Conjuncture or Disjuncture? An Institutionalist Analysis of Local Regeneration Partnerships in the UK

Following Lowndes' (2001) injunction for scholars to take the new institutionalism seriously, this paper offers an institutionalist explanation for the development of regeneration partnerships in the UK. Drawing on four complete case studies and evidence from ongoing research into New Deal for Communities (NDC), it argues that UK-style partnerships tend to embody conflicting values and hierarchical patterns of organization. This is therefore a path shaping period, since partnerships have not established themselves as co-ordinating mechanisms built on strong-weak ties.

[1]  Peter Malpass,et al.  Policy Making and Local Governance: how Bristol Failed to Secure City Challenge Funding (Twice) , 1994 .

[2]  David Wilson,et al.  Balancing revisability and robustness? A new institutionalist perspective on local government modernization , 2003 .

[3]  Jacob Torfing,et al.  Path‐Dependent Danish Welfare Reforms: The Contribution of the New Institutionalisms to Understanding Evolutionary Change , 2001 .

[4]  Jmw Stewart.  Between Whitehall and Town Hall. The Realignment of Urban Regeneration Policy in England , 1994 .

[5]  P. Pierson.  Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics , 2000, American Political Science Review.

[6]  S. Osborne,et al.  Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Renewal, and the Limits to Co-governance , 2003 .

[7]  S. Cropper.  Collaborative Working and the Issue of Sustainability , 1996 .

[8]  C. Hay,et al.  Crisis and the Structural Transformation of the State: Interrogating the Process of Change , 1999 .

[9]  C. Hood,et al.  Paradoxes of public-sector managerialism, old public management and public service bargains , 2000 .

[10]  G. Stoker.  Life is a lottery: New Labour’s strategy for the reform of devolved governance , 2002 .

[11]  Paul Pierson,et al.  When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change , 1993, World Politics.

[12]  B. Peters.  Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism , 1999 .

[13]  U. Wannop,et al.  ' Leveraging' urban development: a comparison of urban policy directions and programme impact in the United States and Britain. , 1985 .

[14]  Rob Atkinson,et al.  Discourses of Partnership and Empowerment in Contemporary British Urban Regeneration , 1999 .

[15]  J. Davies,et al.  The governance of urban regeneration: a critique of the ‘governing without government’ thesis , 2002 .

[16]  D. Perrons,et al.  Empowerment Through Participation? Conceptual Explorations and A Case Study , 2003 .

[17]  C. Hay,et al.  Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism , 1998 .

[18]  P. Lawless.  Partnership in Urban Regeneration in the UK: The Sheffield Central Area Study , 1994 .

[19]  D. Valler,et al.  The Politics of 'Integrated' Local Policy in England , 2001 .

[20]  G. Stoker.  Regulation theory, local government and the transition from Fordism , 1991 .

[21]  Vivien Lowndes.  Between Rhetoric and Reality: Does the 2001 White Paper Reverse the Centralising Trend in Britain? , 2002, Regulating Local Authorities.

[22]  J. Davies,et al.  Partnerships versus Regimes: Why Regime Theory Cannot Explain Urban Coalitions in the Uk , 2003 .

[23]  Clarence N. Stone.  It’s More than the Economy after All: Continuing the Debate about Urban Regimes , 2004 .

[24]  D. Coates.  Capitalist Models and Social Democracy: The Case of New Labour , 2001 .

[25]  S. Freud,et al.  Civilization and Its Discontents , 2018, Princeton Readings in Political Thought.

[26]  P. Hall.  Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain , 1993 .

[27]  E. Immergut.  The Theoretical Core of the New Institutionalism , 1998 .

[28]  Paul Pierson,et al.  The Limits of Design: Explaining Institutional Origins and Change , 2000 .

[29]  Berthold. Rittberger,et al.  The Creation, Interpretation and Contestation of Institutions - Revisiting Historical Institutionalism* , 2003 .

[30]  G. Alexander.  Institutions, Path Dependence, and Democratic Consolidation , 2001 .

[31]  R. Boyer,et al.  The Regulation School: A Critical Introduction , 1990 .

[32]  Alan DiGaetano.  Urban Governing Alignments and Realignments in Comparative Perspective , 1997 .

[33]  P. Seyd.  Radical Sheffield: From Socialism to Entrepreneurialism , 1990 .

[34]  Vivien Lowndes,et al.  Rescuing Aunt Sally: Taking Institutional Theory Seriously in Urban Politics , 2001 .

[35]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[36]  Gerry Stoker,et al.  Theory and Urban Politics , 1998 .

[37]  J. Davies.  Can’t Hedgehogs Be Foxes Too? Reply to Clarence N. Stone , 2004 .

[38]  J. Davies,et al.  Partnerships and Regimes: The Politics of Urban Regeneration in the UK , 2002 .

[39]  A. Harding.  Urban Regimes and Growth Machines toward a Cross-National Research Agenda , 1994 .