![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Claire Stevens of the Merseyside Social Inclusion Observatory (MSIO) who significantly contributed to the research detailed within this article.
Notes
1. Operational difficulties in respect of planning frameworks were recognized through the late 1990s and were included by the Government within its Green Paper ‘Planning—Delivering a Fundamental Change’ in December 2001. This set out—and has been subsequently acted upon through policies such as Local Area Agreements (LAA)—the desire to introduce a framework for stronger, more interactive community involvement at a formative stage in producing policies and plans and in actively engaging with community groups (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, ODPM, Citation2001). Indeed, the increasing prioritization of community engagement as part of developing successful policy interventions is evident in a number of policy areas as well as in the requirement for each Local Planning Authority (LPA) to produce a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).
2. This itself built upon findings within the SEU's PAT Report 16 Learning Lessons (SEU, Citation2000) and the work of the Home Office's Active Community Unit.
3. ‘Core’ occupations are defined as ‘individuals who spend almost all of their time in activities relating to planning, delivering and maintaining sustainable communities—for example, neighbourhood renewal and regeneration practitioners’, whilst ‘Associate’ occupations are defined as ‘individuals whose contribution is deemed important but who are not involved on a full-time basis’ (ODPM, Citation2004, p. 10).
4. Also see Merseyside Social Inclusion Observatory (MSIO, Citation2006) for a full description of this work.
5. Floor targets set a minimum standard for disadvantaged groups or areas in relation to a particular government service and the gap between these and the rest of the country can then be tracked to provide an overview of progress.
6. For example, regeneration professionals, planners, neighbourhood renewal coordinators, Registered Social Landlord officers and both NewHeartlands and local authority staff.
7. 32 interviews were conducted with white residents, whilst Innervision Consultancy Ltd (a local BRM-led organization) were appointed to help ascertain views of a further 47 BRM individuals within a sampling framework that sought differences by ethnicity, gender, age, place of residence and occupation. Most of these interviews were on a ‘one to one’ basis but two group interviews/focus groups were held—one with Indians in Birkenhead and one with Yemenis in Liverpool.
8. ‘Networks together with shared norms, values and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups’ (Cote & Healey, Citation2001, p. 2). Within this definition, networks can be broken down into three main types: (1) bonding social capital—describes closer connections between people—for example, amongst family members or close friends; it is good for ‘getting by’ in life; (2) bridging social capital—describes more distant connections between people and is characterized by weaker, but more cross-cutting ties—for example, business associates, friends of friends; it is good for ‘getting ahead’ in life; and (3) linking social capital—describes connections with people in positions of power; it is good for accessing support from formal institutions. This latter form of social capital is different from bonding and bridging capital in that it is concerned with relations between people who are not on an ‘equal’ footing (Harper & Kelly, Citation2003).
9. This replaced the ODPM in May 2006 and which now has a remit to promote community cohesion and equality, as well as having responsibility for housing, urban regeneration, planning and local government.