The shift from government to governance in recent years has created significant new opportunities for people from disadvantaged communities to participate in the decisions that affect them. However, the weight of evidence over the years suggests that these communities have remained on the margins in partnerships and other initiatives. Governmentality theory helps to explain the ways in which state power persists even when governing is increasingly devolved; however, it also allows for the possibility of 'active subjects', who can shape and influence the new spaces into which they have been invited. This article draws on a range of evidence from the literature and from the author's own research in the UK to consider the challenges for communities of 'governing beyond the state'.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anastacio, J., Gidley, B., Hart, L. ET AL. (2000) Reflecting Realities: Participants' Perspectives on Integrated Communities and Sustainable Development. Bristol: The Policy Press.
2.
Atkinson, R. (2003) Addressing urban social exclusion through community involvement in urban regeneration, in: R. Imrie and M. Raco (Eds) Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy, pp. 101-119. Bristol : The Policy Press.
3.
Blair, T. (1995) The rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe. Spectator lecture, 22 March.
4.
Blair, T. (1998) The third way: new politics for the new century. Pamphlet No. 588, Fabian Society , London.
5.
Blunkett, D. (2003) Civil renewal: a new agenda. The CSV Edith Kahn Memorial Lecture, 11 June.
6.
Caniglia, B.S. and Carmin J. (2005) Scholarship on social movement organziations: classic views and emerging trends, Mobilization, 10(2), pp. 201-212.
7.
Civil Renewal Unit (2005) Togetherwecan: people and government working together to make life better (http://www.togetherwecan.info/).
8.
Coaffee, J. and Healey, P. (2003) 'My voice: my place': tracking transformations , Urban Governance, 40(10), pp. 1979-1999.
9.
Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny?London: Zed Books.
10.
Cornwall, A. (2004a) New democratic spaces? The politics and dynamics of institutionalised participation, IDS Bulletin, 35(2), pp. 1-10.
11.
Cornwall, A. (2004b) Spaces for transformation? Reflections on issues of power and difference in participation in development, in: S. Hickey and G. Mohan (Eds) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation, pp. 75-91. London : Zed Books.
12.
Craig, G., Taylor, M. and Parkes, T. (2004) Protest or partnership? The voluntary and community sectors in the policy process, Social Policy and Administration , 38(3), pp. 221-239.
13.
Daly, M. (2003) Governance and social policy, Journal of Social Policy, 32(1), pp. 113-128.
14.
Flynn, R. (2002) Clinical governance and governmentality, Health , Risk and Society, 4(2), pp. 155-173.
15.
Foucault, M. (1979) Governmentality, Ideology and Consciousness , 6, pp. 5-21.
16.
Foucault, M. (1980) PowerlKnowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-77, ed. by C. Gordon.Brighton: Harvester Press.
17.
Fung, A. and Wright, E. (2003) Deepening democracy: innovations in empowered participatory governance, Politics and Society, 29(2), pp. 5-41.
18.
Gaster, L. and Taylor, M. (1993) Learning from citizens and consumers. Local Government Management Board, Luton.
19.
Gaventa, J. (2004) Towards participatory governance: assessing the transformative possibilities , in: S. Hickey and G. Mohan (Eds) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation , pp. 25-41. London : Zed Books.
20.
Gittell, M. (2001) Empowerment zones: an opportunity missed: a six-city comparative study. The Howard Samuels State Management and Policy Centre, The Graduate School and the University Centre of the City University of New York.
21.
Greer, J. (2001) Whither partnership governance in Northern Ireland? , Environment and PlanningC, 19, pp. 751-770.
22.
Hickey, S. and Mohan, G. (2004) Towards participation as transformation: critical themes and challenges, in: S. Hickey and G. Mohan (Eds) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation, pp. 3-24. London: Zed Books.
23.
HM Treasury (2002) The role of the voluntary and community sector in service delivery: a cross cutting review. HM Treasury , London.
24.
Hodgson, L. (2004) Manufactured civil society: counting the cost, Critical Social Policy, 24(2), pp. 139-164.
25.
Jessop, B. (2003) Governance and meta-governance: on reflexivity, requisite variety and requisite irony. Department of Sociology, Lancaster University (http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/Jessop-Governance-and-Metagovernance.pdf).
26.
Jones, P. (2003) Urban regeneration's poisoned chalice: is there an impasse in (community) participation-based policy?, UrbanStudies, 40(3), pp. 581-601.
27.
Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as Governance. London : Sage.
28.
Lemke, T. (2001) 'The birth of bio-politics': Michel Foucault's lecture at the College de France on neo-liberal governmentality, Economy and Society, 30(2), pp. 190-207.
29.
Lowndes, V. and Sullivan, H. (2004) Like a horse and carriage or a fish on a bicycle: how well do local partnerships and public participation go together?, Local Government Studies, 30(1), pp. 51-73.
30.
Marris, P. and Rein, M. (1967) Dilemmas of Social Reform. New York: Atherton Press.
31.
Mayo, M. (1997) Partnerships for regeneration and community development: some opportunities, challenges and constraints, Critical Social Policy, 17(3), pp. 3-26.
32.
McAdam, D., Mccarthy, J. and Zald, M. (1996) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Miliband, D. (2006) Empowerment and the new deal for devolution. Speech by the Minister of Communities and Local Government to the Annual Conference of the New Local Government Network, 18 January.
34.
Morison, J. (2000) The government-voluntary sector compacts: governance, governmentality and civil society, Journal of Law and Society , 27(1), pp. 98-132.
35.
Nao (National Audit Office) (2004) Getting Citizens Involved: Community Participation in Neighbourhood Renewal . London: The Stationery Office .
36.
Newman, J. (2001) Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society. London: Sage.
37.
Newman, J., Barnes, M., Sullivan, H. ET AL. (2004) Public participation and collaborative governance , Journal of Social Policy, 33(2), pp. 203 -223.
38.
Odpm (Office Of The Deputy Prime Minister) ( 2002) Public participation in local government: a survey of local authorities. ODPM, London .
39.
Odpm (2005a) Making connections: an evaluation of the Community Participation Programmes. ODPM, London.
Odpm/Home Office (2005) Citizen engagement and public services: why neighbourhoods matter. ODPM, London.
42.
Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T. (1992) Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
43.
Powell, W.W. (1991) Extending the scope of institutional analysis, in: W. W. Powell and P. J. Dimaggio (Eds) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, pp. 183-203. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Power, M. (2003) Evaluating the audit explosion, Law and Policy, 25(3), pp. 185-202.
45.
Raco, M. (2003) Governmentality, subject-building, and the discourses and practices of devolution in the UK, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 28, pp. 75-95.
46.
Raco, M. AND Flint J. (2001) Communities, places and institutional relations: assessing the role of area-based community representation in local governance , Political Geography, 20, pp. 585-612.
47.
Rhodes, R. (1997) Understanding Governance. Buckingham : Open University Press.
48.
Rose, N. (1996) The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government, Economy and Society, 25(3), pp. 327-356.
49.
Rose, N. (1999) Powers of Freedom Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50.
Rose, N. and Miller, P. (1992) Political power beyond the state: problematics of government, British Journal of Sociology,43, pp.173-205.
51.
SEU (Social Exclusion Unit) (1998) Bringing Britain together. SEU, London.
52.
SEU (2001) A new commitment to neighbourhood renewal: the action plan. SEU, London.
53.
Shirlow, P. and Murtagh, B. (2004) Capacity-building, representation and intracommunity conflict, UrbanStudies, 41(1), pp. 57-70.
54.
Somerville, P. (2005) Community governance and democracy, Policy and Politics, 33(1), pp. 117-144.
55.
Stewart, A. (1995) Two conceptions of citizenship, British Journal of Sociology,46(1), pp. 63-78.
56.
Stoker, G. (1998) Governance as theory: 5 propositions, International Social Science Journal, 155, pp. 17-28.
57.
Swyngedouw, E. (2005) Governance innovation and the citizen: the Janus-face of governance-beyond-the-state, Urban Studies, 42(11), pp. 1991-2006.
58.
Tarrow, S. (1994) Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Action and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Taylor, M. (2000) Communities in the lead: power, organisational capacity and social capital, UrbanStudies, 37(5/6), pp. 1019-1035.
60.
Taylor, M. (2002) Brighton URBAN: the evaluation report. University of Brighton.
61.
Taylor, M. (2003a) Public Policy in the Community. London: Palgrave.
62.
Taylor, M. (2003b) Neighbourhood governance: holy grail or poisoned chalice?, Local Economy, 18(3), pp. 190-195.
63.
Taylor, M. and Warburton, D. (2003) Legitimacy and the role of UK third sector organisations in the democratic process, Voluntas, 14(3), pp. 321-338.
