• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Apollo The Paradox of Localism Exploring rhetoric and reform promoting the devolution of power, from 1964 to 2017 Sophia Ulrika Peacock Newnham College April 2019 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Declaration This dissertation is submitted according to the requirements of the Degree Committee of Land Economy. It does not exceed the regulation length of 80,000 words including footnotes, references and appendices.1 It is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as specified in the text. 1 Excluding the additional corrections as stipulated in the examiners’ report. 2 Summary Full name: Sophia Ulrika Peacock Thesis title: The Paradox of Localism – Exploring rhetoric and reform promoting the devolution of power, from 1964 to 2017 The Localism Act 2011 is one of many reforms over the past few decades aimed at English local government and its service delivery areas, with the expressed aim to empower citizens and oversee democratic renewal. However, localism has been marked by two fundamental contradictions. Firstly, despite stated intentions of mainstream political parties to localise power, centralisation is widely perceived to be increasing. Secondly, and in relation to this, localism has often emerged as a centrally led agenda rather than through a bottom-up process. Therefore, this thesis problematises the political context of periodic localism. It asks: what are the political motivations and pressures that result in decentralist / localist rhetoric and reform? This thesis explores the uses of localism in relation to two political discourses of governments and political parties: on the one hand, discourse that seeks to legitimise and justify government policy, and on the other hand, discourse that seeks to popularise and delegitimatize policies and ideas. Focusing on two types of discourses – one associated with government communicative discourse, and one associated with mainly communicative discourse observed during election campaigns and most commonly amongst opposition parties, this thesis suggests that legitimacy and populism both offer useful frames for understanding how localism is used and operationalised in the political sphere. The empirical and analytical core can be found in chapters four, five and six, which offers both a historical and contemporary perspective based on qualitative research (interviews and documentary analysis). Chapter four outlines my empirical observations on the Localism Act, discussing where the Act can be situated in a history of decentralising reform, how the government and parliament interpreted localism during the Bill stages, and the strategies central government used to implement it. Chapter five widens the perspective, exploring the link between centralisation (in the form of top-down interventions) and localist rhetoric and policy, from the 1960s onwards, by distinguishing between ‘strategic’ (means) and ‘normative’ (ends) localism as expressed in both rhetoric and reform. Chapter six explores the extent to which localism forms part of populist messaging as well as a party-political campaign strategy, outlining the dynamic between opposition party versus government rhetoric on localism. My main conclusion is that localism is first and foremost a government and / or party-political strategy, which explains why localism often remains a poorly implemented policy idea. 3 Contents Summary 3 List of Tables, Figures and Abbreviations 6 Acknowledgments 8 INTRODUCTION 9 1.1. EXPLORING THE PARADOX ............................................................................................................................. 9 1.2. RESEARCH MOTIVATION .............................................................................................................................. 12 1.3. STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS .......................................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 17 2.1. LOCATING A THEORY OF LOCALISM ............................................................................................................. 17 2.1.1. From governance to critique .............................................................................................................. 19 2.2. THE CONTEXT OF LOCALISM: LEGITIMATION CHALLENGES FROM THE 1960S ONWARDS ............................. 24 2.2.1 Internal challenges to legitimacy: tensions between bureaucracy and democracy............................. 26 2.2.2 External challenges to legitimacy: turnout and distrust ...................................................................... 28 2.3. THE TRADITION OF LOCALISM...................................................................................................................... 31 2.4. EXPLORING A STRATEGIC LOCALISM ........................................................................................................... 36 2.4.1. A legitimating discourse? ................................................................................................................... 36 2.4.2. Delegitimisation and populist localism .............................................................................................. 39 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 42 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH PROCESS, CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, AND METHODS 44 3.1. THE RESEARCH PROCESS .............................................................................................................................. 45 3.2. STUDYING LOCALISM DISCURSIVELY ........................................................................................................... 48 3.3. A QUALITATIVE APPROACH: INTERVIEWS, DOCUMENTS, AND A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ......................... 53 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 60 CHAPTER 4: A CASE STUDY OF THE LOCALISM ACT 61 4.1. DEFINING LOCALISM .................................................................................................................................... 62 4.2. TANGIBLE MANIFESTATIONS: THE LOCALISM ACT 2011 ............................................................................. 66 4.3. IMPLEMENTING LOCALISM .......................................................................................................................... 77 4.3.1. Institutionalising localism: the Department of Communities and Local Government ....................... 77 4.3.2. Short-lived or repurposed momentum? Localism to devolution ......................................................... 80 4.4. A CASE STUDY ON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING ......................................................................................... 84 4.4.1. The link between planning and democracy ......................................................................................... 85 4.4.2. The implementation of neighbourhood planning ................................................................................ 88 4.4.3. ‘Prescribed’ versus ‘genuine’ localism? Neighbourhood planning in Southwark ............................. 91 4 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 94 CHAPTER 5: STRATEGIC LOCALISM AND STATE INTERVENTION, 1964 TO 2017 96 5.1. DEFINING CENTRALISATION......................................................................................................................... 98 5.2. THE LEGITIMACY OF STATE INTERVENTION ............................................................................................... 103 5.3. AN OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC OPINION AND LOCALIST-RHETORIC, 1964-2017 ................................................ 110 5.3.1. An introduction to the main historical patterns ................................................................................ 110 5.3.2. Modernisation, 1964-1970 ................................................................................................................ 117 5.3.3. Streamlining and accountability, 1979-1997 .................................................................................... 121 5.3.4. Second phase of modernisation, 1997-2010 ..................................................................................... 127 5.3.5. Austerity and bottom-up restructuring, 2010-2017 .......................................................................... 131 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................... 136 CHAPTER 6: THE LOCALIST PROMISE – POPULIST STRATEGIES

Load more

  200

Copy Link