The European Union's long-term goal for regional policy is economic and social cohesion. In Merseyside the Union has been engaged in a range of policies, through Objective 1 status, to stimulate regional economic development. In view of the current government's concern to promote capacity building and community economic development, an interesting aspect of Objective 1 is Pathways to Integration, a policy that seeks to tackle the problems of high unemployment and social exclusion across Merseyside through community economic development and capacity building. This paper contrasts the rhetoric of the Pathways literature with the reality of its local delivery in the Knowsley Borough of Merseyside. It argues that the reality of Pathways, particularly in relation to community involvement, does not match the rhetoric and the local delivery has been problematic, and that this experience has important lessons for local economic development strategies that include a large element of capacity building.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackmanT.1995: Urban policies in practice, London: Routledge.
2.
BolandP.1998: Urban governance and economic development: a case study of Knowsley, Merseyside, PhD Thesis, Department of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University.
3.
BolandP.1999: Contested multi-level governance: Merseyside and the European Structural Funds, European Planning Studies, Vol7, No5, 647–64.
4.
CarvelJ.1994: Objective Europe. Two into one will go, Quorum, Issue1. Liverpool: The Mersey Partnership, 4–7.
5.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1994a: Europe 2000+. Co-operation for European territorial development, Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities.
6.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1994b: Fifth periodic report on the social and economic situation and development of the regions in the Community, Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities.
7.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1994c. Europe at the service of regional development, Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities.
8.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1994d: Merseyside single programming document 1994–1999, Brussels: Directorate General for Regional Policies, Commission of the European Communities.
9.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1996: Social and economic inclusion through regional development. The Community economic development priority in European Structural Funds programmes in Great Britain, Brussels: Directorate General for Regional Policies, Commission of the European Communities.
10.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC)1997: Agenda 2000. For a stronger and wider Union, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Supplement 5/97.
11.
Government Office for Merseyside (GOM)1998: Knowsley: ESF (Pathways) approved bids, 1996–1998, Liverpool: Government Office for Merseyside.
12.
HaughtonG.1998: Principles and practice in Community Economic Development, Regional Studies, Vol32, No9, 872–77.
13.
LloydP.MeeganR.1996: Contested governance: European exposure in the English regions, inAldenJ.BolandP.(eds)Regional development strategies: European perspective, London: Jessica Kingsley, 55–85.
14.
MayoM.1994: Communities and caring: the mixed economy of welfare, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
15.
MeeganR.1989: Paradise postponed: the growth and decline of Merseyside's outer estates, inCookeP.(ed)Localities. The changing face of urban Britain, London: Unwin Hyman, 198–234.
16.
MeeganR.1990: Merseyside in crisis and in conflict, inHarloeM.PickvanceC.UrryJ.(eds)Place, policy and politics: do localities matter?London: Unwin Hyman, 87–107.
17.
Merseyside economic assessment1996: Report prepared by KPMG in association with Cambridge Econometrics and the University of Warwick Institute of Employment Research. Liverpool: Objective 1 Labour Market Strategy Group.
18.
Merseyside labour market: a supply-side study 1997: Report prepared by the University of Warwick Institute of Employment Research. Liverpool: Objective 1 Labour Market Strategy Group.
19.
MinfordP.StoneyP.1993: Objective one must be growth, Merseyside Economic and Business Prospect, Vol8, No2. Liverpool Research Group in Macro-economics: University of Liverpool, 3–6.
20.
North West Network1994: Building the pathways to integration: approaches to developing self-help for Merseyside neighbourhoods, Liverpool: North West Network.
21.
ParkinsonM.RussellH.1994: Economic attractiveness and social Exclusion. The case study of Liverpool, Report prepared for Europe 2000+ for the European Commission. European Institute for Urban Affairs: Liverpool John Moores University.
22.
Pathways strategies for Halewood, Huyton, Kirkby and Lickers Lane (1996) Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: Merseyside.
23.
PearceJ.1993: At the heart of the community economy. Community enterprise in a changing world, London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
24.
TurokI.1997: Inserting a local dimension into regional programmes: the experience of Western Scotland, inBachtlerJ.TurokI.(eds)The coherence of EU regional policy, London: Jessica Kingsley, 67–86.
