The current orthodoxy of urban regeneration is that it is essential to involve the community in decisions about regeneration programmes. This article argues that the justification for this position is often unclear and explores three different theoretical arguments for deliberative democracy in an urban regeneration context. It concludes that there are fundamental theoretical flaws with arguing for deliberation on the grounds of legitimacy, and that arguments based on the nature of knowledge or the nature of society are more promising. However both of those types of arguments will only justify deliberation in certain circumstances, and it is an empirical question as to whether or not a specific regeneration project meets the necessary criteria. The article concludes by using this purely theoretical discussion to construct nine questions to guide empirical evaluation of attempts to employ deliberative democracy in urban regeneration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Akkerman, T. (2001), ‘Urban debates and deliberative democracy’, Acta Politica, No 36, pp.71-87.
2.
Aldridge, S. , Halpern, D. and Fitzpatrick, S. (2002), Social capital: a discussion paper, ( London: Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit) .
3.
Amos, G. (2001), ‘The role of community and voluntary sector planners: the experience from Planning Aid London’ , Planning Theory and Practice, Vol 2, No 3, pp. 344-348 .
4.
Apel, K. (1990), ‘Is the ethics of the ideal communication community a utopia?’, in Benhabib, S. and Dallmayr, F. , eds, The communicative ethics controversy, ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) .
5.
Banks, S. and Shenton, F. (2001), ‘Regenerating neighbourhoods: a critical look at the role of community capacity building’ , Local Economy, Vol 16, No 4, pp. 286-298 .
6.
Bolland, J. and McCallum, D. (2002), ‘Neighbouring and community involvement in high poverty inner-city neighbourhoods’ , Urban Affairs Review, Vol 38, No 1, pp. 42-69 .
7.
Carley, M. , Chapman, M. , Hastings, A. , Kirk, K. and Young, R. (2000), Urban regeneration through partnerships, ( Bristol: Policy Press) .
8.
Carter, A. and Patel, R. (1998), Regeneration and communities: a new role for housing, ( London: National Housing Federation) .
9.
Chambers, S. (1996), Reasonable democracy: Jurgen Habermas and the politics of discourse, ( Ithaca: Cornell University Press) .
10.
Checkland, P. and Scholes, J. (1990), Soft systems methodology in action, ( London: Wiley) .
11.
Cooke, M. (2000), ‘Five arguments for deliberative democracy’ , Political Studies, Vol 48, No 5, pp. 947-969 .
12.
Dallmayr, F. (1990), ‘Introduction’, in Benhabib, S. and Dallmayr, F. , eds, The communicative ethics controversy ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) .
13.
DETR (Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions) (2000), New Deal for Communities: developing delivery plans, ( London: The Stationary Office) .
14.
Dobbs, L. and Moore, C. (2002), ‘Engaging communities in area-based regeneration: the role of participatory evaluation’ , Policy Studies, Vol 23, Nos 3-4, pp. 157-171 .
15.
Dryzek, J. (1987), ‘Complexity and rationality in public life’ , Political Studies, Vol 35, No 3, pp. 424-442 ,
16.
Dryzek, J. (1993), ‘Policy analysis and planning: from science to argument’, in Fischer, F. and Forester, J. , eds, The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning, ( London: UCL Press) .
17.
Dryzek, J. (2000), Deliberative democracy and beyond: liberals, critics and contestations, ( Oxford: OUP) .
18.
Dryzek, J. (2001), ‘Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy’ , Political Theory, Vol 9, No 5, pp. 651-669 .
19.
Duffy, K. and Hutchinson, J. (1997), ‘Urban policy and the turn to-community’ , Town Planning Review, Vol 68, No 3, pp. 347-362 .
20.
Dowding, K. (2004), ‘Interpretation, truth and investigation’ , British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol 6, No 2, pp. 138-145 .
21.
Edwards, C. (2001), ‘Inclusion in regeneration: a place for disabled people?’ , Urban Studies, Vol 38, No 2, pp. 267-286 .
22.
Etzioni, A. (1968), The active society, ( New York: Free Press) .
23.
Etzioni, A. (1993), The spirit of community, ( New York: Simon and Schuster) .
24.
Foley, P. and Martin, S. (2000), ‘A New Deal for the Community? Public participation in regeneration and service delivery’ , Policy and Politics, Vol 28, No 4, pp. 479-492 .
25.
Fischer, F. (1993), ‘Citizen participation and the democratisation of policy expertise’ , Policy Sciences, Vol 26, No 3, pp. 165-188 .
26.
Fischer, F. and Forester, J. (1993), ‘Introduction’, in The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning, ( London: UCL Press) .
27.
Fitzpatrick, S. , Hastings, A. and Kintrea, K. (2000), ‘Youth involvement in urban regeneration: hard lessons, future directions’ , Policy and Politics, Vol 28, No 4, pp. 493-510 .
28.
Greenberg, M. and Lewis, M. (2000), ‘Brownfield redevelopment, preferences and public involvement: a case study of an ethnically mixed neighbourhood’ , Urban Studies, Vol 37, No 3, pp. 2501-2514 .
29.
Habermas, J. (1984), The theory of communicative action vol I - reason and the rationalisation of society, ( Boston, MA: Beacon Press) .
30.
Hodgson, G. (1998), ‘Socialism against markets? A critique of two recent proposals’ , Economy and Society, Vol 27, No 4, pp. 407-433 .
31.
Hughes, J. and Carmichel, P. (1998), ‘Building partnerships in urban regeneration: a case study from Belfast’ , Community Development Journal, Vol 33, No 3, pp. 205-225 .
32.
Jennings, B. (1986), ‘Counsel and consensus: norms of argument in health policy’, in Fischer, F. and Forester, J. , eds, The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning, ( London: UCL Press) .
33.
Kymlicka, W. (1990), Contemporary political philosophy, ( Oxford: OUP) .
34.
Lancaster, K. and Lipsey, R. (1956), ‘General theory of the second best’ , Review of Economic Studies, Vol 24, No 1, pp. 11-32 .
35.
Lawless, P. (2001), ‘Community economic development in urban and regional regeneration: unfolding potential or justifiable scepticism?’ , Environment and Planning, Vol 19, No 2, pp. 135-155 .
36.
Lepofsky, J. and Fraser, J. (2003), ‘Building community citizens: claiming the right to place making in the city’ , Urban Studies, Vol 40, No 1, pp. 127-142 .
37.
Macintyre, A. (1988), Whose justice? Which rationality?, ( London: Duckworth) .
38.
McNaughton, D. (1988), Moral Vision, ( Oxford: Blackwells) .
39.
Meadowcroft, J. (2001), ‘Community politics, representation and the limits of deliberative democracy’ , Local Government Studies, Vol 27, No 3, pp. 25-42 .
40.
Moore, G. (1903), Principia ethica, ( Cambridge: Butterworth) .
41.
Mouffe, C. (1992), ‘Democratic politics today’, in Mouffe, C. , ed., Dimensions of radical democracy, ( London: Verso) .
42.
Mutale, E. and Edwards, M. (2002), ‘The London Development Agency and local regeneration issues: an overview of urban regeneration management’ , Local Economy, Vol 17, No 1, pp. 25-34 .
43.
Ostrom, E. (1990), Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action, ( Cambridge: CUP) .
44.
Parkinson, M. (1996), ‘25 years of urban policy in Britain: partnership, entrepreneurialism or competition?’ , Public Money and Management, Vol 16, No 3, pp. 7-14 .
45.
Pennington, M. (2002), ‘Environmental markets vs. environmental deliberation: A Hayekain critique of green political economy’ , New Political Economy, Vol 6, No 2, pp. 171-190 .
46.
Pennington, M. (2003), ‘Hayekian political economy and the limits of deliberative democracy’ , Political Studies, Vol 51, No 4, pp. 722-739 .
47.
Purdue, D. (2001), ‘Neighbourhood governance: leadership, trust and social capital’ , Urban Studies, Vol 38, No 12, pp. 2211-2224 .
48.
Putnam, R. (2000), Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community, ( New York: Touchstone) .
49.
Rhodes, R. and Bevir, M. (2004), ‘Interpreting British Governance’ , British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol 6, No 2, pp. 130-136 .
50.
Sagoff, M. (1988), The economy of the earth, Cambridge: CUP) .
51.
Shaw, M. and Martin, I. (2000), ‘Community work, citizenship and democracy: remaking the connections’ , Community Development Journal, Vol 35, No 4, pp. 401-413 .
52.
Smith, G. and Wales, C. (2000), ‘Citizens juries and deliberative democracy’ , Political Studies, Vol 88, No 1, pp. 51-56 .
53.
Smith, G. (2001), ‘Taking deliberation seriously: institutional design and green politics’ , Environmental Politics, Vol 10, No 3, pp. 72-93 .
54.
SEU (Social Exclusion Unit) (2000), National strategy for neighbourhood renewal: a framework for consultation, ( London: The Stationary Office) .
55.
Townshead, I. (1998), ‘Review of Abbott, J. , Sharing the city: community participation in urban management’, Urban Studies, Vol 35, No 1, pp. 156-159 .
56.
Young, I.M. (2000), Inclusion and Democracy, ( Oxford: OUP) .
