Rachel Danemann University of Stirling
Explains the context of my research on CLTs and Localism Explains my methodology Runs through the four world view model I used in my analysis Highlight the findings
This presentation is based on the findings of my MSs dissertation on CLTs and Localism The research was conduced in 2010 shortly after Coalition Government was elected It considered why CLT seemed to be universally popular- with both new Labour and new Con-Lib Coalition
Documentary Analysis triangulated with the collaborative creation of An Orgisational Life History
Based on Johnson Birchall’s Four World Views: 1. Individualism 2. Pluralism 3. Collectivism 4. Communitarianism (used in research on co-operatives)
IndividualismPluralism Draws on work of Adam Smith See individuals as self-interested Freedom is the supreme good Co-operation is a way of furthering individual ends in the market place Draws on work of J.S.Mill See community as defining an individual's state and function Co-operation required adaption of individual life plans to achieve common goals CollectivismCommunitarianism Draws on Marx See individuals as a product of social formation Fraternity is key Role of state, rather than community is key Draws on work of Robert Owen Liberty is key Recognises ‘irreducible tension between individual and wider community
IndividualismPluralism People are motivated by self- interest so housing co-ops are unworkable. Direct housing provision or state- subsidy runs contrary to core principles Good governance is key This is impacted by the quality of individuals involved Applied to state, rather then small scale democracies at housing co- op level CollectivismCommunitarianism ‘Bourgeois values’ are criticised but little mention of values in post- revolutionary society State rather than community-led co-operatives are advocated Small scale dispersed ownership guarantees liberty. Exclusive ownership is problematic Housing co-ops seen as a solution to tension between individual and wider community ownership
Eric Pickles in 2010 defined his priorities as Localism, Localism and Localism Coalition Agreement includes reference to promoting decentralisation and empowerment Big Society a key component Still a contested and imprecise term
New manageralism saw local authorities shift from being providers to enablers or services Rouse (1999) argues New Labour embrace of new mangeralism should have placed emphasis on inclusivity, participation and intolerance of low standards but was often reduced to a tick box exercise Localism under Labour = Regionalism
New Localism spilt into two camps, one interested in empowering ‘very local areas’ to deliver services and the other interested in mutuals and not-for-profit models. Coalition version
CLT are a new panacea Seen as being able to deliver develoved power, improve accountability and help address housing crisis. All underpinned by notion of social capital- social glue (networks within groups) and social bridges (networks between groups) ….but does this happen in practice
Holsworthy CLT in North Devon East Portlemouth CLT in South Devon
Slow progress Planning tensions Confusion of Roles Defining and Meeting ‘Housing Need’ Lack of Trust Defining ‘Local’
Little explicit about any of the four world views in the documentation, but much implicit esp. in CLT literature Little explicit in life histories but different world views are evidently influencing views and values of officers, members, CLT objectors, CLT supporters and their actions.
More support for volunteers needed More Finance for CLT needed Need to build support at a Local Level It’s too early (in 2012) to offer concrete conclusions of the success and appeal of CLTs, but hopefully the theoretical framework developed will be useful for further research.
Johnston Birchall (1986) Building Communities the Co-operative Way London: Routledge and Paul Rouse J (1999) ‘Performance Management, Quality Management and Contracts’ in Horton S and Farnham D (Eds) Public Management in Britain Hampshire: Palgrave