City government in an age of austerity: Discursive institutions and critique

Abstract

Austerity is an increasingly important feature of urban society and in western countries, both as a site interwoven with the crisis tendencies of capitalism and as spaces mitigating austerity programmes instigated by nation states. Cities have therefore become key spaces in the mediation of 'austerity urbanism', but where such processes involve deliberation, making the production of consensus highly problematic. Such tendencies require far greater intellectual sensitivity towards the practices of agents as they seek to enact social control and coordination, as well as subordinate resistance and critique. 'Pragmatist Sociology' is utilised in this paper to examine the construction and deployment of discursive institutions seeking to control the behaviour of actors, including reducing critique, with the intention of legitimising austerity programmes. Such discursive institutions establish semantic links between the discursive aims of those seeking to control, and the pragmatics of the everyday lives of those subject to such institutions. The paper seeks to examine, through a case study of an English city, how key decision-makers construct discursive institutions in the implementation of austerity and subordination of resistance and, second, the actual practices of resisting austerity. In conclusion, the paper finds that austerity governance is characterised by discursive austerity institutions based on market and bureaucratic values, where large scale critique has been marginalised, resulting in minor forms of critique in the everyday, and compounded by constant efforts at the reconfirmation of discursive institutions.

The changing role of household projections: exploring policy conflict and ambiguity in planning for housing

“…In an age of austerity local authorities are increasingly at a disadvantage in challenging housing numbers due to lack of resources and talent to develop alternative projections (Hastings et al, 2015). Emaciated local planning authorities must become increasingly innovative (Fuller, 2017) or risk falling back on official household projections.…”

A harbour on land: De Ceuvel’s topologies of creative reuse

“…First-hand this might appear as yet another occurrence of government-led gentrification or, in light of the 'post-crisis city' argument, a manifestation of what Neil Gray (2018: 15) terms 'soft austerity urbanism', that is, 'seemingly progressive, instrumental small-scale urban catalyst initiatives that in reality complement rather than counter punitive hard austerity urbanism'. Such manifestations are in fact often flagged as the upshot of austerity-led urban politics (Fuller, 2017;Peck, 2012), predicated upon a logic of 'insecurity, flexibility and temporariness' (Ferreri et al, 2017: 249). And their temporary character may indeed become a catalyst for 'intensifying and normalising precarity' in the city, as shown by Ferreri et al (2017: 249) in the discussion of property guardianship.…”

Re-stating the post-political: Depoliticization, social inequalities, and city-region growth

“…The construal of hegemonic projects (in part through the mobilization of a social base of support within spatial imaginaries) can prove decisive in resolving (albeit temporarily and unevenly) the conflicts between particular interests. Depoliticization, read across these three dimensions of the state, thus operates through hegemony-seeking ''discursive institutions'' (Fuller, 2017), which establish semantic links between the discursive aims of those seeking to control and the pragmatics of the everyday lives of those subject to such institutions. As these are socially constructed by particular actors and involve the operation of particular broader societal values, these dimensions stress the contingency of political decisions and the inescapable power relations that are involved in depoliticizing contexts (Jessop, 2016: 88-90).…”

“…On the one hand, local authorities are managing austerity (but in different ways) by moving towards a more ''facilitating'' and enabling role in terms of provision of services (CLES, 2014). SCRCA and its local authorities are ''discursive institutions'' (Fuller, 2017), discussed above, relaying depoliticization through the ongoing savage cuts in public-sector budgets, which contribute directly to their economic agenda by providing opportunities for private profit (outsourcing and privatization), as well as, on the other hand, providing a critical voice in relation to increasing poverty and social inequalities.…”