文章基本信息

标题：Community Governance: Where did it all go Wrong?
本地全文：下载
作者：Jamie P. Halsall
期刊名称：Journal of Administration Governance
印刷版ISSN：1834-3511
电子版ISSN：1834-352X
出版年度：2012
卷号：7
期号：2
出版社：Network of Asia Pacific Schools and Institutes of Public Administration and Governance
摘要：Over the past decade there has been much debate challenging the approach that New Labour took on tackling social and economic division across Britain. Coupled with this debate, questioning the merit of community governance, British society in 2006 was described by the then Leader of the Opposition, David Cameron, as being 'broken', implying that New Labour's policies, which focused on local government, were seen as failing. When the new coalition government was formed in May 2010 the 'Big Society,' an alternative style of community governance was introduced. The introduction of the Big Society is creating a new discourse in respect of local and regional planning and decision making, which challenges the notion of community. Against this background this paper provides an analytical discussion on the emerging new forms of community governance and in particular the re-democratisation of communities in Britain
关键词：Big Society; Community Governance; Local Government; New Labour ;1;School of Human and Health Sciences; The University of Huddersfield; Queensgate; Huddersfield; UK; ;email: [email protected]; var currentpos;timer; function initialize() { timer=setInterval("scrollwindow()";10);} function sc(){clearInterval(timer); }function scrollwindow() { currentpos=document.body.scrollTop; window.scroll(0;++currentpos); if (currentpos != document.body.scrollTop) sc();} document.onmousedown=scdocument.ondblclick=initialize;2 ;Halsall; J. P. (2012). Community Governance ¨C ;Where did it go Wrong. ;JOAAG; Vol. 7. No. 2 ;Introduction ;Since Victorian times local government has been a central aspect of British Politics. The ;characteristics of local government are dominated by multifunctional elected authorities. ;Throughout the last 30 years the United Kingdom has experienced some fundamental changes ;in local government. Back in the 1980s the Thatcher Government was highly suspicious of how ;local government functioned; particularly when it came to political leadership and the allocation ;of resources. By the early 1990s the then Conservative Government; led by John Major; were ;perceived to be more aware of the opportunities that local government provides in the ;community (Healey; 1997; Pacione; 1997). John Major's Government of the time was keen to ;promote elements of social cohesion within the emphasis of economic regeneration. ;A significant shift in structures; within local government; followed New Labour's election victory ;in 1997. New Labour went about making these changes by placing a new importance on ;community leadership and community governance (Jones; 2003; Ward 2004). However; ;following the election of the coalition back in May 2010; the new government had a rethink on ;how local government should be run. Since then the coalition have taken steps to decentralise ;local government and have brought in the 'Big Society' agenda. ;Therefore; this poses the question; why has the community governance agenda not been ;embraced and furthermore why is this perceived by many to have failed. The aim of this paper ;is to critically explore the displacement of community governance in a local government setting. ;The paper firstly; seeks to define and understand community governance in the policy context. ;Secondly the paper questions how the concept of the Big Society influences and impacts on ;issues around community governance. ;Understanding Community Governance ;Local government has had a long association with the complex process of community ;governance. The emergence of the concept has been influenced by the geographical tendencies ;from the terms 'community' (Delanty 2003) and 'governance' meaning new governing structures ;(Goodwin 2009). Debates on community literature have had a long association with group theory ;and policy networks (Powell and Steel 2012; Imrie and Raco 1999). Moreover; debates on the ;term community have outlined a clear pathway in the advancement of political institutions. ;However; recent developments in this area have created a rediscovery of community in public ;policy discourse because the practice has been influenced by the lost legitimacy of states and ;markets (Newman; 2010; Smith; 2010; Alcock; 2011; Evans; 2011). Thus; as O'Toole and ;Burdess (2004; p. 434) note; the lost legitimacy of states and markets has created 'a convergence ;of neo-liberalism and communitarianism to form the basis of a new relationship between the state; ;the market and civil society.' At the central part of community governance is social capital. Robert ;Putnam (1995; p. 67) defines social capital as: ;"...features of social life - networks; norms; and trust - that enable participants to act ;together more effectively to pursue shared objectives¡Social Capital; in short; refers to ;social connections and the attendant norms and trust." ;Purdue (2001; p. 2214) has noted that the purpose of social capital is to create 'trust between ;social and economic actors' as the concept promotes conditions for innovation; economic ;development and democracy. Over the years social capital has created different types of ;complexities and complements both the theory and the practice of social/community cohesion. ;Stoker et al (2004; p. 391) have stated that social capital has three components: ;1. "The context of obligations; expectations and trustworthiness in which actors operate; ;2. The quality of the information channels which they have access to; ;3. The availability of norms and effective sanctions to discipline relationship."