) The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. IBA (Internationale Bauaustellung) (1996) Werkstatt fuer die Zukunft von Industrieregionen. Memorandum 1996–1999, Gelsenkirchen. IDE (Innenhafen Duisburg Entwicklungsgesellschaft) (2007) Der Innenhafen-Seine Geschichte und industrielle Entwicklung, Duisburg: Innenhafen Duisburg Entwicklungsgesellschaft.

194

References

ILS (Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2000) Routes into jobs and the society. Final report of the project ‘Evaluation of Local Socio-Economic Strategies in Disadvantaged Urban Areas’ (ELSES), Dortmund: Consortium of the European Research Project ELSES (Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, University of Glasgow, Department of Urban Studies, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Department of Infrastructure and Planning u. a.). IM NRW (Innenministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2009) Kommunalfinanzbericht 2009, Düsseldorf: Innenministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Imrie, R. and Raco, M. (1999) ‘How new is the new local governance? Lessons from the United Kingdom’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 24, 45–63. Imrie, R. and Raco, M. (2004) ‘Community and the changing nature of urban policy’, in R. Imrie and M. Raco (eds) Urban renaissance? New Labour, community and urban policy, Bristol: The Policy Press. Imrie, R.F. and Thomas, H. (1993) ‘Urban policy and the urban development corporations’, in R.F. Imrie and H. Thomas (eds) British urban policy and the urban development corporations, London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Imrie, R. and Thomas, H. (1999) ‘Policies towards the inner cities’, in R. Imrie and H. Thomas (eds) British urban policy: an evaluation of the urban development corporations, London: Sage. Innova AG (2006) Management Summary. Projekt ‘Stadtumbau in Duisburg’, Duisburg: Stadt Duisburg. Available at: http://www. duisburg.de/micro/stadtentwicklung/medien/sid_management_ summary__innova_ag.pdf (accessed 10 February 2009). James, O. and Lodge, M. (2003) ‘The limitations of “policy transfer” and “lesson drawing” for public policy research’, Political Studies Review, 1, 179–93. Jasper, U. and Recke, B.V.D. (2010) ‘Shared Ser vices im Krankenhaussektor. Anforderungen an Kooperationen gelockert’, KU Gesundheitsmanagement, 2, 45–6. Jenkner, C. (2008) ‘Warum das Wunder in Marxloh funktioniert’, Der Spiegel, 26 Oktober. Jennings, H. (1962) Societies in the making – a study of development and redevelopment within a county borough, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

195

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Jessop, B. (2003) ‘Good governance and the urban question: on managing the contradictions of neo-liberalism’, Lancaster University. Available at: http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/JessopGood-Governance-and-the-Urban-Question.pdf (accessed 4  May 2009). John, P. (2001) Local governance in Western Europe, London: Sage. John, P.C. (2000) ‘Policy networks’, in K. Nash and A. Scott (eds), Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology, Oxford: Blackwell. John, P. (2006a) Analysing public policy, London: Continuum. John, P. (2006b) ‘Explaining policy change: the impact of the media, public opinion and political violence on urban budgets in England’, Journal of European Public Policy, 13, 1053–68. Johnson, N. and Cochrane, A. (1981) Economic policy-making by local authorities in Britain and Western Germany, London: George Allen & Unwin. Johnston, R. and Glasmeier, A. (2007) ‘Neo-liberalism, democracy and the state: temporal and spatial constraints to globalisation’, Space and Polity, 11, 1– 33. Jones, C. and Lichtenstein, B.B. (2008) ‘Temporary inter-organizational project. How temporal and social embeddedness enhance coordination and manage uncertainty’, in S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham and P.S. Ring (eds) The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jones, P.M. (2009) ‘Hard and soft policies in music education: building the capacity of teachers to understand, study, and influence them’, Arts Education Policy Review, 110, 27–32. Jones, P.S. (2003) ‘Urban regeneration’s poisoned chalice: is there an impasse in (community) participation-based policy?’, Urban Studies, 40, 581–601. Joshi, H. (2001) ‘Is there a place for Area-Based Initiatives?’, Environment and Planning A, 33, 1349–52. Jouve, B. (2005) ‘From government to urban governance in Western Europe: a critical analysis’, Public Administration and Development, 25, 285–94. Jungfer, K. (2005) Die Stadt in der Krise. Ein Manifest fuer starke Kommunen, Muenchen: Carl Hanser Verlag. Junkernheinrich, M., Micosatt, G. and Boettcher, F. (2007) Kommunaler Schuldenreport Nordrhein-Westfalen, Guetersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.

196

References

Kamp-Murböck, M. (2006) ‘Kontinuität in der Sozialen Stadt. Erste Erkenntnisse aus Nordrhein-Westfalen’, Die Soziale Stadt für Kinder und Jugendliche – Perspektiven von Quartiersentwicklung und Lokalem Aktionsplan in E&C-Gebieten Dokumentation der E&CZielgruppenkonferenz der Quartiersmanager/innen vom 26 und 27 April 2006. Katzenstein, P.J. (1987) Policy and politics in West Germany: the growth of a semi-sovereign state, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Kendall, J. (2000) ‘The mainstreaming of the third sector into public policy in England in the late 1990s: whys and wherefores’, Policy & Politics, 28, 541–62. Kenis, P. and Oerlemans, L. (2008) ‘The social network perspective: understanding the structure of cooperation’, in S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham and P.S. Ring (eds) The Oxford handbook of interorganizational relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kilper, H., Lehner, F., Rehfeld, D. and Schmit-Bleek, F. (1996) Wegweiser in die Zukunft. Perspektiven und Konzepte fuer den Strukturwandel im Ruhrgebiet, Aachen: Klartext Verlag. Kisby, B.E.N. (2010) ‘The Big Society: power to the people?’, The Political Quarterly, 81, 484–91. Kjær, A.M. (2004) Governance, Cambridge: Polity. Klinger, P. (2007) Ein Gutachten im Rahmen der wissenschaftlichen Begleitforschung des Informationsbüros d-NRW, Bochum: Informationsbüro d-NRW. Available at: www.d-nrw.de/informationsnuero-d-nrw/ item/download/71 (accessed 10 January 2011). Kloth, M. (2006a) Evaluationsbericht Duisburg-Bruckhausen. Soziale Stadt NRW. Evaluationsbaustein ‘Analyse qualitativer Prozesse’, Duisburg: Universitaet Duisburg-Essen. Kloth, M. (2006b) Soziale Stadt NRW. Evaluationsbaustein ‘Analyse qualitativer Prozesse’. Evaluationsbericht Duisburg-Marxloh, Duisburg: Universitaet Duisburg-Essen. Klug,W. (1997) Wohlfahrtsverbände zwischen Markt, Staat und Selbsthilfe, Freiburg im Breisgau: Lambertus, 1997. Knill, C. and Balint,T. (2008) Explaining variation in organisational change: the reform of human resource management in the European Commission and the OECD, Barcelona: IBEI. Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as governance, London: Sage Publications. Kronauer, M. (2002) Exklusion: die Gefährdung des Sozialen im Hoch entwickelten Kapitalismus, Frankfurt am Main: Campus-Verlag.

197

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Kuerpick, S. and Weck, S. (1998) ‘Policies against social exclusion at the neighboorhood level in Germany. The case study of NorthrineWestphalia’, in A. Madanipour, G. Cars and J.Allen (eds) Social exclusion in European cities. Processes, experiences and responses, London: Regional Studies Association. Kunzmann, K. (1989) ‘Eine europaeische Staedtebaupolitik?’, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 8/9, 609–15. Laffin, M. (2008) ‘Local government modernisation in England: a critical review of the LGMA evaluation studies’, Local Government Studies, 34, 109–25. Lamping,W. (2002) Der aktivierende Staat : Positionen, Begriffe, Strategien, Bonn: Arbeitskreis Bürgergesellschaft und Aktivierender Staat der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Landtag NRW (Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2002) Nur gemeinsam laesst sich die Soziale Stadt verwirklichen! – Integrative Ansaetze der Stadtentwicklung unterstuetzen und fortfuehren!, Duesseldorf: Drucksache 13/2203. Landtag NRW (2004) Zukunft der Staedte. Bericht der Enquetekommission des Landtags von Nordrhein-Westfalen, Duesseldorf: Landtag NRW. Larner,W. (2003) ‘Neoliberalism?’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 21, 509–12. Lawless, P. (1989) Britain’s inner cities, London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Lawless, P. (2004) ‘Locating and explaining area-based urban initiatives: New Deal for Communities in England’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 22, 383–99. Lawless, P., Foden, M.,Wilson, I. and Beatty, C. (2009) ‘Understanding area-based regeneration: the New Deal for Communities programme in England’, Urban Studies, 47, 257–75. Le Galès, P. (1998) ‘Regulations and governance in European cities’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 22, 482–506. Le Galès, P. (2002) European cities: social conflicts and governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Leonardsen, L., Matthiessen, L., Klint, J., Jørgensen, G., Larsen, G. and Larsen, K.S. (2003) The Danish neighbourhood regeneration programme. Kvarterløft in Copenhagen.Available at: http://www.ensure.org/entrust/ Case_Studies/Copenhagen_Case_Study.pdf (accessed 10 July 2009). Loehr, R.P. and Roesner, V. (2003) ‘Kooperation und KoordinationBuendelung der Ressourcen’, in Deutsches Institut Fuer Urbanistik (DIFU) (ed) Strategien fuer die soziale Stadt, Berlin: im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums fuer Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen. Lowndes, V. (2001) ‘Rescuing aunt Sally: taking institutional theory seriously in urban politics’, Urban Studies, 38, 1953–71.

198

References

Lowndes,V. (2002) ‘Between rhetoric and reality: does the 2001 White Paper reverse the centralising trend in Britain?’, Local Government Studies, 28, 135–47. Lowndes,V. (2003) ‘Between rhetoric and reality: does the 2001 White Paper reverse the centralising trend in Britain?’, in P. Carmichael and A. Midwinter (eds) Regulating local authorities: emerging patterns of central control, London: Routledge. Lowndes,V. and Sullivan, H. (2008) ‘How low can you go? Rationales and challenges for neighbourhood governance’, Public Administration, 86, 53–74. Lowndes,V. and Wilson, D. (2001) ‘Social capital and local governance: exploring the institutional design variable’, Political Studies, 49, 629–47. Lowndes, V. and Wilson, D. (2003) ‘Balancing revisability and robustness? A new institutionalist perspective on local government modernization’, Public Administration, 81, 275–98. Lupton, R. and Turok, I. (2004) ‘Anti-poverty policies in Britain – area-based and people-based approaches’, in U.-J. Walther and K. Mensch (eds) Armut und Ausgrenzung in der ‘Sozialen Stadt’: Konzepte und Rezepte auf dem Prüfstand, Darmstadt: Schader-Stiftung. Mahoney, J. (2000) ‘Path dependence in historical sociology’, Theory and Society, 29, 507–48. Mahoney, J. and Thelen, K. (2010b) ‘A theory of gradual institutional change’, in J. Mahoney and K. Thelen (eds) Explaining institutional change: ambiguity, agency, and power, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Malpass, P. (1994) ‘Policy making and local governance: how Bristol failed to secure City Challenge funding (twice)’, Policy & Politics, 22, 301–12. Malpass, P. and Walmsley, J. (2005) 100 years of council housing in Bristol, Bristol: University of West of Bristol (UWE). Manning, N. (2000) The new public management & its legacy, Washington: Worldbank.Available at: http://www.mh-lectures.co.uk/npm_2.htm (accessed 1 November 2008). March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (2004) ‘The logic of appropriateness’, ARENA Working Paper Series 09/2004, 734–49. Marcuse, P. and Kempen, R.V. (eds) (2000) Globalizing cities. A new spatial order, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Marshall, F. (2005) ‘NDC national evaluation.Analysis of delivery plans 2004: outcomes, floor targets and projects’, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research, Sheffield University, Sheffield. Massey, D. (2005) For space, London: Sage.

199

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Mayer, M. (1994) ‘Post-Fordist city politics’, in A. Amin (ed) PostFordism. A reader, Oxford: Blackwell. MBV NRW (Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (2006a) Bericht zur Stadtentwicklung in Nordrhein-Westfalen 2006. Herausforderungen des Demographischen Wandels, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MBV NRW (2006b) Städtebauinvestitionen des Landes NRW 2006, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MBV NRW (2007) Städtebauinvestitionen des Landes NRW 2007, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MBV NRW (2008) Städtebauinvestitionen des Landes NRW 2008, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MBV NRW (2009) Städtebauinvestitionen des Landes NRW 2009, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. McCann, E.J. (2008) ‘Expertise, truth, and urban policy mobilities: global circuits of knowledge in the development of Vancouver, Canada’s “four pillar” drug strategy’, Environment and Planning A, 40, 885–904. McCulloch, A. (2001) ‘Ward-level deprivation and individual social and economic outcomes in the British Household Panel Study’, Environment and Planning A, 33, 667–84. McFarlane, C. (2009) ‘Translocal assemblages: space, power and social movements’, Geoforum, 40, 561–7. McFarlane, C. (2010) ‘The comparative city: knowledge, learning, urbanism’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34, 725–42. McQuarrie, M. and Marwell, N.P. (2009) ‘The missing organizational dimension in urban sociology’, City & Community, 8, 247–68. Meegan, R. and Mitchell, A. (2001) ‘“It’s not community round here, it’s neighbourhood” : neighbourhood change and cohesion in urban regeneration policies’, Urban Studies, 38, 2167–94. Meyer, T. (2001) ‘From Godesberg to the Neue Mitte: the new social democracy in Germany’, in A. Giddens (ed) The global third way debate, Cambridge: Oxford Press. Milbourne, L. (2009) ‘Remodelling the third sector: advancing collaboration or competition in community-based initiatives?’, Journal of Social Policy, 38, 277–97. 200

References

Miller, W. (1993) ‘IBA’s “models for a city”: housing and the image of Cold-War Berlin’, Journal of Architectural Education, 46, 202–16. Mills, S. (2004) Discourse: the new critical idom, London: Routledge. Milward, H.B. and Provan, K.G. (1998) ‘Measuring network structure’, Public Administration, 76, 387–407. Mix, U. and Herweyer, M. (eds) (1995) 10 JahreTilburger Modell; Erfahrungen einer o¨ffentlichen Verwaltung auf dem Weg zum Dienstleistungscenter, Bremen: Kellner. Mohr, B. (1980) ‘Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen: Das Beispiel Duisburg’, Gewerkschaftliche Monatshefte, 31, 479–83. Moore, B.J. (1966) Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: lord and peasant in the making of the modern world, Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Mouffe, C. (2005) On the political, London: Routledge. MSKS (Ministerium für Stadtentwicklung, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (1998) Stadtteile mit besonderem Erneuerungsbedarf. Ressortübergreifendes Handlungsprogramm der Landesregierung NordrheinWestfalen, Wuppertal: Ministerium für Stadtentwicklung, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (Minister ium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen) (1996) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 1996, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes NordrheinWestfalen. MSWKS NRW (1997) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 1997, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (1998) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 1998, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (1999) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 1999, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (2000) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 2000, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (2001) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 2001, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (2002) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 2002, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen.

201

Regenerating deprived urban areas

MSWKS NRW (2003) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 2003, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSWKS NRW (2004) Stadterneuerungsprogramm 2004, Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Staedtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Murtagh, B. (2001) ‘Partnerships and policy in Northern Ireland’, Local Economy, 16, 50–62. Musson, S.,Tickell,A. and John, P. (2005) ‘A decade of decentralisation? Assessing the role of the Government Offices for the English regions’, Environment and Planning A, 37, 1395–412. Myrdal, G. (1963) Challenge to affluence, NewYork, NY: Pantheon Books. Nahapiet, J. (2008) ‘The role of social capital in inter-organizational relationsships’, in S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham and P.S. Ring (eds) The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Neumann, U. (2002) Urban sub-divisions. Position of Duisburg in the hierarchical system of German cities and the structural sub-division of the urban area, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Neumann, U. and Schatz-Bergfeld, M. (1997) Lebensgestaltung, Infrastrukturangebotsnutzuung und soziale Kontakte in Duisburg-Marxloh, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Institute Duisburg. Neumann, U. and Schatz-Bergfeld, M. (1998a) Die Zusammenhaenge zwischen raeumlichen Strukturmerkmalen, Meinungsbildern und Verhaltensmustern in Sanierungsbetroffenen Stadtteilen, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Institute Duisburg. Neumann, U. and Schatz-Bergfeld, M. (1998b) Strukturen und Strukturenentwicklung sanierungsbetroffener Stadtteile. Stadtteil-Monitoring Marxloh 1996 bis 1998 und sozialraeumliche Strukturanalyse Duisburg 1998, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Institute Duisburg. Neumann, U. and Schatz-Bergfeld, M. (1999a) Betriebe, Geschaefte, Praxen, Institutionen und Vereine in Duisburg-Marxloh. Bestand und Perspektiven, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Institute Duisburg. Neumann, U. and Schatz-Bergfeld, M. (1999b) Meinungsbilder und Verhaltensmuster in Duisburg-Marxloh. Entwicklung 1997 bis 1999 und Zusammenhang mit der Strukturenentwicklung des Stadtteils, Duisburg: N.U.R.E.C. Institute Duisburg. Nijman, J. (2007) ‘Introduction – comparative urbanism’, Urban Geography, 28, 1–6.

202

References

Noble, M., Anttila, C., Covizzi, I., Mclennan, D., Mason, D., Mokhtar, C., Zaidi, A. and Hannan, C. (2005) Worklessness in New Deal for Communities areas: findings from stage 1 of the national evaluation, Oxford: Social Disadvantage Research Centre, Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Oxford. NRU (Neighbourhood Renewal Unit) (2002) Collaboration and coordination in Area-Based Initiatives, London: Neighbourhood Renewal Unit. Nye, J.S. (2004) ‘Soft power and American foreign policy’, Political Science Quarterly, 119, 255–70. Oatley, N. (2000) ‘New Labour’s approach to age-old problems: renewing and revitalising poor neighbourhoods – the national strategy for neighbourhood renewal’, Local Economy, 15, 86–97. ODPM (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) (1999) Cross-cutting issues in public policy and public service, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. ODPM (2003) Review of Area Based Initiatives, impacts and outcomes, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. ODPM (2006) Local Strategic Partnerships: shaping their future, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. ODPM/NRU (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister/Neighbourhood Renewal Unit) (2002) Factsheet no.8: the role of Local Strategic Partnerships in neighborhood renewal, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister/ Neighbourhood Renewal Unit. ODPM/NRU (2005a) Making it happen in neighbourhoods: the national strategy for neighbourhood renewal – four years on, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister/Neighbourhood Renewal Unit. ODPM/NRU (2005b) New Deal for Communities 2001–2005: an interim evaluation, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister/ Neighbourhood Renewal Unit. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1998) Immigrants, integration and cities. Exploring the links, Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD (1999) Urban policy in Germany. Towards sustainable urban development, Paris: OECD Publishing. Oelschlaegel, D. (1987) ‘Ein “Lichtblick” fuer Bruckhausen. Sozialkulturelle Arbeit in einem armen Stadtteil’, Kulturpolitische Mitteilungen, 37, 27–30. Offe, C. (1996) ‘Designing institutions in East European transitions’, in R. Goodin (ed) The theory of institutional design, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

203

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Oliver, C. (1992) ‘The antecedents of deinstitutionalization’, Organization Studies, 13, 563–88. Olsen, J.P. (2008) ‘Change and continuity. An institutional approach to institutions of democratic government’, ARENA Working Paper No 15, June, Oslo. Ong, A. (2006) Neoliberalism as exception: mutations in citizenship and sovereignty, Durham and London: Duke University Press. Ong, A. (2007) ‘Neoliberalism as a mobile technology’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32, 3–8. Painter, J. and Goodwin, M. (2000) ‘Local governance after Fordism: a regulationist perspective’, in G. Stoker (ed) The new politics of British local government, Basingstoke: Macmillan Parkinson, M. (1988) ‘Urban regeneration and development corporations: Liverpool style’, Local Economy, 3, 109–118. Parkinson, M. (1998) Combating social exclusion. Lessons from area-based programmes in Europe, London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation Parkinson, M., Foley, B. and Judd, D. (eds) (1988) Regenerating the cities: the UK and the US expierence, Manchester; Manchester University Press. Pattie, C. (2001) ‘On reinvented wheels’, Environment and Planning A, 33, 1353–6. Peck, J. (2001) ‘Neoliberalizing states: thin policies/hard outcomes’, Progress in Human Geography, 25, 445–55. Peck, J. (2002) ‘Political economies of scale: fast policy, interscalar relations, and neoliberal workfare’, Economic Geography, 78, 331–60. Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (2002) ‘Neoliberalizing space’, Antipode, 34, 380–404. Perrons, D. and Skyers, S. (2003) ‘Empowerment through participation? Conceptual explorations and a case study’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27, 265–85. Pesch, F., Schenk, M. and Sperle, T. (2003) Bedeutungswandel der Innenstädte und Nebenzentren in den Städten von Nordrhein-Westfalen, Stuttgart: Städtebau-Institut Universität Stuttgart. Peters, B.G. (2005) Institutional theory in political science. The ‘new institutionalism’, London: Continuum. Peters, B.G. and Pierre, J. (1998) ‘Governance without government? Rethinking public administration’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 8, 223–43. Pfeiffer, U. and Heckenroth, M. (2001) Best practice in überforderten Nachbarschaften: Strategien und Maßnahmen in Großbritannien, Bonn: empirica.

204

References

Pfotenhauer, E. (2000) ‘Stadter neuerung-Sanierung’, in H. Haeussermann (ed) Grosstadt. Soziologische Stichwort, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Pierre, J. (1997) ‘Public–private partnerships and urban governance: introduction’, in J. Pierre (ed) Partnerships in urban governance. European and American experience, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Pierre, J. and Peters, B.G. (2000) Governance, politics and the state, London: Macmillan. Pike, A and Tomaney, J (2009) ‘The state and uneven development: The governance of economic development in England in the postdevolution UK’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 2 (1), 13–34. Pollitt, C. (2001) ‘Clarifying convergence. Striking similarities and durable differences in public management reform’, Public Management Review, 3, 471–92. Portes, A. (1998) ‘Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology’, Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24. Powell, M. (2004) ‘In search of new and old localism’, paper presented at ESPAnet Conference, Oxford, 9–11 September, Bath, University of Bath. Pressman, J.L. and Wildavsky, A. (1984) Implementation, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Punter, J.V. (1993) ‘Development interests and the attack on planning controls: “planning difficulties” in Bristol 1985–1990’, Environment and Planning A, 25, 521–38. Putnam, R.D. (1995) ‘Tuning in, tuning out: the strange disappearance of social capital in America’, PS: Political Science and Politics, 28, 664–83. Quack, S. (2006) ‘Institutioneller Wandel. Institutionalisierung und De-institutionalisierung’, in K. Senge and K.-U. Hellmann (eds) Einfuehrung in den Neo-Institutionalismus, Wiesbaden: Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Raco, M. (2000) ‘Assessing community participation in local economic development – lessons for the new urban policy’, Political Geography, 19, 573–99. Raco, M. (2002) ‘The social relations of organisational activity and the new local governance in the UK’, Urban Studies, 39, 437–56. Raco, M., Gavin, P. and Doak, J. (2006) ‘Reshaping spaces of local governance? Community strategies and the modernisation of local government in England’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24, 475–96.

205

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Redding, V. (2008) The people’s hive. Connecting with the community. Evaluation report for April 2006–September 2007, Bristol: Resolve Consultancy. Reichard, C. (2002) ‘The “new steering model” and the citizen’, German Journal of Urban Studies, 41, 1-15. Rhodes, R. (1997) Understanding governance: policy networks, governance, reflexitivity and accountability, Basingstoke: Macmillian. Rhodes, R.A.W. (2007) ‘Understanding governance: ten years on’, Organization Studies, 28, 1243–64. Richter, R. (2008) Die Bevölkerungsentwicklung in Duisburg bis 2027. Ergebnisse der Bevölkerungsvorausberechnung 2008, Duisburg: Stadt Duisburg,Amt für Statistik, Stadtforschung und Europaangelegenheiten. Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973) ‘Dilemmas in a general theory of planning’, Policy Sciences, 4, 155–69. Robinson, D. (2005) ‘The search for community cohesion: key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy agenda’, Urban Studies, 42, 1411–27. Robinson, J. (2004) ‘In the tracks of comparative urbanism: difference, urban modernity and the primitive’, Urban Geography, 25, 709–23. Robinson, J. (2006) Ordinary cities. Between modernity and development, Oxon: Routledge. Robinson, J. (2011) ‘Cities in a world of cities: the comparative gesture’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35, 1–23. Robson, B. (1994) ‘Urban policy at the crossroads’, Local Economy, 9, 216–23. Robson, B., Bradford, M., Deas, I., Hall, E. and Harrison, E. (1994) Assessing the impact of urban policy, London: HMSO. Rodríguez-Pose, A. and Gill, N. (2003) ‘The global trend towards devolution and its implications’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21, 333–51. Ruiz, M. and Sauter, M. (2007) Kontinuität in der Sozialen Stadt.Welche Perspektive hat die integrierte Stadtteilentwicklung nach der Förderung? Tagungsdokumentation 2006, Dortmund: Städtenetz Soziale Stadt NRW in Kooperation mit Stadt Gelsenkirchen, Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung und Bauwesen des Landes NRW (ILS NRW) und Ministerium für Bauen und Verkehr des Landes NRW. Rydin,Y. (1993) The British planning system.An introduction, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Rydin, Y. and Pennington, M. (2000) ‘Public participation and local environmental planning: the collective action problem and the potential of social capital’, Local Environment:The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 5, 153–69. 206

References

Sassen, S. (2001) The global city: New York, London, Tokyo (2nd edn), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Sauter, M. (2009) ‘Soziale Stadt: Es ist Zeit für einen Paradigmenwechsel!’, vhw FWS, 4, 209–13. Schmid, J. (1996) Wohlfahrtsverbände in modernen Wohlfahrtsstaaten. Soziale Dienste in historisch-vergleichender Perspektive, Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Schmid, J. (2006) Wohlfahrtsstaaten im Vergleich. Soziale Sicherung in Europa: Organisation, Finanzierung, Leistungen und Probleme, Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Schmidt-Eichstaedt, G. (1999) ‘Autonomie und Regelung von oben. Zum Verhaeltnis von kommunaler Eigenverantwortung und fremdbestimmter Eingrenzung durch Bundes- und Landesrecht sowie durch Normen der Europaeischen Union’, in H. Wollmann and R. Roth (eds) Kommunalpolitik, Opladen: Leske+Budrich. Schmitter, P.C. (1989) ‘Corporatism is dead! Long live corporatism!’, Government and Opposition, 24, 54–73. Schmuelling, K. (2008) ‘Das “Wunder von Marxloh”’, rponline. Available at: www.rp-online.de/niederrheinnord/duisburg/ nachrichten/duisburg/Das-Wunder-von-Marxloh_aid_630512.html (accessed 10 September 2009). Scott, W.R. (1995) Institutions and organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Scott,W.R. (2004) ‘Institutional theory’, in G. Ritzer (ed) Encyclopedia of social theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Selle, K. (1994) ‘Lokale Partnerschaften-Organisationsformen und Arbeitsweisen fuer kooperative Problembearbeitung vor Ort’, in R. Froessler and K. Selle (eds) Lokale Partnerschaften: die Erneuerung benachteiligter Quartiere in europaeischen Staedten, Basel, Boston, Berlin: Birkhäuser. Selznick, P. (1957) Leadership in administration, New York, NY: Harper and Row. Senge, K. (2006) ‘Zum Begriff der Institution im Neo-Institutionalismus’, in K. Senge and K.-U. Hellmann (eds) Einfuehrung in den NeoInstitutionalismus, Wiesbaden:Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. SEU (Social Exclusion Unit) (1998) Bringing Britain together: a national strategy for neighbourhood renewal, London: Social Exclusion Unit. SEU (2001) A new commitment to neighbourhood renewal: a national strategy action plan, London: Social Exclusion Unit, The Cabinet Office. Smith, D. and Timberlake, M. (2002) ‘Hierarchies of dominance among world cities: a network approach’, in S. Sassen (ed) Global networks, linked cities, London: Routledge.

207

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Smith, G. (1987) ‘Whatever happened to educational priority areas?’, Oxford Review of Education, 13, 23–38. Smith, G.R. (1999) Area-Based Initiatives: the rationale and options for area targeting, London: Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion/London School of Economics. Smith, I. (2004) ‘Main evaluation report for the Community at Heart New Deal 2002/03’, unpublished, University of West of England, Bristol. Smith, I. (2005) ‘Main evaluation report for the Community at Heart New Deal 2003/04’, unpublished, University of West of England, Bristol. Smith, I., Howard, J. and Evans, L. (2007) ‘Mainstreaming and neighbourhood governance: the importance of process, power and partnership’, in I. Smith, E. Lepine and M.Taylor (eds) Disadvantaged by where you live? Neighbourhood governance in contemporary urban policy, Bristol: The Policy Press. Southern, R. (2002) ‘Understanding multi-sectoral regeneration partnerships as a form of local governance’, Local Government, 28, 16–32. Stadt Duisburg (1991) Geschaeftsbericht, Duisburg: Amt für Statistik, Stadtforschung und Europaangelegenheiten. Stadt Duisburg (1994) Beschlussvorlage 7077: Ressortuebergreifendes S t a d t er ne ue r u n gspr o gramm Hambo r n/Marxloh , Duisburg: Oberstadtdirektor. Stadt Duisburg (1998) Beschlussvorlage 5690: Beschlussvorlage Gruendung der Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH, Duisburg: Oberstadtdirektor. Stadt Duisburg (2005) Gesellschafterversammlung der EGDU Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH hier: Jahresabschluss 2004, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2006) Gesellschafterversammlung der EGDU Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH hier: Jahresabschluss 2005, Duisburg; Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2007a) Gesellschafterversammlung der EGDU Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH hier: Jahresabschluss 2006, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2007b) Wohnbericht 2007. Stadt Duisburg, Duisburg: Amt fuer Soziales und Wohnen. Stadt Duisburg (2008b) Gesellschafterversammlung der EGDU Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH hier: Jahresabschluss 2007, Duisburg; Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2008c) Sozialbericht. Stadt Duisburg, Duisburg;Amt für Statistik, Stadtforschung und Europaangelegenheiten. 208

References

Stadt Duisburg (2009a) Gesellschafterversammlung der EGDU Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH hier: Jahresabschluss 2008, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2009b) Haushaltssicherungskonzept 2010 der Stadt Duisburg, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2009c) Projekt Duisburg2027 – Berücksichtigung der Leitlinien ‘Interkulturelle Urbanität’ im Rahmen der Erarbeitung einer nachhaltigen Stadtentwicklungsstrategie und der Neuaufstellung des Flächennutzungsplans, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Stadt Duisburg (2009d) Projekt Duisburg 2027, Duisburg: Stadt Duisburg. Available at: http://iz-duisburg.de/micro2/2027/medien/bindata/ Projektbeschreibung_Duisburg2027.pdf (accessed 2 November 2009). Stadt Duisburg (2009e) Wahl von Mitgliedern für den Stadtteilausschuss Marxloh der Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg mbH (EGDU).DS 091640, Duisburg: Der Oberbuergermeister. Staubach, R. (1994) ‘Projekte zur Erneuerung benachteiligter Stadtquartiere in Deutschland’, in R. Froessler and K. Selle (eds) Lokale Partnerschaften: die Erneuerung benachteiligter Quartiere in europaeischen Staedten, Basel: Birkhäuser. Steinert, J. (1999) ‘Ueberforderte Nachbarschaften’, in F.E. Stiftung (ed) Modernisieren ohne auszuschließen : Quartiersentwicklung zur Verhinderung einer städtischen Unterschicht, Bonn: Forschungsinstitut der FriedrichEbert-Stiftung, Abt. Arbeit und Sozialpolitik. Steinmo, S.,Thelen, K. and Longstreth, F. (eds) (1992) Structuring politics: historical institutionalism in comparative analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stewart, M. (2001) ‘Area Based Initiatives and urban policy’, paper presented at the Conference Area-Based Initiatives in Contemporary Urban Policy, Danish Building and Urban Research and European Urban Research Association, Copenhagen, May. Stewart, M. and Howard, J. (2004) Mainstreaming in NDC areas: evidence from the national evaluation 2004/05, Bristol: Cities Research Centre, University of the West of England. Stoker, G. (1998) ‘Urban governance’, in J. Pierre (ed) Partnerships in urban governance, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Stoker, G. (1999) ‘Introduction: the unintended costs and benefits of new management reform for British local government’, in G. Stoker (ed) The new management of British local governance, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Stoker, G. (2004) ‘New localism, progressive politics and democracy’, The Political Quarterly, 75, 117–29.

209

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Stracke, E. (1980) Stadtzerstoerung und Stadtteilkampf in Frankfurt am Main, Koeln: Pahl-Rugenstein. Streeck, W. (2003) ‘From state weakness as strength to state weakness as weakness: welfare corporatism and the private use of the public interest’, MPIfG Working Paper 03. Streeck, W., Hilbert, J., Maier, F., Kevelaer, K.-H.V. and Weber, H. (1987) Die Rolle der Sozialpartner in der Berufsausbildung und beruflichen Weiterbildung: Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Berlin: Cedefop – Europäisches Zentrum für die Förderung der Berufsbildung. Strohmeier, K.P. and Häußermann, H. (2003) Sozialraumanalyse – Soziale, ethnische und demografische Segregation in den nordrheinwestfälischen Städten, Dortmund und Bochum: Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Sullivan, H. and Gillanders, G. (2005) ‘Stretched to the limit? The impact of Local Public Service Agreements on service improvement and central/local relations’, Local Government Studies, 31, 555–74. Sullivan, H., Knops, A., Barnes, M. and Newman, J. (2004) ‘Central– local relations in an era of multi-level governance: the case of public participation policy in England, 1997–2001’, Local Government Studies, 30, 245–65. SWRDA (South West Regional Development Agency) (2008) Key gateway to Bristol to be transformed, Bristol: South West Regional Development Agency. Available at: http://www.southwestrda.org. uk/news/release.asp?ReleaseID=2303 (accessed 9 November 2009). Swyngedouw, E. (2004) ‘Globalisation or “glocalisation”? Networks, territories and rescaling’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17, 25–48. Swyngedouw, E. (2005) ‘Governance innovation and the citizen: the Janus face of governance-beyond-the-state’, Urban Studies, 42, 1991–2006. Swyngedouw, E. (2009) ‘The antinomies of the postpolitical city: in search of a democratic politics of environmental production’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33, 601–20. Swyngedouw, E., Moulaert, F. and Rodriguez, A. (2002) ‘Neoliberal urbanization in Europe: large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy’, Antipode, 34, 542–77. Tallon, A.R. (2007) ‘Bristol’, Cities, 24, 74–88. Taylor, M. (2000) ‘Communities in the lead: power, organisational capacity and social capital’, Urban Studies, 37, 1019–35. Taylor, P.J. (2004) World city network. A global urban analysis, London, New York, NY: Routledge.

210

References

Tewdwr-Jones, M., Morphet, J. and Allmendinger, P. (2006) ‘The contested strategies of local governance: community strategies, development plans, and local government modernisation’, Environment and Planning A, 38, 533–51. Thelen, K. (1999) ‘Historical institutionalism in comparative politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 369–404. The Telegraph (2009) ‘Bristol city council local election 2009’. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/localelections/5290193/Bristol-city-council-local-election-2009.html (accessed 2 December 2009). Tiesdell, S. and Allmendinger, P. (2001) ‘Neighbourhood regeneration and New Labour’s third way’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19, 903–26. Tobias, G. and Boettner, J. (1992) Von der Hand in den Mund. Armut und Armutsbewaeltigung in einer westdeutschen Grossstadt, Essen: Klartext Verlag. Treibel,A. (1999) Migration in modernen Gesellschaften.Soziale Folgen von Einwanderung, Gastarbeit und Flucht, Weinheim und München: Juventa. Turok, I. (1987) ‘Continuity, change and contradiction in urban policy’, in D.V. Donnison and A. Middleton (eds) Regenerating the inner city: Glasgow’s Experience, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Turok, I. and Hopkins, N. (1998) ‘Competition and area selection in Scotland’s new urban policy’, Urban Studies, 35, 2021–61. Turok, I., O’Siochru, S. and Zimmer-Hegmann, R. (1998) Inclusive cities: building local capacity for development. Final report for the European Commission DG XVI and Glasgow Development Agency, Glasgow: University of Glasgow. URBACT (2010) ‘URBACT cities facing the crisis. Impact and responses’, Saint-Denis La Plaine URBACT Secretariat. Available at: http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/general_library/Crise_urbact__16-11_ web.pdf (accessed 10 January 2011). Van den Berg, L., Braun, E. and Van de Meer, J. (2007) National policy responses to urban challenges in Europe, Rotterdam: European Institute for Comparative Urban Research (EURICUR). VIVID (2008a) Community’s at Heart race equality project and Race Equality Community Cohesion Action Plan (RECCAP). Evaluation report, Bristol: Vivid Regeneration LLP. VIVID (2008b) Neighbourhood solutions. Evaluation report, Bristol:Vivid Regeneration LLP. Voelzkow, H. (1996) Private Regierungen in der Techniksteuerung. Eine sozialwissenschaftliche Analyse der technischen Normung, Frankfurt am Main/New York: Campus Verlag. 211

Regenerating deprived urban areas

Von Alemann, U., Gehne, D., Moshoevel, F., Reuband, K.-H. and Struenck, C. (2003) Politische Kultur in Stadtteilen mit Problempotenzial. Eine vergleichende Studie aus Nordrhein-Westfalen, Duesseldorf: HeinrichHeine-Universitaet Duesseldorf. Walther, U.-J. and Guentner, S. (2007) ‘Vom lernenden Programm zur lernenden Politik? Stand und Perspektiven sozialer Stadtpolitik in Deutschland’, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 6, 349–62. Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1994) Social network analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weck, S. (2000) Good practice guide ‘routes into jobs and the society’, Dortmund: Consortium of the European Research Project ‘Evaluation of Local Socio-Economic Strategies in Disadvantaged Urban Areas’ (ELSES). Weck, S. (2009) ‘Local economic development in area-based urban regeneration in Germany’, Local Economy, 24, 523–35. Weck, S. and Zimmer-Hegmann, R. (2000) The case study of DuisburgMarxloh. National report of the project ‘Evaluation of Local Socio-Economic Strategies in Disadvantaged Urban Areas’ (ELSES), Dortmund: Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes NordrheinWestfalen. Wegrich, K. (2006) Steuerung im Mehrebenensystem der Laender. Governance-Formen zwischen Hierarchie, Kooperation und Management, Wiesbaden:VS-Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Wiesenthal, H. (1981) Die Konzertierte Aktion im Gesundheitswesen- Ein Beispiel für Theorie und Politik des modernen Korporatismus, Frankfurt a.M./New York: Campus Verlag. Wiesner, R. (1988) ‘Probleme der Stadter neuer ung und jüngerer Wohnungsmodernisierung in Altbauquartieren aus sozialgeographischer Sicht’, Geographische Rundschau, 40, 18–25. Wilks-Heeg, S. (1996) ‘Urban experiments limited revisited: urban policy comes full circle?’, Urban Studies, 33, 1263–80. Wilson, D. (2003) ‘Unravelling control freakery: redefining central–local government relations’, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 5, 317–46. Wilson, D. (2005) ‘The United Kingdom: an increasingly differentiated polity?’, in B. Denters and L.E. Rose (eds) Comparing local governance. Trends and developments, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Wollmann, H. (2002) ‘The civic community (“Bürgergemeinde”) in Germany – its double nature as political and as (civil) societal community’, German Journal of Urban Studies, 41, 1-14.

212

References

Wollmann, H. (2008a) ‘Comparing local government reforms in England, Sweden, France and Germany: between continuity and change, divergence and convergence’, Ludwigsburg. Available at: www.wuestenrot-stiftung.de/download/local-government (accessed 10 February 2009). Wollmann, H. (2008b) Reformen in Kommunalpolitik und -verwaltung. England, Schweden, Frankreich und Deutschland im Vergleich, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Wolman, H. and Goldsmith, M. (1992) Urban politics and policy: a comparative approach, London: Blackwell Publishers. Yelling, J. (1999) ‘The development of residential urban renewal policies in England: planning for modernization in the 1960s’, Planning Perspectives, 14, 1–18. Zapf, K. (1969) Rückständige Viertel. Eine soziologische Analyse der städtebaulichen Sanierung in der Bundesrepublik, Frankfurt: Europäische Verlagsanstalt. Ziesemer, A. (2004) Strategische Stadtentwicklungsplanung im Ruhrgebiet. Eine Analyse am Beispiel der Staedte Duisburg und Dortmund, Dortmund: Dortmunder Vertrieb fuer Bau- und Planungsliteratur. Zimmer, A. (1999) ‘Corporatism revisited – the legacy of history and the German nonprofit sector’, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 10, 37–49.

213

Index

Index Please note: ‘NDC’ = ‘New Deal for Communities’; ‘SCP’ = ‘Social City Programme’.

A Adburgham, R. 57 adult learning support 158, 167 Aehnelt, R. 34, 37, 97, 103-4, 110-11 affordable housing, Germany 88, 92 Alcock, P. 18, 30 Alemann, U.V. 30 Alexander, J. 10-11 Alisch, M. 34, 37 Allen, J. 139 Allen, R. 13 Allmendinger, P. 27 Althoff, R. 89, 92 Ambrose, P. 65 Amin, A. 47 anchoring approaches, succession and sustainability of SCP initiatives 109-18 Andersen, H.T. 24, 142 Andersson, R. 24, 142 advice, business, learning and enterprise initiatives 158, 167 Anhut, R. 34 Antilla, C. 65 area committees (Germany) 99-104 area forums (Germany) 113-15 ‘area rehabilitation’ programmes (Germany) 32, 38 see also Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) Area-Based Initiatives (ABIs) common features 24 cross-national observations 37-40, 121-34 emergence of 23-37 in England 25-30 in Germany 30-7, 88-9 extent and scope of 58-9, 89-90

frameworks for analysis 3-4, 41-53 institutionalisation of practices 43-4 neo-institutionalist approaches 44-6 Institutional Capacity Building Framework 46-53 legacies of 38-9 Bristol 84-6 Duisburg 118-20 models of institutional change 3-4 participation and engagement Bristol 68-71, 71-4 Duisburg 99-104 see also New Deal for Communities (NDC); Social City Programme (SCP) (Germany) ARGEBAU 34-6, 40, 109 Arnstein, S.R. 50 arts programmes, Bristol NDC projects 159 Aspden, J. 29 Association of German Municipalities (Deutscher Staedtetag) 32 Atkinson, R. 26, 50 Audit Commission 26, 38 Austermann, K. 35, 90

B Bachmann, R. 52 Backhaus-Maul, H. 21 Bailey, N. 18, 29 Balint, T. 45 Ball, M. 25 Banting, K. 8 Barnett, C. 140

215

Regenerating deprived urban areas Barton Hill neighbourhood see Bristol Barton Hill Barton Hill History Group 61 Batley, R. 25, 38 Batty, E. 29, 141 BCC (Bristol City Council) 55, 57, 59, 61-2, 81, 82 corporate finance role for NDC 62-3 BdW (1998) 33 Becker, H. 35-7, 104, 109, 141 Beech, N. 53 Beeck (Duisburg) 92 project initiatives 170 SCP funding 95 Behrendt, U. 21 ‘Behutsame Stadterneuerung’ (careful urban renewal) 32-3 Beinhauer-Koehler, B. 113 Bellotti, E. 151 Benington, J. 11, 23 Bensch, G. 88 Berkes, F. 49 Bernt, M. 38 BezDU 116 Bianconi, M. 28 Bidart, C. 151 Big Society 18 Birch, D. 29 Birkenhauer, J. 87 Blair, Tony 14-15, 18 Blanke, B. 34 BMVBS 1, 91, 24, 111, 144-5 BMVBW 97 Bodenbender, J.C. 19 Bodenschatz, H. 32 Boettner, J. 92 Bogumil, J. 20 Böhme, C. 110 Boland, P. 23 Boston, J. 13 Bourdieu, P. 51 Bovermann, R. 90 Bradshaw, J. 142 Brenner, N. 2, 9, 12, 138 Bristol Barton Hill background contexts 55-7 demographic characteristics 57 emergence of development partnerships 57-9 New Deal for Communities (NDC) initiatives 60-86

216

area profiles 61-2 consultation exercises and preparation 60-2 evaluating transformational capacity 125-30 evaluating processes of deinstitutionalisation 130-4 formation of Community at Heart 62-3 funding distributions and expenditures 63-4, 167-8 knowledge broker and gatekeeper role 64-8 legacies 78-84 mainstreaming planning 67, 74-84 organisation of CaH 62-3 participation arrangements 68-71 relational resource generation 71-4 succession strategies and winding down 74-84 summary of post-NDC legacies 84-6 themes and project details 158-65 Bristol city regeneration initiatives (overview) background contexts 55-9 New Labour initiatives 58-9 post-1992 challenges 57-8 governance and political instability 58-9 performance monitoring and evaluation 58-9 turning points for transformation 122 The Bristol Initiative (TBI) 57-8 Bristol Partnership (BP) 74 Bristol Regeneration Partnership (BRP) 58 see also Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) Brombach, K. 1 Bruckhausen (Duisburg) profile of 92-3 project initiatives 170-1 SCP funding 95 SCP programmes 91-120 see also Duisburg BSA 151 Buennig, J. 87 Bull, A.C. 51 Bulmer, S. 43 Burch, M. 43

Index Burgers, J. 1 Burgi, M. 117 Burrows, R. 142 Burt, R.S. 151 business support initiatives 158, 167 Bußmann, U. 21

C CA (Creating Excellence) (2008) 24, 79 CaH see Community at Heart (CaH) Cameron, David 18 Carrington, P.J. 151 Cerny, P.G. 10 change processes and isomorphism 45 see also institutional change Cheshire, P. 23 Chien, S.-S. 45 Chiu, L.F. 151 City Challenge Programme (CCP) 26, 39, 58, 122 Clarke, J. 9, 138-9 Clarke, N. 2-3, 7, 14 Clarke, S.E. 7 Cleaver, F. 50 Coaffee, J. 7, 9, 29, 39, 53, 139 Coalition government (2010–), on Localism 18 Cochrane, A. 1, 10, 16, 18, 25, 139 Cohen, M.D. 48 Cole, A. 12-13 Cole, I. 109 Coleman, J.S. 51 Community at Heart (CaH) 62-8, 76, 78-9 background context and introduction 62 board and organisational charts 62-3 charitable status 62 partnership arrangements 68-71 project titles 158-65 roles as buffer between local administration and the area 71-4 as knowledge broker and gatekeeper 64-8 community development programmes, Bristol NDC projects 159-60 ‘Community Development Projects’ (CDPs) 25

community engagement 68, 82-4 as NDC objective 31 community safety programmes, Bristol NDC projects 160 comparative urbanism research see evaluation research for comparative urbanism Cooke, B. 50 Costa-Font, J. 8 Couch, C. 1, 40 Coulson, A. 17 CoW (City of Westminster) 145 Cox, K.R. 8-9 CRESR 74 cross-national urbanism research see evaluation research for comparative urbanism Crossley, N. 141 Cullingworth, J.B. 25 cultural diversity and architectural styles 112-13 see also ethnic populations

D Dahme, H.-J. 21 Dangschat, J.S. 34 Danielzyk, R. 1, 26 Dargan, L. 50 Davies, J.S. 1, 11, 41-2 Davis, H. 17 DCC see Duisburg City Council (DCC) DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government) 15, 28, 75, 79 De Groot, L. 26, 58 Deakin, N. 26 Deas, I. 17, 58, 65 ‘decoupling’ strategy 45-6, 71, 138 deinstitutionalisation 4, 9, 43-6 project examples Bristol 81-4, 130-4 Duisburg 115-18, 130-4 Deloitte 92 DETR (1999) 29-30, 37, 60, 124 Deutscher Bundestag (2000) 19, 35-6 Deutscher Staedtetag (2005) 32 DIFU (German Institute of Urban Affairs) 33-7, 91, 109, 110 DiGaetano, A. 1, 58 DiMaggio, P.J. 43, 45 DITB 113 217

Regenerating deprived urban areas DoE (1977) 25 Dolowitz, D. 145 Dortmund 90 Duhem, G. 110 Duisburg background history 87-9 demographics and characteristics 87-8 introduction of first ABIs 89 funding 89 outsourcing strategies 89-90 political frameworks 90 post-financial crisis 115-18 as ‘shrinking city’ 88 Social City Programme (SCP) initiative 91-120, 169-71 demographic profiles of Marxloh and Bruckhausen 92-3 EGDU organisational structure 93-5 funding and expenditures 95-7, 169-72 governing bodies 100 knowledge-generating activities of EGDU 95-8 mainstreaming and anchoring practices 109-15 resident and VSO participation strategies 99-104 sustainability approaches 109-15 trust issues and inter-organisational relationships 104-8 withdrawal of funding and budget crisis 115-18 review of legacies 111-18, 118-20 turning points for transformation 122 Duisburg City Council (DCC) EGDU representation and remit 93-4 inter-organisational relationships (DCC–EGDU) 99-104 role as governing body for SCP 100 sourcing knowledge resources from EGDU 95-9 Duisburg Marketing 90 Dunleavy, P. 13 Durose, C. 11

E Education Action Zones 58 education support projects 218

Bristol 69-70, 161, 167 Duisburg 170 Edward, J. 25, 38 Edwards, G. 141 Edwards, J. 26 EGDU (Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg) 89, 98-108, 113, 120 organisational structures 93-5 role as ‘knowledge resource’ 95-8 review of legacy post-SCP 118-20 EGM 90 Ehrkamp, P. 112-13 Eid, A.A. 62 Eisenhuettenstadt 88 Eisenmann, S. 20-1 Emmel, N. 141 employment initiatives, NDC projects 158, 167 England background of public-service delivery reforms 15-18 emergence of Area-Based Initiatives 25-30 decentralisation and outsourcing approaches 25-8 New Labour’s ‘urban renaissance’ 28-30, 39 ENTRUST 109 Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg see EGDU (Entwicklungsgesellschaft Duisburg) environment regeneration projects Bristol 161-2, 168 Duisburg 170-1 ERS 67 Essen 90 Etherington, D. 109 ethnic populations Bristol 61-2 Duisburg 92-3 see also race equality initiatives ethnic entrepreneurship 112-3 evaluation research for comparative urbanism 135-45 cross-national comparisons 137-40 design approaches 147-52 findings and future prospects 142-5 methodological reflections 140-2 value of neo-institutional frameworks 136-7

Index

F Farwick, A. 34 Faust, K. 151 Ferlie, E. 13 Fix, F. 89 Flyvbjerg, B. 141 Fordham, G. 84, 141 Franke, T. 35, 37 Friedrichs, J. 87 Friesecke, J. 1 Froessler, R. 26, 90 Fukuyama, F. 51 Funder, M. 90 funding for ABIs and SCPs 89, 95-7 Bristol’s NDC 63-4, 167-8 Duisburg’s SCP 95-7, 169-72 sustainability strategies 109-18 withdrawal implications 115-18

G Gabriel, O.W. 20-1 Gaffikin, F. 1 Ganser, R. 1 Gargiulo, M. 52 Geddes, M. 10-11, 23, 43 German Institute of Urban Affairs (DIFU) 33-7, 91, 109, 110 Germany and urban regeneration background welfare reforms (19982005) 18-21 city demographic characteristics 87-8 emergence of Area-Based Initiatives 30-7, 88-91 background history 1960s-1970s 30-2, 38, 88-9 ‘Behutsame Stadterneuerung’ (careful urban renewal) approaches 32-3, 38 see also Social City Programme (SCP) (Germany) Gill, N. 8 Gillanders, G. 17 Gissendanner, S. 90 Glasmeier, A. 140 Glock, B. 88, 90 GO NRW 117 Goderbauer, E. 1 Goetz, E.G. 7 Goldsmith, M. 1, 8 Gonzalez, S. 43

Goodman, L.A. 148 Goodwin, M. 9 Granovetter, M. 52 Greese, D. 21 Grimshaw, L. 49 Guentner, S. 32, 33-4, 37-9, 110 ‘guest workers’ (Germany) 32 Gulati, R. 52

H Habermas, J. 49 Hall, N. 27 Hall, P. 26, 41, 43, 87 Hambleton, R. 10, 45, 145 Hamburg 34 Hamnett, C. 2, 143 Hanesch, W. 34 Hanhoerster, H. 103 Hardy, C. 52 Harlander, T. 32 Harloe, M. 12 Harvey, J. 23 Häußermann, H. 32, 34, 51, 87 Headlam, N. 139 Healey, P. 3-5, 43, 47-50, 53, 140 health and wellbeing initiatives, Bristol 162, 167 Heckenroth, M. 1 HEGISS (Hesse) 34 Heineberg, H. 32, 38 Heinelt, H. 10, 34 Heitmeyer, W. 34 Hendriks, F. 20, 21 Herweyer, M. 22 Hirst, P. 10 Hochfeld (Duisburg) 92 project initiatives 171 SCP funding 95 Hohmann, R.P. 113 Holtkamp, L. 20 Hood, C. 13 Hoppe, W. 117 housing companies, reciprocal trust issues 108 housing initiatives Bristol 163, 168 Duisburg 108, 170 housing supply comparisons, Duisburg 88, 92 Howard, J. 75, 77 Hrbek, R. 19 Hult, K.M. 50 219

Regenerating deprived urban areas types of 45 coercive 45, 71, 124

Huttenloher, C. 23 Huxham, C. 37, 53

I

J

IBA 89 ICBF see Institutional Capacity Building Framework IDE 89 ILS 98 IM NRW (2009) 1, 19, 116 Imrie, R. 11, 26, 28, 38 Innova AG 88 ‘institution(s)’ and ‘institutionalisation’ 41-6 as ‘process’ 44-5 institutional capacity 46-53, 126-30, 132-4 transformation of 3-4 evaluation of SCP and NDC transformations 126-30 see also deinstitutionalisation; Institutional Capacity Building Framework Institutional Capacity Building Framework 46-53, 135-7 background to neo-institutional approaches 41-6 dimensions of 49 knowledge resources as intellectual capital 48-50 mobilisation capacity as political capital 50-1 relational resources as social capital 51-3 research on cross-national ABI comparisons 125-34 value as analytic tool 136-7 institutional change 3-4, 41-6 key processes 3-4, 43-4 and isomorphism 45, 66-7, 71, 124, 128 ‘intellectual capital’ 48-50 Inter-organisational Network Analysis (IoNA) 148-52 inter-organisational relationships Bristol’s NDC partnerships 71-4, 153-4 Duisburg’s SCP arrangements 1048, 155-6 ‘intercultural urbanity’ 112-13 isomorphism 45, 66-7, 128

James, O. 145 Jasper, U. 145 Jenkner, C. 113 Jennings, H. 61 Jessop, B. 9 ‘Job Creation Measures and Urban Development’ (1988, Germany) 89 John, P. 8, 11-13, 25 Johnson, N. 1 Johnston, R. 140 Jones, B. 51 Jones, C. 52 Jones, P.M. 134 Jones, P.S. 50 Joshi, H. 142 Jouve, B. 10 Jungfer, K. 19 Junkernheinrich, M. 19, 116

220

K Kamp-Murbock, M. 110 Katzenstein, P.J. 90 Kempen, R.V. 2 Kendall, J. 17 Kenis, P. 52 Kilper, H. 90 Kisby, B.E.N. 18 Kjaer, A.M. 10 Klemanski, J.S. 58 Klinger, P. 145 Kloth, M. 97, 104, 142 Klug, W. 21 Knill, C. 45 knowledge resources as intellectual capital 48-50 cross-national reviews 126-8 patterns of (de)institutionalisation 130-4 role of the EGDU 95-8 SCP activities 96 evaluation of 97-8 legacy and sustainability of 118-19 Kooiman, J. 49 Kothari, U. 50 Kronauer, M. 34 Krupp 87 Kunzmann, K. 23

Index Kvarterloft urban regeneration programme (Denmark) 109

L Laffin, M. 17 Lamping, W. 20 land-use planning, provision of services for 117 Lantag NRW 91-2 Larner, W. 12 Lavenu, D. 151 Lawless, P. 16, 25-6, 38, 74, 77 Le Galès, P. 10, 23 legacies of New Localism initiatives Bristol 78-84, 84-6 Duisburg 111-18, 118-20 Leggewie, C. 113 Leonardsen, L. 109 Lichtenstein, B.B. 52 lifelong learning initiatives 158, 167 Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) 29 local development partnerships 10-13 local governance arrangements 8-10 Bristol 57-9 Duisburg 89-90 local state spaces, transformation through SCP and NDC initiatives 121-5 Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) 29, 58, 72, 82-4 Localism emergence 18 see also New Localism Lodge, M. 145 Loehr, R.P. 37 ‘logic of appropriateness’ 42-3 Lowndes,V. 4, 8, 11, 13, 17, 42-3, 47, 51, 138

M McCann, E.J. 23 McCulloch, A. 142 McFarlane, C. 137, 139 McQuarrie, M. 46 Maginn, P.J. 25 Mahoney, J. 43, 134 mainstreaming planning approaches 5, 44 Bristol 67, 74-84 Duisburg 109-18

Malpass, P. 11, 61 Mannesmann 87 Manning, N. 13 March, J.G. 42-3 Marcuse, P. 2 Marsh, D. 145 Marshall, F. 158-65 Martin, S. 17 Marwell, N.P. 46 Marxloh (Duisburg) first ABI projects 89-90 SCP funding 95 SCP initiatives 92-120 see also Duisburg Massey, D. 140 Mayer, M. 33 MBV NRW 89, 95, 170-2 Meegen, R. 142 Merkez mosque (Marxloh, Duisburg) 112-13 Meyer, T. 20 Milbourne, L. 17 Miller, W. 32, 58 Mills, S. 48 Milward, H.B. 151 mimetic isomorphism 45, 124 Mitchell, A. 142 Mix, U. 22 mobilisation capacity 4, 48, 49 as political capital 50-1 creation methods 99-104 cross-national reviews 126-30 patterns of (de)institutionalisation 130-4 sustainability of 119 Mohr, B. 89 Moore, B.J. 43 Mouffe, C. 11 MSKS 90 Musson, S. 28 Musterd, S. 24, 142 Myrdal, G. 25

N Nadin,V. 25 Nahapiet, J. 51 Nank, R. 10-11 NDC see New Deal for Communities (NDC) Neighbourhood Renewal Funding (NRF) 29

221

Regenerating deprived urban areas Neighbourhood Renewal Unit (NRU) 28 neo-institutionalist perspectives 44-6 background and approaches 41-6 definitions 42 Institutional Capacity Building Framework 46-53, 135-7 research on cross-national ABI comparisons 125-34 value as analytic tool 136-7 Neumann, U. 92, 97 New Deal for Communities (NDC) Bristol Barton Hill 60-86 area profiles 61-2 consultation exercises and preparation 60-2 evaluating transformational capacity 125-30 evaluating processes of deinstitutionalisation 130-4 formation of Community at Heart 62-3 funding distributions and expenditures 63-4, 167-8 knowledge broker and gatekeeper roles 64-8 legacies 78-84 mainstreaming planning 67, 74-84 organisation of CaH 62-3 participation arrangements 68-71 relational resource generation 71-4 succession strategies and winding down 74-84 summary of post-NDC legacies 84-6 themes and project details (20002010) 158-65 emergence 29-30 funding and expenditures 29, 31 key characteristics 31 policy areas 31 target areas 31, 61 New Localism emergence of 15-18 features 7-15 local vs. national governance 8-10 rise of entrepreneurial management approaches 13-15 rise of local development partnerships 10-13 future prospects 142-5

222

international (EU) comparisons 121-34, 137-40 transformation of local state spaces 121-5 neo-institutional analysis of 135-45 as new form of ‘centralism’ 138-9 see also New Deal for Communities (NDC); Social City Programme (SCP) (Germany) New Public Management (NPM) approaches 3-4, 13-15, 45-6 emergence 25-6 as policy strategy 19-20 tools 27 as ‘transformative’ strategy 136-9 types of practice 17, 21 see also outsourcing strategies New Steering Model (NSM) 20-1 Nijman, J. 137 Noble, M. 141 normative isomorphism 45 NSM see New Steering Model (NSM) Nye, J.S. 134

O Oatley, N. 142 ODPM (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) 28, 30 ODPM/NRU (2002/2005a) 28 OECD (1998) 1, 33 Oelschlaegel, D. 38 Oerlemans, L. 52 Offe, C. 43 Oliver, C. 45-6 Olsen, J.P. 42-3, 45-6 Ong, A. 2, 12, 138-9 organisational change, forms of 45-6 organisational relationships see interorganisational relationships outsourcing strategies 1, 2, 21, 25-30, 140, 143-4 Bristol 59-61, 85-6, 123, 130-2 Duisburg 89-90, 102, 118-19

P Painter, J. 9 Parkinson, M. 1, 24, 26, 40, 142 participation in ABIs Bristol 68-71

Index ‘trust’ sociograms for NDC partners 153-4 Duisburg 99-104 ‘trust’ sociograms for SCP partners 155-6 see also community engagement Pattie, C. 142 payment by results 27 Peck, J. 9-10, 12, 138-9 Pennington, M. 51 performance-monitoring 20, 28 of Bristol’s NDC programmes 46, 59, 65-8, 74 of Duisburg’s SCCP initiatives 118, 119 and NPM 14, 17, 27 overview of effectiveness 141 Perrons, D. 50 Pesch, F. 87, 92 Peters, B.G. 10-11, 41 Pfeiffer, U. 1 Pfotenhauer, E. 32, 38 Pierre, J. 10-11, 13 Pike, A. 17 Pill, M. 1, 18 planning documents, for public investments in Duisburg 96-7 planning forums, as platform for public consultation 113-15 ‘policymaking’ 42-3 ‘political capital’ 50-1 see also mobilisation capacity Pollitt, C. 14 population demographics, Germany 87-8 Portes, A. 51 Powell, M. 138 Powell, W. 43, 45 Pressman, J.L. 13 primary schools 117, 159-61, 167 see also schools ‘Project Bruckhausen’ 89 Provan, K.G. 151 public administrations see local governance arrangements public sector reforms, England 15-18 Punter, J.V. 57 Putnam, R.D. 51

Q Quack, S. 43-4

R race equality initiatives Bristol 164-5, 168 Duisburg 170 Raco, M. 11, 28-9, 38, 41, 50 Recke, B. 145 Reichard, C. 20 Reimann, B. 103 relational resources as social capital 4, 48, 49, 51-3 creation of (NDC) partnerships 71-4 cross-national reviews 126-30 patterns of (de)institutionalisation 130-4 and SCP inter-organisational relationships 104-8 sustainability of 119 ‘trust’ sociograms Bristol NDC arrangements 71-4, 153-4 Duisburg SCP arrangements 1048, 155-6 relationship comparisons see interorganisational relationships; relational resources research design 147-52 see also evaluation research for comparative urbanism Rhine–Ruhr Agglomeration 87, 120 Rhodes, R. 10 Richter, R. 88 Rittel, H. 49 road and infrastructure redevelopments 170-1 Robinson, D. 79 Robinson, J. 3, 137 Robson, B. 27 Rodríguez-Pose, A. 8 Roesner,V. 37 Ruiz, M. 110 Rydin,Y. 26, 38, 51, 131

S Sassen, S. 2 Sauter, M. 110 Schatz-Bergfeld, M. 92, 97

223

Regenerating deprived urban areas Schmid, J. 21, 30 Schmidt-Eichstaedt, G. 19 Schmitter, P.C. 21, 30 Schmuelling, K. 113 school holiday support 165, 168 schools 69-70, 117, 161, 167, 170 funding applications from 102 Schroeder, Gerhard 14-15 Scott, W.R. 42, 44 Selle, K. 90 Selznick, P. 44 Senge, K. 42 Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) 27, 39, 58, 81, 122, 124 Bristol bids 60 Skyers, S. 50 Smith, D. 2 Smith, G. 1, 25, 37, 38, 40, 142 Smith, I. 44, 49, 67-8, 70, 74, 81, 142 social capital, and relational resources 51-3 Social City Programme (SCP) (Germany) 33-7 contexts and policy discourses 34-5 emergence 34-5 financing and funding (overview) 36 key characteristics 36 key project spending details 169-72 objectives 35, 36 target areas 35, 36, 91 Duisburg North 91-120 demographic profiles of Marxloh and Bruckhausen 92-3 EGDU organisational structure 93-5 funding and financing 95-7, 16972 governing bodies 100 knowledge-generating activities of EGDU 95-8 mainstreaming and anchoring practices 109-15 resident and VSO participation strategies 99-104 sustainability approaches 109-15 trust issues and inter-organisational relationships 104-8 withdrawal of funding and budget crisis 115-18 review of legacies 111-18, 118-20 ‘social exclusion’ concept 34 Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) 28-9, 64

224

social housing, funding difficulties 108 sociograms inter-organisational trust among NDC partnerships 153-4 among SCP partnerships 155-6 ‘soft power’ (Nye) 134 Southern, R. 27 sports projects, Bristol 164, 168 SRB see Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) Stadt Duisburg 88-9, 92-3, 103, 112, 120 steel industries, Germany 87-8 Steinert, J. 33 Steinmo, S. 43 Stewart, M. 58, 75, 77 Stoker, G. 10, 16-17 Stracke, E. 32 Streeck, W. 30, 90 Strohmeier, K.P. 87 Sullivan, H. 11, 17 sustainability of SCP initiatives 10918 see also mainstreaming planning approaches SWRDA (2008) 55 Swyngedouw, E. 2, 9, 11

T Taylor, M. 2, 11, 70-1 Taylor, R. 41, 43 Tewdwr-Jones, M. 29 Thelen, K. 43, 134 Theodore, N. 2, 9, 12, 138 ‘third way’ 18, 30 Thomas, H. 26, 38 Thrift, N. 47 Thyssen 87 Tickell, A. 9-10, 12, 138-9 Tiesdell, S. 27 Tilburg model 20 Timberlake, M. 2 Tobias, G. 92 Tomaney, J. 17 Tops, P. 20, 21 transformation in governance 47 see also institutional capacity transformation of local state spaces 121-25 transport infrastructure developments 170-1

Index Treibel, A. 32 trust issues partnership sociograms NDC arrangements 71-4, 153-4 SCP arrangements 104-8, 155-6 turning points for local state transformations 122 Turok, I. 25, 38, 133

U Uechtritz, M. 117 URBACT 144 Urban Decline Study Group (1983) 23 Urban Development Corporation (UDC) 26, 38, 57, 122 urban neighbourhoods, transformation through SCP and NDC initiatives 121-5 Urban Neighbourhoods with a Special Need for Regeneration 88-90 in Duisburg 90-1

V Van den Berg, L. 40 VIVID 67, 78 Voelzkow, H. 30 Von Alemann, U. 104 VSOs (Voluntary Sector Organisations) roles within NDC initiatives (Bristol) 60, 68-71 reciprocal trust arrangements 71-4 roles within SCP initiatives (Duisburg) 96, 99-104 participation in area forums 11315 reciprocal trust arrangements 104-7 as service providers 17-18

waste management 117, 162 Webber, M.M. 49 Weck, S. 98, 103, 138 Wegrich, K. 19 wellbeing programmes see health and wellbeing initiatives West, R.M. 151 Wiesenthal, H. 30 Wiesner, R. 32 Wildavsky, A. 13 Wilks-Heeg, S. 25-6, 38 Williams, K. 1 Wilson, D. 8, 17, 43, 46, 51 Wollmann, H. 1, 16, 19-21 Wolman, H. 1 Wood, G. 1, 26 Wright, G. 65

Y Yelling, J. 38 young people’s services, Bristol 165, 168 youth agencies, in Duisburg 106-8, 156 youth centres 117, 165 see also school holiday support youth forums 165 Youth Inclusion Programme 39 youth unemployment, Duisburg 89 youth work, as voluntary selfgovernment task 116

Z Zaheer, A. 52 Zapf, K. 32, 38 Ziesemer, A. 89 Zimmer, A. 30 Zimmer-Hegmann, R. 35, 90, 98, 103

W Wagner, J. 26 Walcott, C.E. 50 Walmsley, J. 61 Walther, U.-J. 37 Ward, K.G. 17 Warf, B. 1 Wassermann, S. 151

225

Based upon comparative research in two cities, Bristol in England and Duisburg in Germany, this book is the first to cross-nationally compare the impacts of ABIs in two deprived urban areas in England and Germany. It evaluates the impacts of these New Localism(s) on organisations and development actors at the neighbourhood level. Using a rich data-set and applying a hands-on methodology it uses a mixed method approach to help the reader with a wider spectrum of illustrations and is aimed at those studying and working in the field of urban regeneration and planning.

RENE PETER HOHMANN works as an urban policy expert for International Development Programmes. He holds a PhD in Geography from King’s College London and a Master’s degree in Social Sciences from Humboldt University in Berlin. He is particularly interested in poverty oriented development approaches in cities. He has extensive research and consultancy experience in evaluating urban regeneration schemes in Europe and slum-upgrading programmes in developing countries.

REGENERATING DEPRIVED URBAN AREAS • Rene Peter Hohmann

In the face of continuing challenges of urban decline, an increasing local policy activism can be observed in a number of European countries. The implementation of area-based initiatives (ABIs) for deprived urban areas, such as the ‘New Deal for Communities’ in England and the ‘Social City Programme’ in Germany, is an example of these New Localism(s). ABIs can be seen as test-beds for new forms of urban governance seeking to foster the active participation of residents and the voluntary sector.

Regenerating deprived urban areas A CROSS-NATIONAL ANALYSIS OF AREA-BASED INITIATIVES

URBAN STUDIES / GEOGRAPHY

ISBN 978-1-44731-078-5

Rene Peter Hohmann

9 781447 310785

www.policypress.co.uk

Regenerating deprived urban areas of Germany and England_PPC.indd 1

9/6/2013 9:24:13 AM