| Summary: | This research considers how neighbourhood-based governance entities are located in broader networks of governance, by undertaking an international comparative investigation in two cities (Baltimore, Maryland in the US and Bristol in England). It uses an empirically-grounded approach to ascertain the function of such governance forms according to the way they are structured and operate. It assesses the governance context, focused at the urban level, within which these entities are located, considering the key actors and their relative power and the focus on deprived neighbourhoods versus broader strategies. This leads to consideration of how these strategies and actors shape the functions of neighbourhood governance and the implications in terms of the relative power vested at the neighbourhood level. The research demonstrates the localist and privatist nature of Baltimore's urban governance context, and the centrist and managerial nature of Bristol's. Within both networks a policy subsystem is evident with regard to neighbourhood approaches, but it is the broader governance network which determines the state and market imperatives pursued. In Baltimore and latterly in Bristol, tackling deprivation is a subservient agenda to the predominant imperative of growth. This highlights the importance of the two cities' shared neo-liberal context despite their different governmental systems. In Baltimore, neighbourhoods do not gain resource from the city-level governance network if they lack the assets this network seeks. The function of neighbourhood governance which results is self-help, as long as neighbourhoods have the capacity to do so. In Bristol, neighbourhood governance is steered by central government via its funding regimes and policy approaches. Changes in these have heralded a shift from the targeting of deprived areas via area-based initiatives' to seeking to link deprived neighbourhoods to the benefits of broader growth. Neighbourhood governance entities are being steered to adopt self-help strategies, irrespective of their capacity to do so.
|
|---|
