In recent years, discourse analysis has been deployed by academics as a methodology to understand the urban policy implementation process, in particular, the ways in which key actors exercise power. Much of the discourse-based research in urban policy has drawn upon the writings of Norman Fairclough and Michel Foucault and seeks to provide a critical scrutiny of texts and utterances of policy makers and other key actors. The methodological assumption that informs discourse-based approaches is that politics is an arena in which different interest groups seek to establish a particular narrative or version of events as a means to pursue political objectives. This article begins by setting out the theoretical influences that have informed discourse analysis. There then follows a discussion of some of the studies that have deployed discourse-based research within urban policy, an evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses as a method and an assessment for new areas of enquiry. The article's conclusion is that discourse analysis provides the researcher with a set of tools to interpret urban policy in a theoretically informed and insightful way. However, there are some pitfalls associated with its techniques that require consideration before any analysis should commence.

This is an electronic version of an article published in Housing Studies, 18(4), pp. 429-446, July 2003. Housing Studies is available online at:http://www.journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/openurl.asp?genre=article&issn=0267-3037&volume=18&issue=4&spage=429The Eprints service at the University of Westminster aims to make the research output of the University available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the authors and/or copyright owners. Users are permitted to download and/or print one copy for non-commercial private study or research. Further distribution and any use of material from within this archive for profit-making enterprises or for commercial gain is strictly forbidden.Whilst further distribution of specific materials from within this archive is forbidden, you may freely distribute the URL of the University of Westminster Eprints (http://eprints.wmin.ac.uk).In case of abuse or copyright appearing without permission e-mail wattsn@wmin.ac.uk. WestminsterResearchhttp://www.wmin.ac.uk/westminsterresearchThe WestminsterResearch online digital archive at the University of Westminster aims to make the research output of the University available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the authors and/or copyright owners. Users are permitted to download and/or print one copy for non-commercial private study or research. Further distribution and any use of material from within this archive for profit-making enterprises or for commercial gain is strictly forbidden.Whilst further distribution of specific materials from within this archive is forbidden, you may freely distribute the URL of WestminsterResearch. (http://www.wmin.ac.uk/westminsterresearch).

The third section of the article considers the contemporary period, in particular reforms presented to parliament in 2011 that, if enacted, will provide new avenues for powerful interest groups to influence decisions that hitherto have been mainly the preserve of local government. The conclusion provides a summary of the key policy implications and theoretical issues that arise from the analysis.

No abstract

The paper reviews the usefulness of the concept of social exclusion for Australian social housing policy. We draw on recent theoretical and empirical research from Europe and the UK to develop a critique of the concept of social exclusion. It is argued that any assessment of social exclusion needs to distinguish between its utility as an academic explanatory concept and its political deployment to justify new forms of policy intervention. Policy targeting anti-social behaviour through increasingly more punitive means, for instance, is often justified on the basis that it ameliorates the problems of social exclusion experienced by tenants residing in public housing estates. We conclude that, in spite of the limitations of social exclusion as an analytical concept, for political and pragmatic reasons it is likely to become an important component of the emerging Australian housing policy agenda.