Debating the value of twinning in the United Kingdom: the need for a broader perspective.

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE British Politics Pub Date : 2021-03-09 DOI:10.1057/s41293-021-00163-x
Holly Eva Ryan, Caterina Mazzilli
{"title":"Debating the value of twinning in the United Kingdom: the need for a broader perspective.","authors":"Holly Eva Ryan, Caterina Mazzilli","doi":"10.1057/s41293-021-00163-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The twinning model has been used to develop a wide array of political, economic and cultural relationships that connect communities and institutions in the United Kingdom with counterparts overseas. However, where local governments were once among the most ardent promoters of twinning, years of austerity coupled with changing processes of financial rationalisation, have led many councils to question the value of these relationships. Today, fewer British local authorities are taking up new twinnings and some have even been involved in a process of quiet 'untwinning'. This paper takes pause to examine what might be lost with this set of changes-it asks: just what is of value of twinning? Taking a cue from ongoing debates in the field of cultural policy studies, it advocates for a broadening and deepening of the operational concept of 'public value' to better account for the manifold ways that twinning can deliver pro-social benefits to British communities and their partners.</p>","PeriodicalId":46067,"journal":{"name":"British Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940093/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-021-00163-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The twinning model has been used to develop a wide array of political, economic and cultural relationships that connect communities and institutions in the United Kingdom with counterparts overseas. However, where local governments were once among the most ardent promoters of twinning, years of austerity coupled with changing processes of financial rationalisation, have led many councils to question the value of these relationships. Today, fewer British local authorities are taking up new twinnings and some have even been involved in a process of quiet 'untwinning'. This paper takes pause to examine what might be lost with this set of changes-it asks: just what is of value of twinning? Taking a cue from ongoing debates in the field of cultural policy studies, it advocates for a broadening and deepening of the operational concept of 'public value' to better account for the manifold ways that twinning can deliver pro-social benefits to British communities and their partners.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
辩论英国双胞胎的价值:需要一个更广阔的视角
结对模式已被用于发展一系列广泛的政治、经济和文化关系,将英国的社区和机构与海外同行联系起来。然而,在地方政府曾经是最热心的结对支持者的地方,多年的紧缩加上不断变化的财政合理化进程,已导致许多地方议会质疑这种关系的价值。如今,越来越少的英国地方政府接受新的双胞胎,有些地方甚至参与了悄悄“拆散双胞胎”的过程。这篇论文停下来研究了这一系列变化可能带来的损失——它问:什么是双胞胎的价值?从文化政策研究领域正在进行的辩论中得到启示,它提倡扩大和深化“公共价值”的操作概念,以更好地解释结对可以为英国社区及其合作伙伴提供亲社会利益的多种方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Politics
British Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: British Politics offers the only forum explicitly designed to promote research in British political studies, and seeks to provide a counterweight to the growing fragmentation of this field during recent years. To this end, the journal aims to promote a more holistic understanding of British politics by encouraging a closer integration between theoretical and empirical research, between historical and contemporary analyses, and by fostering a conception of British politics as a broad and multi-disciplinary field of study. This incorporates a range of sub-fields, including psephology, policy analysis, regional studies, comparative politics, institutional analysis, political theory, political economy, historical analysis, cultural studies and social policy. While recognising the validity and the importance of research into specific aspects of British politics, the journal takes it to be a guiding principle that such research is more useful, and indeed meaningful, if it is related to the field of British politics in a broader and fuller sense. The scope of the journal will therefore be broad, incorporating a range of research papers and review articles from all theoretical perspectives, and on all aspects of British politics, including policy developments, institutional change and political behaviour. Priority will, however, be given to contributions which link contemporary developments in British politics to theoretical and/or historical analyses. The aim is as much to encourage the development of empirical research that is theoretically rigorous and informed, as it is to encourage the empirical application of theoretical work (or at least to encourage theorists to explicitly signify how their work could be applied in an empirical manner).
期刊最新文献
The media, terrorism, and censorship in the UK: conflicting imagined audiences in British parliamentary debates in 1988 and 2018 Whatever happened to Tory Liverpool? Success, decline, and irrelevance since 1945 by David Jeffery What kind of discipline are we? A network analysis of British Politics ‘The first, but not the last’: women’s descriptive and substantive representation in the 2021 Scottish Parliament election Remind you of anyone? Comparing the gendered heroic leadership of Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1