Real Participation or the Tyranny of Participatory Practice? Public Art and Community Involvement in the Regeneration of the Raploch,Scotland

Abstract

The language of participation and empowerment has become a convention in urban redevelopment practice. While on first glance there is little to disagree with, a critical literature has emerged around the notion that participation has become a new ‘tyranny’ that, despite its claims, is little more than tokenism. However, it is the contention of this paper that the impacts of participation in community-based urban regeneration projects are complex, usually contested and often contradictory. While an uncritical vocabulary of ‘participation’ has proliferated in both cultural and regeneration policy, the actual practice on the ground reveals significant difficulties which have implications for policy goals of community participation and empowerment, and for the community itself. Rather than seeing it as a problem, or something to be removed as soon as possible from the process, contestation and conflict should be recognised as appropriate reflections of community.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alcock

(2010a) Big Society or civil society? A new policy environment for the third sector. Third Sector Research Centre (http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=PwhvBXnPGAU%3D&tabid=716; accessed 28 November 2011).

Alcock

(2010b) Devolution or divergence? Third sector policy across the UK since 2000, in: Lodge

Schmuecker

(Eds) Devolution in Practice 2010, ch. 15. London: Institute for Research on Public Policy.

Atkinson

(1999) Discourses of partnership and empowerment in contemporary British urban regeneration, Urban Studies, 37, pp. 1037–1055.

Atkinson

(2003) Addressing urban social exclusion through community involvement in urban regeneration, in: Imrie

Raco

(Eds) Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community, and Urban Policy, pp. 101–110. Bristol: Policy Press.

Belfiore

(2002) Art as a means of alleviating social exclusion: does it really work? A critique of instrumental cultural policies and social impact studies in the UK, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 8(1), pp. 91–106.

Belfiore

(2006) The social impact of the arts: myth or reality?, in: Miraz

(Ed.) Culture Vultures: Is UK Arts Policy Damaging the Arts?, pp. 20–37. London: Policy Exchange.

Bishop

(2004) Antagonism and relational aesthetics, October, 110, pp. 51–79.

Bishop

(2006) The social turn: collaboration and its discontents, Artforum, February, pp. 178–183.

Bourriaud

(1998) Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Du press du reel.

10.

CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment) and Arts and Business (2008) Artists and places: engaging creative minds in regeneration. CABE, London ( http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/artists-and-places ; accessed February 2010).

11.

Carley

(2006) Partnership and statutory local governance in Scotland, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19(3), pp. 250–260.

12.

Cleaver

(1999) Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development, Journal of International Development, 11, pp. 596–612.

13.

Cochrane

(1986) Community politics and democracy, in: Held

Pollitt

(Eds) New Forms of Democracy, pp. 51–72. London: Sage.

14.

Cooke

(2001) The social psychological limits of participation, in: Cooke

Kothari

(Eds) Participation: The New Tyranny, pp. 102–105. London: Zed Books.

15.

Cooke

Kothari

(Eds) (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny. London: Zed Books.

16.

Cornwall

(2004a) Introduction: new democratic spaces? The politics and dynamics of institutionalised participation, IDS Bulletin, 35(2), pp. 1–10.

17.

Cornwall

(2004b) Spaces for transformation? Reflections on issues of power and difference in participation in development, in: Hickey

Mohan

(Eds) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development, pp. 75–91. London: Zed Books.

18.

COSLA (Convention of Scottish Local Authorities) and Scottish Government (2003/2008) Working and learning together to build stronger communities. (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/1046/0069751.pdf; accessed June 2011).

19.

Dargan

(2009) Participation and local urban regeneration: the case of the New Deal for Communities in the UK, Regional Studies, 43(2), pp. 305–317.

20.

Deutsche

(1996) Evictions: Art and Spatial Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

21.

Dodgshon

R. A.

(1999) Human geography at the end of time? Some thoughts on the notion of time–space compression, Environment and Planning D, 17(5), pp. 607–620.

22.

Fisher

(2009) The art of persuasion: bringing the community on board, in: Creative Spaces Raploch Stirling. Raploch URC, Stirling.

23.

Foley

Martin

(2000) A New Deal for Community: public participation in regeneration and local service delivery, Policy and Politics, 28, pp. 478–491.

24.

Fraser

(1996) Justice Interrupts. London: Routledge.

25.

Fung

Wright

E. O.

(2003) Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. London: Verso.

26.

Giddens

(1998) The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

27.

Gray

(2002) Local government and the arts, Local Government Studies, 28, pp. 77–90.

28.

Hall

Robertson

(2001) Public art and urban regeneration: advocacy, claims and critical debates, Landscape Research, 26(1), pp. 5–26.

29.

Healey

(1997) Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan.

30.

Hickey

Mohan

(Eds) (2004) Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development. London: Zed Books.

31.

HM Government (2008) Communities in control: real power, real people. Department of Communities and Local Government, London (http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesincontrol; accessed August 2010).

32.

Hunter

(2005) Creative spaces. Unpublished Community Report for Raploch RCP.

33.

Hunter

(2006) Creative spaces. Unpublished Community Report for Raploch RCP.

34.

Jones

(2003) Urban regeneration’s poisoned chalice: is there an impasse in (community) participation-based policy?, Urban Studies, 40(3), pp. 581–601.

35.

Kearns

(1992) Active citizenship and urban governance, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 17, pp. 20–34.

36.

Kwon

(2004) One Place after Another: Site Specific Art and Locational Identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

37.

Lacy

(1995) Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art. Seattle, WA: Bay Press.

38.

Lovering

(1995) Creating discourses rather than jobs: the crisis in cities and transition fantasies of intellectuals and policy makers, in: Healey

Cameron

Davoudi

Graham

. (Eds) Managing Cities: The New Urban Context, pp. 109–126. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

39.

MacLeavy

(2009) (Re)analysing community empowerment: rationalities and technologies of government in Bristol’s New Deal for Communities, Urban Studies, 46(4), pp. 849–875.

40.

Maginn

(2007) Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: the potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography, Qualitative Research, 7(25), pp. 25–43.

41.

McKee

(2011) Sceptical, disorderly and paradoxical subjects: problematizing the ‘will to empower’ in social housing governance, Housing Theory and Society, 28(1), pp. 1–18.

42.

McKee

Cooper

(2008) The paradox of tenant empowerment: regulatory and liberatory possibilities, Housing, Theory and Society, 25(2), pp. 132–146.

43.

Milbourne

Cushman

(2011) From third sector to the Big Society: how changing UK government policies have eroded third sector trust. Working Paper No. 184, Department of Management Information Systems and Innovation Group, London School of Economics (http://is2.lse.ac.uk/wp/pdf/wp184.pdf).

44.

Mirza

(Ed.) (2006) Culture vultures: is UK arts policy damaging the arts? London: Policy Exchange (http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/publications/publication.cgi?id=5; accessed 1 February 2010).

45.

Morison

(2000) The government–voluntary sector compacts: governance, governmentality and civil society, Journal of Law and Society, 27(1), pp. 98–132.

46.

Mouffe

(2008) Art and democracy: art as an agonistic intervention in public space, in: Art as a Public Issue: How Can Art and Its Institutions Reinvent the Public Dimension, Open No. 14, pp. 6–13.

47.

Pollock

Sharp

(2007) Constellations of identity: place-ma(r)king beyond heritage, Environment and Planning D, 25(5), pp. 1061–1078.

48.

Raco

(2000) Assessing community participation in local economic development: lessons for the new urban policy, Political Geography, 19, pp. 573–599.

49.

Raco

Flint

(2001) Communities, places and institutional relations: assessing the role of area-based community representation in local governance, Political Geography, 20, pp. 585–612.

50.

Raco

Imrie

(2000) Governmentality and rights and responsibilities in urban policy, Environment and Planning A, 32, pp. 2187–2204.

51.

Raco

Henderson

Bowlby

(2008) Changing times, changing places: urban development and the politics of space–time, Environment and Planning A, 40, pp. 2652–2673.

52.

Raco

Turok

Kintrea

(2003) Local development companies and the regeneration of Britain’s cities, Environment and Planning C, 21, pp. 277–303.

53.

Raploch URC (n.d.) Vision statement (http://www.raploch.com/; accessed 7 October 2009).

54.

Robertson

Smyth

McIntosh

(2008) The Raploch: a history, people’s perceptions and the likely future of a problem housing estate, Architectural Heritage, 19, pp. 83–97.

55.

Rose

(1996) The death of the social? Refiguring the territory of government, Economy and Society, 25(3), pp. 327–356.

56.

Sammers

(1998) Immigration, ‘ethnic minorities’, and ‘social exclusion’ in the European Union: a critical perspective, Geoforum, 29(2), pp. 123–144.

57.

Scott

(2011) Reflections on the ‘Big Society’, Community Development Journal, 46(1), pp. 132–137.

58.

Scottish Executive (2003) Local Government in Scotland Act (http://www.hmso.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/acts2003/20030001.htm; accessed August 2010).

59.

Scottish Government (2009) Community: Scottish community empowerment action plan—celebrating success: inspiring change. The Scottish Government, Edinburgh (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/03/20155113/0; accessed Ocotber 2009).

60.

Scottish Government (2011) Building a sustainable future: regeneration discussion paper. The Scottish Government, Edinburgh (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/02/07095554/0; accessed August 2011).

61.

Selwood

(1995) The Benefits of Public Art. London: The Policy Press.

62.

Sharp

(2007) The life and death of five spaces: public art and community regeneration in Glasgow, Cultural Geographies, 14, pp. 274–292.

63.

Sharp

Pollock

V. L.

Paddison

(2005) Just art for a just city? Public art in urban regeneration, Urban Studies, 42(5/6), pp. 1001–1023.

64.

Shaw

(2008) Community development and the politics of community, Community Development Journal, 43(1), pp. 24–36.

65.

Shiel

Smith-Milne

(2007) Best practice in establishing urban regeneration companies in Scotland. Scottish Government Social Research, Edinburgh (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/09/20103240/0; accessed Ocotber 2009).

66.

Stirling Council/Ginkgo Projects (2004) Creative spaces. National Lottery capital programme: small grants application form: artists’ work in public places.

67.

Taylor

(2007) Community participation in the real world: opportunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces, Urban Studies, 44(2), pp. 297–317.

68.

Williams

Véron

Srivastava

Corbridge

(2003) Participation, poverty and power: poor people’s engagement with India’s employment assurance scheme, Development and Change, 34(1), pp. 163–192.