In this article the author identifies the dichotomous nature of a government approach which insists on autonomy. Exhortations to communities to be independent while fostering dependent relations lead to a kind of paralysis that inhibits people’s abilities to progress. These insights were gained in Salford, UK in a former working class community fatigued by government intervention. As part of an academic project focused on supporting local people’s ideas, new ways of engaging were explored. However the researchers’ role as project directors and the status of the university also had impacts on fostering self-determination. The author proposes that a reflexive strategy identifying and ameliorating the multiple points of government interventions in low-income communities would go far in nurturing people’s productivity. This includes working with local intermediaries who have an intimate knowledge of the communities they serve.
Corsín JiménezA. (2007). Introduction: Re-institutionalisations. In Corsín JiménezA. (Ed.), The anthropology of organisations (pp. xii–xxxi). The international library of essays in anthropology. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
5.
DaviesA. (2009). The gangs of Manchester: The story of the Scuttlers, Britain’s first youth cult. Preston, UK: Milo Books.
6.
DelaneyS. (2014). A taste of honey. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing (Original work published 1958).
7.
EdwardsJ. (2000). Born and bred: Idioms of kinship and new reproductive technologies in England. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
8.
EdwardsJ.EvansG.SmithK. (2012). Introduction: The middle class-ification of Britain. Focaal, 62, 3–16.
9.
EstalellaA.Sánchez-CriadoT. (2015). Experimental collaborations an invocation for the redistribution of social research. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 21, 301–305.
10.
EvansK.FraserP.WalklateS. (1996). Whom can you trust? The politics of ‘grassing’ on an inner city housing estate. The Sociological Review, 44, 361–380.
11.
FacerK.EnrightB. (2016). Creating living knowledge: The Connected Communities programme, community university relationships and the participatory turn in the production of knowledge. Bristol, UK: University of Bristol/AHRC Connected Communities.
12.
FergusonJ. (2013). Declarations of dependence: Labour, personhood, and welfare in southern Africa. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 19, 223–242. doi:10.1111/1467-9655.12023
13.
GeertzC. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
14.
GreenwoodW. (2008). Love on the dole: A tale of two cities. London, UK: Random House (Original work published 1933).
15.
GunnA.MintromM. (2016). Higher education policy change in Europe: Academic research funding and the impact agenda. European Education, 48, 241–257. doi:10.1080/10564934.2016.1237703
JonesO. (2012). Chavs: The demonization of the working class. London, UK: Verso Books.
18.
LawlerS. (2005). Disgusted subjects: The making of middle-class identities. The Sociological Review, 53, 429–446.
19.
LawlerS. (2014). Heroic workers and angry young men: Nostalgic stories of class in England. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 13, 375–393.
20.
LewisC. (2016). ‘Regenerating community’? Urban change and narratives of the past. The Sociological Review, 64, 912–928. doi:10.1111/1467–954X.12418
21.
MacdonaldR.ShildrickT.FurlongA. (2014). In search of ‘intergenerational cultures of worklessness’: Hunting the Yeti and shooting zombies. Critical Social Policy, 34, 199–220.
22.
MayV. (2017). Belonging from afar: Nostalgia, time and memory. The Sociological Review, 65, 155–167.
23.
McKenzieL. (2013). Narratives from a Nottingham council estate: A story of white working-class mothers with mixed-race children. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36, 1342–1358.
24.
Navaro-YashinY. (2002). Faces of the state: Secularism and public life in Turkey: Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25.
PerryB.MayT. (2010). Urban knowledge exchange: Devilish dichotomies and active intermediation. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 1, 6–24.
26.
PerryB.SmithK.WarrenS. (2015). Revealing and re-valuing cultural intermediaries in the ‘real’ creative city: Insights from a diary-keeping exercise. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18, 724–740.
ShildrickT.MacdonaldR. (2013). Poverty talk: How people experiencing poverty deny their poverty and why they blame ‘the poor’. The Sociological Review, 61, 285–303. doi:10.1111/1467–954X.12018
29.
SkeggsB. (1997). Formations of class and gender: Becoming respectable. London, UK: Sage.
SmithK. (2014, September). ‘You don’t own money, you’re just the one who’s holding it’: Borrowing, lending and the fair person in North Manchester. Paper presented at the Anthropology of Britain Decennial Workshop, University of Exeter, UK.
32.
SmithK. E.StewartE. (2016). We need to talk about impact: Why social policy academics need to engage with the UK’s research impact agenda. Journal of Social Policy, 46, 109–127.
33.
SymonsJ. (2015). Shaping the flow: Ethnographic analysis of a Manchester parade event. Ethnos, 81, 697–711. doi:10.1080/00141844.2014.989877
34.
SymonsJ. (2016). Untangling creativity and art for policy purposes: Ethnographic insights on Manchester International Festival and Manchester Day Parade. International Journal of Cultural Policy. Advance online publication. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2016.1150268
