Liverpool is a city which has, in many ways, undoubtedly and observably benefited from Objective One EU funding to the extent that there is pretty much universal agreement that this has underpinned the city’s recent renaissance. That said, outside the city centre persistent long-term economic problems endure. This paper reviews the mixed experiences of Merseyside’s Objective One ‘Pathways to Inclusion’ programme as an attempt to solve problems of concentrated deprivation, arguing that the success of conventional approaches has been mixed. Brexit provides an opportunity for a rupture with forms of local economic development that have been progressively neoliberalised through time. It argues for a focus on opportunities, not deficits and absences, using asset-based community development, diverse economies, and solidarity economy approaches.
AlcockPGambleAGoughI (1989) The Social Economy and the Democratic State, London: Lawrence and Wishart.
2.
AminACameronAHudsonR (2002) Placing the Social Economy, London: Routledge.
3.
Amin A and Thrift N (1995) Globalization, institutional ‘thickness’ and the local economy. In: Healey P, Cameron S, Davoudi S, e al. (eds) Managing Cities-The New Urban Context, Chichester, Sussex: John Wiley, pp. 91–108.
4.
AuingerM (2009) Solidarity economics – Emancipatory social change or self-help?Journal für Entwicklungspolitik25: 4–21.
5.
BarkinDLemusB (2014) Rethinking the social and solidarity society in light of community practice. Sustainability6: 6432–6445.
6.
BenthamJBowmanAde la CuestaM (2013) Manifesto for the Foundational Economy, Manchester: Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change.
7.
BiddulphM (2011) Urban design, regeneration and the entrepreneurial city. Progress in Planning76: 63–103.
8.
BoddyMFudgeC (1984) Local Socialism, London: Macmillan.
9.
BolandP (1999a) “Community” economic development in Knowsley, Merseyside. Rhetoric versus reality. Local Economy14(3): 214–231.
10.
BolandP (1999b) Merseyside and objective 1 status, 1994–1999: Implications for the next programming period. Regional Studies33(8): 788–792.
11.
BolandP (2010) ‘Capital of culture—You must be having a laugh!’ Challenging the official rhetoric of Liverpool as the 2008 European cultural capital. Social and Cultural Geography11(7): 627–645.
12.
BoyleD (2016) Prosperity Parade: Eight Stories from the Frontlines of Local Economic Recovery, London: New Weather Institute.
13.
CameronJGibsonK (2005a) Alternative pathways to community and economic development: The Latrobe valley community partnering project. Geographical Research43(3): 274–285.
14.
CameronJGibsonK (2005b) Participatory action research in a poststructuralist vein. Geoforum36(3): 315–331.
15.
Castree N (2000) Geographic scale and grass-roots internationalism: The Liverpool dock dispute, 1995–1998. Economic Geography 76(3): 272–292.
16.
CDP (1977) Gilding the Ghetto, London: CDP Inter Project Editorial Team.
17.
CornforthC (1983) Some factors affecting the success or failure of worker co-operatives: A review of empirical research in the United Kingdom. Economic and Industrial Democracy4(2): 163–190.
18.
CornforthC (2014) Understanding and combating mission drift in social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal10(1): 3–20.
19.
CumbersA (2012) Reclaiming Public Ownership: Making Space for Economic Democracy, London: Zed.
20.
CurnoP (1978) Political Issues and Community Work, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
21.
DaunceyG (1988) Beyond the Crash: The Emerging Rainbow Economy, London: Greenprint.
22.
DeFilippisJ (2004) Unmaking Goliath: Community Control in the Face of Global Capital, London: Routledge.
23.
DefilippisJFisherRShraggeE (2006) Neither romance nor regulation: Re-evaluating community. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research30(3): 673–689.
24.
DETR (1998) Community-Based Regeneration Initiatives: A Working Paper, London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
25.
Du NoyerP (2002) Liverpool – Wondrous Place, London: Virgin Books.
26.
EvansR (2002) The Merseyside objective one programme: Exemplar of coherent city-regional planning and governance or cautionary tale?European Planning Studies10(4): 495–517.
27.
FrostDNorthP (2013) Militant Liverpool a City on the Edge, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
28.
Garcia B, Melville R and Cox T (2010) Creating an impact: Liverpool’s year as Capital of Culture. Liverpool: Impacts 08.
29.
GibsonK (2001) Regional subjection and becoming. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space19(6): 639–667.
30.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2003) The impatience of familiarity: A commentary on Michael Watts’ “Development and Governmentality”. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography24(1): 35–37.
31.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2006a) The End of Capitalism (As We Knew It), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
32.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2006b) A Postcapitalist Politics, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
33.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2008) Diverse economies: Performative practices for ‘other worlds’. Progress in Human Geography32(5): 613–632.
34.
Gibson-GrahamJKCameronJHealyS (2013) Take Back the Economy, Any Time, Any Place, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
35.
Gibson-GrahamJKRoelvinkG (2010) An economic ethics for the anthropocene. Antipode41(s1): 320–346.
36.
HainP (1975) Radical Regeneration: Protest, Direct Action and Community Politics, London: Quartet Books.
37.
HarveyD (1989) From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography71(1): 3–17.
38.
HarveyD (1992) The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford: Blackwell.
39.
HaughtonG (1999) Community Economic Development, London: The Stationary Office.
40.
ImbroscioD (1997) Reconstructing City Politics: Alternative Economic Development and Urban Regimes, London: Sage.
41.
JonesGMeeganRKennettP (2016) The uneven impact of austerity on the voluntary and community sector: A tale of two cities. Urban Studies53(10): 2064–2080.
42.
KretzmannJMcknightJ (1993) Building Communities from the Inside Out, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
43.
LapavitsasC (2012) Crisis in the Eurozone, London: Verso.
44.
LeemingK (2002) Community businesses – Lessons from Liverpool, UK. Community Development Journal37(3): 260–267.
45.
LevinsonM (2016) The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Economy Bigger, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46.
LloydPMeeganR (1996) Contested governance: European exposure in the English regions. European Planning Studies4(1): 75–97.
47.
McArthurA (1993) An exploration of community business failure. Policy and Politics21(3): 219–230.
48.
MackintoshMWainwrightH (1987) A Taste of Power: The Politics of Local Economics, London: Verso.
49.
MeeganR (1999) The Merseyside development corporation. In: ImrieRThomasH (eds) Urban Development Corporations: Entrepreneurialism and Locality, London: Longman.
50.
MeeganR (2003) Urban regeneration, politics and social cohesion: The Liverpool case. In: MunckR (ed.) Reinventing the City: Liverpool in Comparative Perspective, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, pp. 53–79.
51.
MeeganRMitchellA (2001) ‘It’s not community round here, it’s neighbourhood’: Neighbourhood change and cohesion in Urban regeneration policies. Urban Studies38(12): 2167–2194.
52.
MendellM (2009) The three pillars of the social economy: The Quebec experience. In: AminA (ed.) The Social Economy, London: Zed, pp. 176–207.
53.
MorrinMSimmondsDSomervilleW (2004) Social enterprise: Mainstreamed from the margins?Local Economy19(1): 69–84.
54.
MurdenJ (2006) ‘City of change and challenge’: Liverpool since 1945. In: BelchemJ (ed.) Liverpool 800, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, pp. 393–485.
55.
MurphyP (2016) 17 things European funding has done for Merseyside. Liverpool Echo. 21 February.
56.
NormanJ (2010) The Big Society: The Anatomy of the New Politics, Buckingham: University of Buckingham Press.
57.
NorthP (2000) Is there space for organisation from below within the UK Government’s Action zones?: A test of ‘collaborative planning’. Urban Studies37(8): 1261–1278.
58.
NorthP (2010) Ecolocalisation as a progressive response to peak oil and climate change. Geoforum41(4): 585–594.
59.
NorthP (2011) Geographies and utopias of Cameron’s Big Society. Social and Cultural Geography12(8): 817–827.
60.
NorthPBruegelI (2001) Community empowerment: Rethinking resistance in an era of partnership. In: PiersonJSmithJ (eds) Rebuilding Community: Policy and Practice in Urban Regeneration, London: Palgrave, pp. 174–188.
61.
NorthPCatoMS (2017) Towards Just and Sustainable Economies: The Social and Solidarity Economy North and South, Bristol: The Policy Press.
62.
ParkinsonM (1985) Liverpool on the Brink, Hermitage: Policy Journals.
63.
ParkinsonMBianchiniF (1993) Liverpool: A tale of missed opportunities. In: BianchiniFParkinsonM (eds) Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration: The West European Experience, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 155–177.
64.
ParkinsonMEvansRMeeganR (2016) The State of Liverpool City Region Report, Liverpool: University of Liverpool/Liverpool John Moores University.
65.
PearceJ (1993) At the Heart of the Community Economy: Community Enterprise in a Changing World, London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
66.
PeckJ (1995) Moving and shaking: Business elites, state localism and urban privatism. Progress in Human Geography19: 16–46.
67.
SchumacherE (1973) Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, London: Vintage Books.
68.
SedgewickEK (2003) Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity, London: Duke University Press.
69.
SouthernA (2011) Enterprise, Deprivation and Social Exclusion: The Role of Small Business in Addressing Social and Economic Inequalities, London: Routledge.
70.
SykesOBrownJCocksM (2013) A city profile of Liverpool. Cities35: 299–318.
71.
TuckmanAI (2011) Worker’s control and the politics of factory occupations. In: NessIAzzelliniD (eds) Ours to Master and to Own: Workers Control from the Commune to the Present, Chicago, IL: Haymarket, pp. 284–301.
72.
Turok IEN (1999) The Jobs Gap in Britain’s Cities Employment Loss and Labour Market Consequences. Bristol: Policy Press.
