Let’s celebrate recovery. Inclusive Cities working together to support social cohesion

Recovery from illicit drug and alcohol use takes place over time and is characterised by a dynamic interaction between internal and external components. An integral part of all recovery journeys is effective community reintegration. After all, recovery is not mainly an issue of personal motivation rather it is about acceptance by family, by friends and by a range of organisations and professionals across the community. Therefore to support pathways to recovery, structural and contextual endeavours are needed to supplement individually-oriented interventions and programmes. One way to do this, is by introducing Inclusive Cities. An Inclusive City promotes participation, inclusion, full and equal citizenship to all her citizens, including those in recovery, based on the idea of community capital. The aim of building recovery capital at a community level through connections and 'linking social capital' to challenge stigmatisation and exclusion, is seen as central to this idea. Inclusive Cities is an initiative to support the creation of Recovery-Oriented Systems of Care at a city level, that starts with but extends beyond substance using populations. This paper describes (and gives examples of) how it is possible to use recovery as a starting point for generating social inclusion, challenging the marginalisation of other excluded populations as well by building community connections

Governance of higher education in Britain: the significance of the research assessment exercises for the funding council model

This article uses the political struggles that have enveloped the research assessment exercises (RAEs) to interpret the UK’s current funding council model of governance. Ironically, the apparently widespread improvement in the research performance of British universities, as demonstrated by RAE 2001, has made it more difficult to distribute research income selectively, which was supposedly the central objective of the whole evaluative process. Whilst enhanced research ratings may be seen as a cause for celebration in the universities, the failure to anticipate this outcome and, more significantly, to plan for its financial implications is seen in political circles as a failure of higher education management. The article explores the alternative models of governance that are likely to emerge as a consequence of this crisis and, in particular, whether the fundingcouncils can have much freedom of action, given the tighter political control of policy goals and their critical dependence upon the academic profession for the conduct of the evaluative process