Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Transformation or bureaucratisation?: the changing role of community representation in local strategic partnerships in England

By Nick Bailey

Abstract

The debate about the need to build social capital and to engage local communities in public policy has become a central issue in many advanced liberal societies and developing countries. In many countries new forms of governance have emerged out of a growing realisation that representative democracy by itself is no longer sufficient. One of the most significant public policy trends in the UK has been the involvement of community organisations and their members in the delivery of national policy, mediated through local systems of governance and management. One such policy area is urban regeneration. Central government now requires local authorities in England to set up Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) to bring together stakeholders who can prepare Community Strategies and deliver social and economic programmes which target areas of deprivation. This paper reviews the key institutional processes which must be addressed, such as representation, accountability and transformation

Topics: UOWABE
Year: 2005
OAI identifier: oai:westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk:1178
Provided by: WestminsterResearch

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2001). A New Commitment to Neighbourhood Renewal: National Strategy Action Plan. London: Cabinet Office.
  2. (2001). Accreditation Guidance for Local Strategic Partnerships.
  3. (2004). Community Development: Current Issues and Emerging Challenges.
  4. ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT and the REGIONS (DETR), (2000b) Preparing Community Strategies, Government Guidance to Local Authorities.
  5. (2004). Evaluation of Local Strategic Partnerships. Governance: A briefing note for LSPs by LSPs.
  6. (2003). Examples of Community Participation Methods in Europe. London: Community Development Foundation.
  7. (2003). Local Strategic Partnerships in England: The Continuing Search for Collaborative Advantage, Leadership and Strategy in Urban Governance. Planning Theory
  8. (2001). Local Strategic Partnerships, Government Guidance.
  9. (2003). Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Renewal, and the Limits to Co-governance.
  10. (2003). My Voice: My Place’: Tracking transformations in Urban Governance.
  11. (2003). Neighbourhood Renewal in London. London: Association of London Government.
  12. Our Towns and Cities: The Future. Delivering an Urban Renaissance, cmnd 4911. London: The Stationery Office.
  13. (2003). Participation: The New Tyranny? London:
  14. (1992). Partnership: Issues of Policy and Negotiation.
  15. Regeneration Initiatives. Seventh Report of Session 2002-03. Volume 1. London: The Stationery Office.
  16. (2003). Searching for Solid Foundations: Community Involvement and Urban Policy. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
  17. (1988). Structure and Process in Community Self-Help Organisations.
  18. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organisational Fields.
  19. (2001). The Place of Social Capital in Understanding Social and Economic Outcomes.
  20. (1997). Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability. Milton Keynes:
  21. (1995). Unleashing the Potential: Bringing Residents to the Centre of Regeneration.
  22. (2000). Urban Political Science and the Challenge of Urban Governance,
  23. (2003). Urban Regeneration’s Poisoned Chalice: Is there an Impasse in (Community) Participation-based Policy? Urban Studies,
  24. (2004). Working in Partnership for Regeneration – the effect of organisational norms on Community Groups.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.