The impact of austerity on urban governance has become a key area of academic concern, but many studies tend to interpret the effect on individual urban state bodies through analysis of broader governance relations, whilst also framing austerity as an overarching and homogeneous set of ideas, values and practices. In response, this paper examines a city government’s economic development department as a means in which to understand how the heterogeneous agency of the organisation mitigates austerity. In examining the adaptation to austerity, the paper deploys the practice theory of Schatzki. This involves utilising his conceptualisation of the construction of practices through various elements in producing the organisation, and their related ‘timespaces’. In conclusion, examining practices are important in understanding the intricacies of the ‘agency’ of the organisation, with the paper elucidating the uneven reconfiguration of the case study towards forms of timespace governing based on entrepreneurial pro-growth practices.
AldagAKimYWarnerM (2019) Austerity urbanism or pragmatic municipalism? Local government responses to fiscal stress in New York state. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space51(6): 1287–1305.
2.
Allen J (2004) The whereabouts of power: Politics, government and space. Geografiska Annaler 86: 19–32.
3.
ArmondiS (2017) State rescaling and new metropolitan space in the age of austerity. Evidence from Italy. Geoforum81: 174–179.
4.
BrennerNPeckJTheodoreN (2010) Variegated neoliberalization: Geographies, modalities, pathways. Global Networks10(2): 1–51.
5.
Bridge G (2020) On pragmatism, assemblage and ANT: Assembling reason. Progress in Human Geography 45(3): 417–435.
6.
ChorianopoulosITselepiN (2020) Austerity governance and bifurcated civil society: The changing matrices of urban politics in Athens. Journal of Urban Affairs42(1): 39–55.
7.
ClarkeJNewmanJ (2012) The alchemy of austerity. Critical Social Policy32(3): 299–319.
8.
ClaytonJDonovanCMerchantJ (2016) Distancing and limited resourcefulness: Third sector service provision under austerity localism in the North East of England. Urban Studies53(4): 723–740.
9.
Coventry City Council (2016) Coventry Local Plan. Coventry: Coventry City Council.
10.
Coventry City Council (2017) Budget Report 2017/18. Coventry: Coventry City Council.
11.
Davidson M and Kutz W (2015) Grassroots austerity: municipal bankruptcy from below in Vallejo, California. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Society 47(7): 1440–1459.
12.
DaviesJBlancoI (2017) Austerity urbanism: Patterns of neo-liberalisation and resistance in six cities of Spain and the UK. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(7): 1517–1536.
13.
DaviesJBuaAMercè Cortina-OriolM, et al. (2020) Why is austerity governable? A Gramscian urban regime analysis of Leicester, UK. Journal of Urban Affairs42(1): 56–74.
14.
DaviesJThompsonE (2016) Austerian realism and the governance of Leicester. In: BevirMRhodesRA W (eds) Rethinking Governance: Ruling, Rationalities and Resistance. London: Routledge.
15.
Dean M (2010) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage.
16.
DonaldBGlasmeierDAGrayM, et al. (2014) Austerity in the city: Economic crisis and urban service decline?Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society7(1): 3–15.
17.
EgebergMGornitzkaATrondalJ (2016) Organization theory. In: AnsellCTorfing J (eds) Handbook on Theories of Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
18.
EvertsJLahr-KurtenMWatsonM (2011) Practice matters! Geographical inquiry and theories of practice. Erdkunde65(4): 232–334.
19.
FullerC (2013) Urban politics and the social practices of critique and justification: Conceptual insights from French Pragmatism. Progress in Human Geography37(5): 639–657.
20.
FullerC (2017) City government in an age of austerity: Discursive institutions and critique. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(4): 745–766.
21.
FullerC (2018) Entrepreneurial urbanism, austerity and economic governance. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society11(3): 565–585.
22.
FullerCWestK (2017) The possibilities and limits of political contestation in times of ‘urban austerity. Urban Studies54(9): 2087–2106.
23.
GaynorN (2020) Governing austerity in Dublin: Rationalization, resilience, and resistance. Journal of Urban Affairs42(1): 75–90.
24.
GonzálezSOosterlynckSRibera-FumazR, et al. (2017) Locating the global financial crisis: Variegated neoliberalization in four European cities. Territory, Politics, Governance6(4): 468–488.
25.
GrayMBarfordA (2018) The depths of the cuts: The uneven geography of local government austerity. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society11(3): 541–563.
26.
HastingsABaileyNBramleyG, et al. (2017) Austerity urbanism in England: The ‘regressive redistribution’ of local government services and the impact on the poor and marginalised. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(9): 2007–2024.
27.
Heidegger M (1962). Being and Time. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
28.
HitchingsR (2012) People can talk about their practices. Area44(1): 61–67.
29.
HortonJ (2016) Anticipating service withdrawal: Young people in spaces of neoliberalisation, austerity and economic crisis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers41(4): 349–362.
30.
Jessop B and Sum N L (2010) Cultural Political Economy: Logics of Discovery, Epistemic Fallacies, the Complexity of Emergence, and the Potential of the Cultural Turn. New Political Economy 15(3): 445–451.
31.
JonesR (2012) State encounters. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space30(5): 805–821.
32.
KimYWarnerME (2018) Geographies of stress after the great recession. Social Policy & Administration52(1): 365–386.
33.
KingBFelinTWhettenD (2009) Finding the organization in organizational theory: A meta-theory of the organization as a social actor. Organization Science21(1): 290–305.
MüllerM (2012) Opening the black box of the organization: Socio-material practices of geopolitical ordering. Political Geography31(6): 379–388.
37.
Nicolini D (2017) Practice theory as a package of theory, method and vocabulary: affordances and limitations. In: Jonas M and Littig, B and Wroblewski A (eds) Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories. Berlin: Springer International Publishing.
38.
PeckJ (2012) Austerity urbanism. City City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action16(6): 626–655.
39.
PeckJ (2014) Entrepreneurial urbanism: Between uncommon sense and dull compulsion. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography96(4): 396–401.
40.
PeckJ (2017) Transatlantic city, part 1: Conjunctural urbanism. Urban Studies54(1): 4–30.
41.
PennyJ (2017) Between coercion and consent: The politics of “Cooperative Governance” at a time of “Austerity Localism” in London. Urban Geography38(9): 1352–1373.
42.
PikeACoombesMO’BrienP, et al. (2016) Austerity states, institutional dismantling and the governance of sub-national economic development. Territory, Politics, Governance 6(1): 118–144.
43.
PugalisL (2016) Austere state strategies: Regenerating for recovery and the resignification of regeneration. Local Government Studies42(1): 52–74.
44.
Reckwitz A (2002) Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory 5(2) 243–263.
45.
RodgersSBarnettCCochraneA (2014) Where is urban politics?International Journal of Urban and Regional Research38(5): 1551–1560.
46.
SchatzkiT (2002) The Site of the Social: A Philosophical account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
47.
SchatzkiTR (2005) The site of organizations. Organization Studies26(3): 465–484.
48.
SchatzkiTR (2006) On organizations as they happen. Organization Studies27(12): 1863–1873.
49.
SchatzkiTR (2010) The Timespace of Human Activity: On Performance, Society, and History as Indeterminate Teleological Events. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
50.
StorperMScottA (2016) Current debates in urban theory: A critical assessment. Urban Studies53(6): 1114–1136.
51.
Thompson M, Nowak V, Southern A, Davies J, and Furmedge P (2020) Re-grounding the city with Polanyi: From urban entrepreneurialism to entrepreneurial municipalism. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 52(6): 1171–1194.
WardKNewmanJJohnP, et al. (2015) Whatever happened to local government? A review symposium. Regional Studies, Regional Science2(1): 435–457.
54.
WarnerMCliftonJ (2014) Marketisation, public services and the city: The potential for Polanyian counter movements. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society7(1): 45–61.
55.
WilliamsAGoodwinMClokeP (2014) Neoliberalism, big society, and progressive localism. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space46(12): 2798–2815.
