Suchergebnisse

Joined‐up government has featured prominently on the agenda of the New Labour government in the UK. However, the politics of joining‐up remain under‐explored, with disproportionate emphasis on the technical and managerial dimensions of the challenge. This paper argues that political value conflicts form an essential part of the explanation for the replication of 'silos' within city strategic partnerships, the joining‐up institution of choice at the local scale. A study of the local politics of social inclusion in the British cities of Dundee and Hull revealed a strong partnership ethos. However, this ethos sustained only a shallow consensus over abstract goals, at the same time legitimating the avoidance of political value conflicts. Thematic partnerships comprising interest group clusters with different political values therefore tended to replicate silo practices. The paper argues, consequently, that the consensual partnership ethos caused the displacement of value conflicts, in turn causing fragmented governance. It concludes with three propositions for further research.

The challenge of enhancing the 'democratic anchorage' of partnerships has become a central concern in policy studies. Radical reform proposals designed to level the deliberative playing field include community veto powers and the appointment of neutral arbiters. Welcome as they would be, however, it is questionable whether such reforms would overcome power asymmetries in the partnership arena. A study of the local politics of social inclusion in two UK cities, Dundee and Hull, suggests that managerialism, driven by national governments, is eroding the prospects for partnership democratisation. But more significantly for the reformist agenda, public managers and community activists think in incompatible frames about the role of partnerships and in ways that are not understood by the other party. Non-communication undermines the prospects for an equitable democratic consensus. Insights from Bourdieu suggest that even in environments more favourable to equitable democratic discourse than those in Dundee and Hull, subtle manifestations of power in culture, discourse and bearing would undermine the potential for a Habermasian consensus between radically unequal actors. In a radical departure from the network governance paradigm, it is therefore argued that empowerment may depend less on enhanced network democracy than on strong independent community organisation capable of acting separately and coercively against governing institutions and elites – an exit-action strategy. These preliminary conclusions point to a substantial research agenda on the politics of the state–civil society nexus.

Following Vivien Lowndes' injunction for scholars to take the new institutionalism seriously, this article 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, 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 coordinating mechanisms built on strong‐weak ties.Vivien Lowndes ayant enjoint les intellectuels à prendre au sérieux le nouvel institutionnalisme, cet article propose une explication institutionnaliste à l'essor des partenariats de régénération au Royaume‐Uni. A partir de quatre études de cas terminées et d'indices issus de recherches en cours sur la 'Nouvelle Donne pour les Communautés', il affirme que les partenariats de type britannique tendent à exprimer des valeurs opposées et des modes hiérarchiques d'organisation. Il se dégage donc une phase d'orientation de trajectoire, les partenariats ne s'étant pas créés comme des mécanismes coordinateurs reposant sur des liens forts‐faibles.