![Sample our Geography journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5937/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Geography.jpg"})
Abstract
The 1998–2011 New Deal for Communities Programme was designed to change 39 deprived English areas, with regard to place- and people-based outcomes. A key mechanism for identifying change was a biennial household survey undertaken in both NDC and comparator areas. Because this survey involved revisiting those interviewed previously, longitudinal panels have been created for those staying within NDC, or comparator, areas. This paper analyses these data to reveal that people living in NDC areas saw little more in the way of positive change than their counterparts living in comparator areas. This finding raises questions about the ability of regeneration schemes to instigate net additional positive change.
Acknowledgements
The author is part of the consortium undertaking the national evaluation of the New Deal for Communities Programme funded by Communities and Local Government. Thanks are due to the CLG and its predecessor departments for funding the 2001–2010 national evaluation of the New Deal for Communities evaluation. In particular thanks are due to Demelza Birch and Penny Withers. The views expressed here are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of CLG. Thanks are also due to all members of the consortium: Christina Beatty, Mike Foden, Paul Lawlessand Sarah Pearson at Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research at Sheffield Hallam University; Angela Brennan, Peter Tyler and Colin Warnock at Cambridge Economic Associates; Ipsos MORI; Social Disadvantage Research Centre Oxford.