Localism and the Big Society

The Asset Transfer of Leisure Centres and Libraries – Fighting Closures or Empowering Communities

Bibliographic Data

ID8090621
AuthorsLindsay Findlay-King (0000-0001-5199-1797, Northumbria University, corresponding author), Geoff Nichols (0000-0002-2477-0865, Sheffield University Management School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK), Deborah Forbes (Newcastle University Business School, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK), Gordon Macfadyen (Northumbria University)
Year2017
Volume37
Issue2
Pages158-170
Publication date2017-02-08
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueLeisure Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0261-4367 • E-ISSN: 1466-4496
PublisherRoutledge (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/02614367.2017.1285954
OpenAlexW2586948448
LanguageEN
Citations received16
References cited20

This paper critically examines the ‘asset transfer’ of leisure services from the public to the voluntary sector. Asset transfer might be theorised as ‘austerity localism’, in which volunteers are obliged to fill the gaps left by retreating public provision, or as ‘progressive localism’, which represents new opportunities through the localism and Big Society agendas to develop more locally responsive, cooperative and mutualist visions. In this way, asset transfer might overcome the limitations of the United Kingdom policies in which ‘Big Government’ is replaced by civic society. Drawing on qualitative interviews with key personnel (volunteers, managers and local authority officers) at 12 leisure facilities, a grounded assessment of the nuanced balance between ‘austerity localism’ and ‘progressive localism’ is provided, including three observations. First, the main impetus for transfer was cuts in local authority budgets which stimulated the emergence of local groups of volunteers. Secondly, the transfers themselves required interaction between local government and the volunteer groups; however, the nature of the relationship and support given varied and support was limited by austerity measures. Thirdly, volunteers do not automatically fill a gap left by the state: without support transfer viability relies on the financial and social capital among volunteer groups, and this is unevenly distributed. These findings suggest that the capacity for a ‘progressive localism’ to emerge through asset transfer is limited. However, where transfer has occurred, there are some progressive benefits of volunteer empowerment and a more flexible service

Asset (computer security · Austerity · Local government · Localism · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Cultural Industries and Urban Development · Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism · Irish and British Studies · Law · Public Administration