Simon pemberton coventrypresentation.


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Comment
  • I would be grateful for a downloadable copy if possible.

    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Simon pemberton coventrypresentation.

  1. 1. <ul><li>Rethinking urban regeneration? Insights into the future through use of the Strategic Relational Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Dr Simon Pemberton </li></ul><ul><li>Senior Lecturer in Public Policy and Management </li></ul><ul><li>University of Keele </li></ul>
  2. 2. Conclusions! <ul><li>Sites, scales and spaces of state activity important for regeneration in the future. </li></ul><ul><li>State institutions constantly changing……. </li></ul><ul><li>Impacts on regeneration governance, policies and (local) strategies. </li></ul><ul><li>Now in a new period of strategic and spatial selectivity </li></ul><ul><li>But will this cure complexity and inequality? </li></ul>
  3. 3. Context <ul><li>Globalization / post-industrialism – urban impact </li></ul><ul><li>New forms of urban governance </li></ul><ul><li>New forms of urban policy – urban regeneration </li></ul>
  4. 4. Contemporary debates <ul><li>Roberts and Sykes (2000) </li></ul><ul><li>But changing forms of governance? </li></ul><ul><li>State influence? / politics of scale on governance?? </li></ul><ul><li>**How do changing institutions and geography of the state AND local political strategy / leadership influence regeneration?** </li></ul>
  5. 5. But first…regeneration ambiguity. Are we talking about: <ul><li>Physical regeneration – urban </li></ul><ul><li>design? Property development? </li></ul><ul><li>Was “renewal”? </li></ul><ul><li>Economic regeneration – external investment </li></ul><ul><li>Was “redevelopment”? </li></ul><ul><li>Neighbourhood / social regeneration </li></ul><ul><li>Now “neighbourhood renewal”…? </li></ul><ul><li>i.e.See Regeneration and Renewal </li></ul><ul><li>But much different type of “renewal”…. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Policy perspectives <ul><li>Too much emphasis economic / physical regeneration? </li></ul><ul><li>Welfare and wealth distribution? </li></ul><ul><li>More social and cultural focus? </li></ul><ul><li>Connect people and place (Griggs et al 2008) </li></ul><ul><li>Have to change approach anyway now? (Glossop, 2009) </li></ul><ul><li>Cities to differentiate approaches more? </li></ul><ul><li>More focus on who wins and loses esp. physical regeneration. </li></ul><ul><li>Link local interventions to wider areas. </li></ul><ul><li>Employment, education, housing need economies of scale? </li></ul><ul><li>Link interventions; otherwise gentrification (Granger, 2010) </li></ul><ul><li>EU – focus on wider metropolitan area and suburbs </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on areas of market failure better – SM cities and periphery? Or Centre for Cities (2010) approach? </li></ul>
  7. 7. Socio-spatial inequality <ul><li>A key point. </li></ul><ul><li>How address? </li></ul><ul><li>Regeneration management important </li></ul><ul><li>But the politics of this is very real (Diamond et al (2010). </li></ul><ul><li>How can changing nature </li></ul><ul><li>of regeneration mmt be </li></ul><ul><li>explained? </li></ul>
  8. 8. The Strategic Relational Approach (SRA) 1 <ul><li>1. Focuses on how changing institutions and geography of the state – of relevance to governance of urban regeneration – can influence the types of strategies and policies that will be promoted . </li></ul><ul><li>2. But also focuses on how local social and political forces and nature of local leadership may influence state institutions and geographies and the strategies pursued . </li></ul><ul><li>3. In turn, it helps us understand how new “ objects of governance ” for urban regeneration may emerge through the prioritisation of certain social and political forces operating at certain scales and through specific strategies . </li></ul><ul><li>4. But these will also be influenced by “ spatial imaginaries ” – the types of economic and social spaces that are deemed amenable to governance practices by new institutions / political actors. </li></ul>
  9. 9. The Strategic Relational Approach (SRA) 2 <ul><li>“ The most theoretically sophisticated discussion of the state currently available” (Kelly 1999; 2009). </li></ul><ul><li>Brenner (2004) – linchpin… </li></ul><ul><li>How political strategies and political / moral leadership influence state form and structure AND </li></ul><ul><li>How state form and structure influence changes in (local) political strategies (and leadership) </li></ul><ul><li>3 KEY PROPOSITIONS…….. </li></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>The power of the state is (simply) the power of forces acting in and through the state (Jessop, 1990, p.269). </li></ul><ul><li>Such forces can include managers, class forces, gender groups, regional interests. </li></ul><ul><li>BUT state more permeable to certain forces than others . </li></ul><ul><li>Such forces are spatially specific and time-specific . </li></ul><ul><li>So they could be altered by changes in the form and structure of the state. </li></ul><ul><li>So reorganisation of economic apparatus in England may impact on shape / power of certain forces. </li></ul><ul><li>Will pursue different strategies and policies as a result. </li></ul>1. State should be viewed in relational terms
  11. 11. <ul><li>Social in and through and political forces that can act ‘’ the state will try and develop a range of strategies (Jessop, 1990, p.18). </li></ul><ul><li>These will attempt to harness state institutions towards particular economic / social activities or hegemonic projects (Brenner, 2004). </li></ul><ul><li>But the shape and form of these will also vary according to changing nature of state structures . </li></ul>2. Coherence of state activity created through hegemonic groups / projects
  12. 12. <ul><li>Privileges access by some forces / interests over others, some strategies over others, some spaces of intervention over others etc. </li></ul><ul><li>But these strategies and interventions are also influenced by “ spatial imaginaries ” – reinforced by those dominant. </li></ul><ul><li>Leads to certain types of “ objects of governance ” being promoted over others. </li></ul><ul><li>But again will change, as structure and institutions of the state change. </li></ul>3. State is strategically and spatially selective
  13. 13. In practical terms?????............. <ul><li>Will new objects of governance be created as new structures of governance emerge? </li></ul><ul><li>Proposals now emerging. </li></ul><ul><li>RDAs to LEPs ? Regional variation (N/S). </li></ul><ul><li>LEPs to carryout fewer functions – narrower focus on business ? </li></ul><ul><li>Unitaries in Norfolk, Suffolk, Devon? </li></ul><ul><li>LDA to go – GLA and Mayor more powers? </li></ul><ul><li>Will this lead to similar emphasis on employment and skills programmes (social remit) ? </li></ul><ul><li>Alternative option – narrower focus on enterprise / business competitiveness? </li></ul><ul><li>Green technology development to suffer if SE RDA goes? </li></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>Will structural change impact on strategies and projects pursued and those politically powerful (and vice versa)? </li></ul><ul><li>National hegemonic projects changed over time – neo-liberalism to third way and now new coalition approach. </li></ul><ul><li>New strategic and spatial selectivities emerging . </li></ul><ul><li>LDAs budget ringfenced prior to calls for its abolition. </li></ul><ul><li>Spatial selectivity around maintaining London / SE competitive advantage rather than addressing spatial inequalities per se? </li></ul><ul><li>New emphasis on localism by Pickles and local government (HCA activities to be delivered under local leadership). </li></ul><ul><li>But will this lead to hegemonic projects that include expansive set of interests ? </li></ul><ul><li>Or will business rule? – LEPs – 50% at least from private sector; Mayor and subsequent discretion given to LAs in London if assumes LDA responsibilities? </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>New “spatial imaginaries” emerging and amenable to governance practices? </li></ul><ul><li>Not going to be easy given complexity already. </li></ul><ul><li>Pike and Tomaney (2009) – 7 spatial entities for urban regeneration activity recently. </li></ul><ul><li>If RDAs go and LEPs come in….. </li></ul><ul><li>LEPs reflect natural economic boundaries? </li></ul><ul><li>LEPs reflect existing sub-regional arrangements (MAAs)? </li></ul><ul><li>LEPs replace existing RDAs? </li></ul><ul><li>In turn, this may then impact on extent to which exogenous or endogenous regeneration activity is promoted </li></ul><ul><li>Also depend on ability of new structures to work over new territories? </li></ul>
  16. 16. Conclusion <ul><li>Future nature of regeneration management needs to be related to interactions between changing nature of state form and changing nature of local political strategy . </li></ul><ul><li>Can then understand why certain governance structures, strategies, scales, benefits emerge. </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence to date…………………. </li></ul><ul><li>Cable and Pickles - promising ? </li></ul><ul><li>Pike and Tomaney (2009) - complexity continuing and fragmentation and incoherence in governance of regeneration continuing ? </li></ul>