What is the role of expertise in reproducing austerity and how might this be challenged by the left? The implementation of austerity policies, the widespread public backlash to these policies and the role that expertise has played in their implementation have contributed to highlighting many of the pathologies of neoliberalism, particularly widening geographical and intergenerational divisions. This article adopts the sociological approach to expertise developed by Harry Collins and colleagues in the ‘Studies of Expertise and Experience’ field. Here expertise is understood as relational in the sense that expertise is not recognized by the extent to which it can be said to be right but rather experts are recognized by their own social group. It argues that this relational approach to expertise is explicitly political in nature, involving inclusions and exclusions based on pre-existing power relations and can be further extended to incorporate the relational nature in which various forms of expertise or knowledge are accepted as being authoritative by the broader public. Using examples from the UK, Portugal and Spain, principally in the area of housing and urban politics, this article explores how expertise under neoliberalism can be understood spatially. Local expertise under austerity is focused on either minimizing social harms which may arise – food banks, housing shelters, community social care – or else is directed towards competing for external investment, promoting policies of regeneration and gentrification for the benefit of foreign capital rather than existing populations. A progressive, relational and political expertise should, however, not merely point to the failures of the current system but shape events. The recent growth in social movements has made some progress in challenging austerity, in practice and discourse, and points towards a more joined-up thinking in which knowledge production is clearly and unambiguously linked to action.
Berglund O (2018) Contesting Actually Existing Austerity. New Political Economy 23(6): 804–818.
6.
BlackburnR (2018) The Corbyn Project: Public capital and labour’s new deal. New Left Review 111: 5–32.
7.
BohleD (2009) Race to the bottom? Transnational companies and reinforced competition in the enlarged European Union. In: van ApeldoornBDrahokoupilJHornL (eds) Contradictions and Limits of Neoliberal European Governance.
London:
Palgrave Macmillan, pp.163–186.
8.
BoswellC (2008)
The political functions of expert knowledge: Knowledge and legitimation in European Union immigration policy. Journal of European Public Policy15: 471–488.
9.
BrownW (2015) Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution.
New York:
Zone Books.
10.
BruffI (2014)
The rise of authoritarian neoliberalism. Rethinking Marxism26(1): 113–129.
11.
BurnhamP (2001)
New labour and the politics of depoliticisation. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations3: 127–149.
12.
Cardoso D and Branco R (2018) Liberalised dualisation. Labour market reforms and the crisis in Portugal: A new departure. European Journal of Social Security 20(1): 31–48.
13.
CarrollWKSapinskiJP (2016) Neoliberalism and the transnational capitalist class. In: SpringerSBirchKMacLeavyJ (eds) The Handbook of Neoliberalism.
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.25–35.
14.
ChristensenJ (2017) The Power of Economists Within the State.
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
15.
ChristensenJHolstC (2017)
Advisory commissions, academic expertise and democratic legitimacy: The case of Norway. Science and Public Policy44(6): 821–833.
16.
Clarke J and Newman J (2017) ‘People in this country have had enough of experts’: Brexit and the paradoxes of populism. Critical Policy Studies 11(1): 101–116.
17.
Clarke N (2012) Urban policy mobility, anti-politics, and histories of the transnational municipal movement. Progress in Human Geography 36(1): 25–43.
18.
CollierS (2017) Neoliberalism and rule by experts. In: HigginsVLarnerW (eds) Assembling Neoliberalism: Expertise, Practices, Subjects.
New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, pp.23–44.
19.
CollinsH (2010) Tacit and Explicit Knowledge.
Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
20.
CollinsH (2018)
Are experts right or are they members of expert groups?Social Epistemology32(6): 351–357.
21.
CollinsHEvansR (2002)
The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science32(2): 235–296.
22.
CollinsHEvansR (2007) Rethinking Expertise.
Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
23.
CorlettAJudgeL (2017) Home Affront: Housing Across the Generations.
London:
Resolution Foundation.
24.
CrouchC (2011) The Strange Non-death of Neoliberalism.
London:
Polity Press.
25.
DagdevirenHDonoghueMWearmouthA (2019)
When rhetoric does not translate to reality: Hardship, empowerment and the third sector in austerity localism. The Sociological Review67(1): 143–160.
26.
DardotPLavalC (2013) The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society.
London:
Verso.
27.
DaviesJ (2011) Challenging Governance Theory: From Networks to Hegemony.
Bristol:
Policy Press.
28.
DaviesW (2015) The Limits of Neoliberalism: Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competition.
London:
SAGE.
29.
DaviesW (2016)
The new neoliberalism.New Left Review101, pp.121–134.
30.
Davies W (2018) Nervous States: How Feelings Took Over the World. London: Jonathan Cape.
31.
DonoghueM (2013)
Welfare and cohesion contested: A critical discourse analysis of New Labour’s reform programme.British Politics8(1): 79–100.
32.
DorlingD (2014) All That Is Solid: The Great Housing Disaster.
London:
Penguin.
33.
DuffyDN (2017) Evaluation and Governing in the 21st Century: Disciplinary Measures, Transformative Possibilities.
London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
34.
EckersleyPTobinP (2019) The impact of austerity on policy capacity in local government. Policy & Politics 47(3): 455–472.
35.
ElvinsM (2003) Anti-Drug Policies of the European Union: Transnational Decision-Making and the Politics of Expertise.
Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
FeatherstoneD (2015)
Thinking the crisis politically: Lineages of resistance to neo-liberalism and the politics of the present conjuncture. Space and Polity19(1): 12–30.
38.
FeatherstoneD (2018)
Editorial: Politics, place and left strategies. Soundings68: 4–13.
39.
ForesterJ (1993) Critical Theory, Public Policy and Planning Practice: Towards a Critical Pragmatism.
New York:
SUNY Press.
40.
García-LamarcaM (2017a)
Creating political subjects: Collective knowledge and action to enact housing rights in Spain. Community Development Journal52(3): 421–435.
41.
García‐LamarcaM (2017b)
From occupying plazas to recuperating housing: Insurgent practices in Spain. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research41(1): 37–53.
42.
GiddensA (1998) The Third Way.
London:
Polity.
43.
GrundmannR (2017)
The problem of expertise in knowledge societies. Minerva55(1): 25–48.
44.
HallS (2017) Selected Political Writings: The Great Moving Right Show and Other Essays.
London:
Lawrence and Wishart.
45.
HanB-C (2017) Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and the New Technologies of Power.
London:
Verso.
46.
HarveyD (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
47.
HayC (1999) The Political Economy of New Labour: Labouring Under False Pretences?
Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
48.
Hopkin J and Rosamond B (2018) Post-truth Politics, Bullshit and Bad Ideas: ‘Deficit Fetishism’ in the UK. New Political Economy 23(6): 641–655.
49.
HuntTStanleyL (2019) From ‘there is no alternative’ to ‘maybe there are alternatives’: Five challenges to economic orthodoxy after the crash. The Political Quarterly. 90(3): 479–87.
50.
JessopB (2016) The heartlands of neoliberalism and the rise of the austerity state. In: SpringerSBirchKMacLeavyJ (eds) The Handbook of Neoliberalism.
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.410–421.
51.
KalantH (2010)
Drug classification: Science, politics, both or neither?Addiction105(7): 1146–1149.
52.
LoreyI (2015) State of Insecurity: Government of the Precarious.
London:
Verso.
53.
McCannE (2008)
Expertise, truth, and urban policy mobilities: Global circuits of knowledge in the development of Vancouver, Canada’s ‘four pillar’ drug strategy. Environment and Planning A40(4): 885–904.
54.
McCannE (2011)
Urban policy mobilities and global circuits of knowledge: Toward a research agenda. Annals of the Association of American Geographers101(1): 107–130.
55.
McCannETemenosC (2015)
Mobilizing drug consumption rooms: Inter-place networks and harm reduction drug policy. Health & Place31(1): 216–223.
56.
McCannEWardK (2011) Mobile Urbanism: Cities & Policy-Making in the Global Age.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
57.
MacLeanN (2017) Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America.
New York:
Viking.
58.
MatthijsMMcNamaraK (2015)
The euro crisis’ theory effect: Northern saints, southern sinners, and the demise of the Eurobond. Journal of European Integration37(2): 229–245.
59.
MirowskiP (2014) Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste: How Neoliberalism Survived the Financial Meltdown.
London:
Verso.
60.
MouryCStandringA (2017)
Going beyond the Troika: Power and discourse in Portuguese austerity policies. European Journal of Political Research56(3): 660–679.
61.
Mudge S (2018) Leftism Reinvented: Western Parties from Socialism to Neoliberalism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
62.
NewmanJ (2001) Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society.
London:
SAGE.
63.
NewmanJ (2017) The politics of expertise: Neoliberalism, governance and the practice of politic. In: HigginsVLarnerW (eds) Assembling Neoliberalism: Expertise, Practices, Subjects.
New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
64.
NuttDKingLAPhillipsLD (2010)
Drug harms in the UK: A multicriteria decision analysis. Lancet376(9752): 1558–1565.
65.
PapadopoulosY (2013) Democracy in Crisis: Politics, Governance and Policy.
New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, pp.87–106.
66.
PeckJ (2012)
Austerity urbanism: American cities under extreme economy. City16(6): 626–655.
PielkeRJrPrinsGRaynerS, et al. (2007)
Climate change 2007: Lifting the taboo on adaptation.Nature445(7128): 567–598.
69.
PiersonP (2002)
Coping with permanent austerity: Welfare state restructuring in affluent democracies. Revue Française de Sociologie42(2): 369–406.
70.
PintoAT (2018)
The art of gentrification: The Lisbon version. Afterall: A Journal of Art, Context and Enquiry45: 88–97.
71.
RacoMMoreira de SouzaT (2018)
Urban development, small business communities and the entrepreneurialisation of English local government. Town Planning Review89(2): 145–165.
72.
RahmanFTomlinsonD (2018) Cross Countries: International Comparisons of Intergenerational Trends.
London:
Resolution Foundation.
73.
SandersonI (2002)
Making sense of ‘what works’: Evidence-based policy as instrumental rationality?Public Policy and Administration17(3): 61–75.
74.
SeixasJTulumelloSDragoA, et al. (2016) Potentials and restrictions on the changing dynamics of the political spaces in the Lisbon Metropolitan Area. In: KnielingJOthengrafenF (eds) Cities in Crisis. Reflections on the Socio-Spatial Impacts of the Economic Crisis and the Strategies and Approaches Applied by Southern European Cities.
London and New York:
Routledge, pp.217–238.
75.
SeymourR (2013) Against Austerity: How We Can Fix the Crisis They Made.
London:
Pluto Press.
76.
StandingG (2011)
Behavioural conditionality: Why the nudges must be stopped. Journal of Poverty and Social Justice19(1): 27–38.
77.
StandringA (2017a)
Evidence-based policymaking and the politics of neoliberal reason: A response to Newman. Critical Policy Studies11(2): 227–234.
78.
StandringA (2017b) Evidence-based policymaking as depoliticised governance strategy: The case of European drug policy. In: O’GormanAPotterGRFountainJ (eds) Evidence in European Social Drug Research and Drug Policy.
Lengerich:
Pabst Science Publishers, pp.33–50.
79.
StanleyL (2014)
‘We’re reaping what we sowed’: Everyday crisis narratives and acquiescence to the age of austerity. New Political Economy19(6): 895–917.
80.
StreeckW (2014) Buying Time: The Delayed Crisis of Democratic Capitalism.
London:
Verso.
81.
TemenosC (2017)
Everyday proper politics: Rereading the post‐political through mobilities of drug policy activism. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers42(4): 584–596.
82.
Tooze A (2018) Crashed: How A Decade of Financial Crises Changed The World. London: Allan Lane.
83.
TulumelloS (2016)
Reconsidering neoliberal urban planning in times of crisis: Urban regeneration policy in a “dense” space in Lisbon. Urban Geography37(1): 117–140.
84.
TulumelloSFerreiraACColomboA, et al. (2018)
Comparative planning and housing studies beyond taxonomies: A geneaology of the special programme for rehousing (Portugal). Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning2(1): 32–46.
85.
WhitesideH (2016) Neoliberalism as austerity: The theory, practice, and purpose of restraint since the1970s. In: SpringerSBirchKMacLeavyJ (eds) The Handbook of Neoliberalism.
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.361–368.
86.
WilsonJSwyngedouwE (2014) The Post-Political and Its Discontents: Spaces of Depoliticisation, Spectres of Radical Politics.
Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
