Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBurton, Paulen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-05T00:22:12Z
dc.date.available2017-04-05T00:22:12Z
dc.date.issued2004en_US
dc.date.modified2009-12-08T07:56:19Z
dc.identifier.issn02690942en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/0269094042000253608en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/27229
dc.description.abstractCommunity involvement now seems secure as a key principle of urban regeneration and neighbourhood renewal. It is enshrined in legislation and policy guidance (DTLR, 2001), serves as a foundation of national strategy (SEU, 1998) and is recognised as a fundamental civil right (Richardson, 1983). It promises a host of benefits, from better policy through greater social cohesion to enhanced self-respect for those who get involved. However, there are also signs of some disquiet. At an ideological level, there are those who claim that involvement is merely part of the systematic oppression of the most excluded sections of the population, whereby a small minority are incorporated into the workings of the state (Cooke & Kothari, 2001) while others see it as part of the obfuscatory language of repressive neoliberalism (Callinicos, 2001). At a more pragmatic level, there are long-standing concerns among decision makers that involvement can be a very costly business that does little more than provide 'the usual suspects' with another opportunity to advance their views and complicate what is already a difficult process of public choice (Foley & Martin, 2000). Finally, community involvement initiatives are frequently criticised for being half-hearted and tokenistic, poorly resourced and badly planned (Alcock, 2004) and in study after study the practice of community involvement in urban regeneration does not seem to match up to the theoretical benefits (Burton et al., 2004).en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherRoutledgeen_US
dc.publisher.placeUKen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom193en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto198en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue3en_AU
dc.relation.ispartofjournalLocal Economyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume19en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPublic Policyen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode160510en_US
dc.titlePower to the people? how to judge public participationen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.date.issued2004
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record