The rise and fall of neighbourhood in the New Labour era

Abstract

‘Neighbourhood’ was a key political and administrative concept for the New Labour administration and was the spatial focus for a proliferation of initiatives in the early period. Yet since 2006, the appeal and use of ‘neighbourhood’ have waned as evidence of the impact of neighbourhood interventions over the last decade has emerged, along with active re-scaling of policy for regeneration and economic development. This article seeks to draw out why ‘neighbourhood’ was important to the New Labour project, to examine why and how this changed over the course of the New Labour administration, and to explore new agendas emerging in policy for sub-national governance.

Variations between Organisations and Localities in Government Funding of Third-sector Activity: Evidence from the National Survey of Third-sector Organisations in England

“…As before, there is a clear relationship with the level of deprivation, with generally a higher share of publicly funded organisations in more deprived local authorities. Indeed, variations in the resources available to local authorities are likely to reflect levels of deprivation since a substantial proportion of funds were, at the time of this survey, derived from central government grants: under New Labour, funds were targeted to tackle area-based deprivation, in keeping with an understanding of social exclusion as being geographically concentrated (Durose and Rees, 2012).…”

Cuts, collaboration and creativity

“…Billions of pounds have been invested in partnership working over the past two decades, but it has too often been seen as an add-on, leaving the mainstream untouched (Durose and Rees, 2012). At the same time, 'compulsory partnership' (in so many areas of public policy) has always seemed an oxymoron, antithetical to the true potential of relationships build on trust and mutuality.…”

Cultural Policy, Governance and Urban Diversity: Resident Perspectives from Birmingham, UK

“…Implications of the research extend to other cities leveraging funds for cultural development that also have a very diverse population, especially those struggling with austerity or non‐statutory arts funding. Further lessons can be gleaned by cities with gateway neighbourhoods welcoming recent migrants over time, but suffering from socio‐economic and racial segregation (Durose & Lees ; Graves ). Pluralising cultural governance seeks to readdress an economic growth agenda in cultural policy for so‐called ‘creative cities’ concentrated spatially in urban centres that is negatively impacting upon arts ability to be more representative for marginal and emergent communities in the city.…”