This chapter considers the role of community anchor organisations in the ‘flagship’ regeneration programme of the National Assembly for Wales, ‘Communities First’, launched in 2001 and later terminated in March 2018. It unpicks the story of the programme's evolution and demise from the perspectives of community development advisors and community development practitioners, the latter based in two community organisations in South Wales: South Riverside Community Development Centre (SRCDC) in Cardiff and 3Gs Community Development Trust in Merthyr Tydfil. Both organisations were involved in the Productive Margins programme and in the design and analysis of this research. Both pre-existed the Communities First programme and were charged with its delivery to local people. The chapter thus looks at the regulatory context in which these organisations found themselves and how they negotiated the demands of the state-funded programme, on the one hand, and their accountabilities to the communities that they believed they represented, on the other. A key question remains as to whether the involvement of community organisations in state-funded programmes can facilitate regulation for engagement for social change or whether their power to improve the well-being of the communities they represent might better be served in providing alternative modes of living.
{"title":"The role of community anchor organisations in regulating for engagement in a devolved government setting","authors":"E. Elliott, Sue Cohen, David Frayne","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvvsqcb1.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvvsqcb1.17","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter considers the role of community anchor organisations in the ‘flagship’ regeneration programme of the National Assembly for Wales, ‘Communities First’, launched in 2001 and later terminated in March 2018. It unpicks the story of the programme's evolution and demise from the perspectives of community development advisors and community development practitioners, the latter based in two community organisations in South Wales: South Riverside Community Development Centre (SRCDC) in Cardiff and 3Gs Community Development Trust in Merthyr Tydfil. Both organisations were involved in the Productive Margins programme and in the design and analysis of this research. Both pre-existed the Communities First programme and were charged with its delivery to local people. The chapter thus looks at the regulatory context in which these organisations found themselves and how they negotiated the demands of the state-funded programme, on the one hand, and their accountabilities to the communities that they believed they represented, on the other. A key question remains as to whether the involvement of community organisations in state-funded programmes can facilitate regulation for engagement for social change or whether their power to improve the well-being of the communities they represent might better be served in providing alternative modes of living.","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"159 11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128915951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sue Cohen, Tim Cole, Morag A Mcdermont, Angela Piccini
{"title":"Co-production as experimentation:","authors":"Sue Cohen, Tim Cole, Morag A Mcdermont, Angela Piccini","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvvsqcb1.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvvsqcb1.9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133206547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-29DOI: 10.46692/9781447348030.004
Helen Thomas-Hughes
{"title":"Interlude: Community Researchers and Community Researcher Training","authors":"Helen Thomas-Hughes","doi":"10.46692/9781447348030.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46692/9781447348030.004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116741770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-29DOI: 10.46692/9781447348030.006
Helen Manchester, J. Barke
This chapter tells the story of a research project that aimed to develop more equitable and inclusive ‘regulatory systems’ around the production of knowledge concerning the isolation and loneliness of older people. As such, this is a chapter about regulation in, and of, research programmes that is intended to highlight the way in which ‘top-down’ regulation, embedded in university ethical processes, funder requirements, and forms of accountability around research, create particular relations between universities and publics. This chapter draws attention to alternative regulatory systems for knowledge production emerging from a co-produced research process that draws particularly on feminist concerns centred on an ethic of care. The chapter labels this ‘care-ful’ research. In order to explore these alternative regulatory systems, the chapter examines how we ‘care-fully’ co-produced regulatory structures during research with older people around an increasingly ‘publicly’ discussed issue of the loneliness of older people.
{"title":"Regulating for ‘care-ful’ knowledge production: researching older people, isolation and loneliness","authors":"Helen Manchester, J. Barke","doi":"10.46692/9781447348030.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46692/9781447348030.006","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter tells the story of a research project that aimed to develop more equitable and inclusive ‘regulatory systems’ around the production of knowledge concerning the isolation and loneliness of older people. As such, this is a chapter about regulation in, and of, research programmes that is intended to highlight the way in which ‘top-down’ regulation, embedded in university ethical processes, funder requirements, and forms of accountability around research, create particular relations between universities and publics. This chapter draws attention to alternative regulatory systems for knowledge production emerging from a co-produced research process that draws particularly on feminist concerns centred on an ethic of care. The chapter labels this ‘care-ful’ research. In order to explore these alternative regulatory systems, the chapter examines how we ‘care-fully’ co-produced regulatory structures during research with older people around an increasingly ‘publicly’ discussed issue of the loneliness of older people.","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127506229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-29DOI: 10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0004
Therese O'Toole
This chapter examines the Prevent strand of the government's counterterrorism strategy as a form of regulation, exploring its evolving local reception and implementation over the period from the New Labour to the Conservative-led Coalition governments. Launched in 2007 by New Labour as a community engagement, ‘hearts and minds’ approach to countering violent extremism, Prevent set out to partner and engage with Muslim communities to address the causes of radicalisation. In its 2007 guise, this involved locally focused Muslim community engagement projects. That approach was widely criticised for the limited offer of engagement that it seemed to present and was beset by allegations that Prevent was a means by which the government sought to achieve the mass surveillance of British Muslims. Here, the chapter argues that it is important to consider the effects of regulation in ways that go beyond consideration of the aims and logics of regulatory systems, to analysing carefully the nature and implications of regulation in practice.
{"title":"Beyond Prevent: Muslim engagement in city governance","authors":"Therese O'Toole","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the Prevent strand of the government's counterterrorism strategy as a form of regulation, exploring its evolving local reception and implementation over the period from the New Labour to the Conservative-led Coalition governments. Launched in 2007 by New Labour as a community engagement, ‘hearts and minds’ approach to countering violent extremism, Prevent set out to partner and engage with Muslim communities to address the causes of radicalisation. In its 2007 guise, this involved locally focused Muslim community engagement projects. That approach was widely criticised for the limited offer of engagement that it seemed to present and was beset by allegations that Prevent was a means by which the government sought to achieve the mass surveillance of British Muslims. Here, the chapter argues that it is important to consider the effects of regulation in ways that go beyond consideration of the aims and logics of regulatory systems, to analysing carefully the nature and implications of regulation in practice.","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132060082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-29DOI: 10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0012
J. Newman
This postscript offers both a celebration of the achievements of the Productive Margins research programme and an attempt to set it in the broader context of contemporary political possibilities — and constraints. Its particular focus is on attempts to transform universities into instruments of engagement and connectedness — to turn them inside out. This is an attempt to take the ‘productive’ emphasis of the programme seriously, and to ask how far, or in what ways, the engagement of ‘communities at the margins’ has the potential to transform university hierarchies of knowledge and power. In addressing this question, the programme raises a number of issues that, if pursued in future work, have a transformative potential. The chapter also considers further unresolved questions and their potential limits on the impact of transformative agendas.
{"title":"Postscript","authors":"J. Newman","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447348016.003.0012","url":null,"abstract":"This postscript offers both a celebration of the achievements of the Productive Margins research programme and an attempt to set it in the broader context of contemporary political possibilities — and constraints. Its particular focus is on attempts to transform universities into instruments of engagement and connectedness — to turn them inside out. This is an attempt to take the ‘productive’ emphasis of the programme seriously, and to ask how far, or in what ways, the engagement of ‘communities at the margins’ has the potential to transform university hierarchies of knowledge and power. In addressing this question, the programme raises a number of issues that, if pursued in future work, have a transformative potential. The chapter also considers further unresolved questions and their potential limits on the impact of transformative agendas.","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"49 6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121198797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-29DOI: 10.46692/9781447348030.003
Sue Cohen, T. Cole, Morag A Mcdermont, Angela Piccini
This chapter discusses experiments in shifting understandings of expertise and in co-producing research that formed the basis of the Productive Margins (PM) programme. Those experiments were structured as the Productive Communities Research Forum, a series of gatherings that included all active co-researchers and occurred every three to six months over the lifetime of the Productive Margins programme. Before discussing this experimental method, the chapter turns to co-production as a specific set of approaches to collaborative research which involves diverse voices. It brings together the Productive Margins principal investigator, community lead, arts and humanities lead, and one of the co-investigators who worked as a link between two projects and the core management group. These individuals have different research interests, forms of expertise, values, and standpoints on collaborative working in communities.
{"title":"Co-production as experimentation: the research forum as method","authors":"Sue Cohen, T. Cole, Morag A Mcdermont, Angela Piccini","doi":"10.46692/9781447348030.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46692/9781447348030.003","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses experiments in shifting understandings of expertise and in co-producing research that formed the basis of the Productive Margins (PM) programme. Those experiments were structured as the Productive Communities Research Forum, a series of gatherings that included all active co-researchers and occurred every three to six months over the lifetime of the Productive Margins programme. Before discussing this experimental method, the chapter turns to co-production as a specific set of approaches to collaborative research which involves diverse voices. It brings together the Productive Margins principal investigator, community lead, arts and humanities lead, and one of the co-investigators who worked as a link between two projects and the core management group. These individuals have different research interests, forms of expertise, values, and standpoints on collaborative working in communities.","PeriodicalId":201160,"journal":{"name":"Imagining Regulation Differently","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130710248","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：