Urban Policy Contradictions

The Market Versus Redistributive Approaches

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6326445
AutoresChristopher Moore (0000-0003-3149-1140), Chris Moore (0000-0002-5183-1707), Simon Booth (0000-0001-5585-022X)
Año1986
Volumen14
Número3
Páginas361-387
Fecha de publicación1986-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaPolicy & Politics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0305-5736 • E-ISSN: 1470-8442
EditorialBristol University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1332/030557386782628208
OpenAlexW2075936302
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas6

British urban policy emphasises the concept of partnership between different levels of government and the importance of institutional co-ordination for effective problem solving. This ignores underlying political and ideological conflicts between the objectives of central government and local authorities in the major conurbations. Examining the evolution of urban policy in Clydeside reveals two competing models of urban regeneration articulated by central and local government, reflecting different modes of interest representation and political accountability. This has particularly adverse consequences for certain communities within the conurbation. Policy prescriptions which fail to recognise these underlying conflicts are unlikely to succeed

Accountability · Central government · Conurbation · Economics · Economy · General partnership · Government (linguistics · Ideology · Local government · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Representation (politics · Urban planning · Urban policy · Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Public Administration · Scottish History and National Identity