Towards a Critical Understanding of Community Anchors and a Community Sector Theory and Practice James Henderson Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Heriot-Watt University School of the Built Environment/ Institute of Social Policy, Housing, Environment and Real Estate Research September 2014 The copyright in this thesis is owned by the author. Any quotation from the thesis or use of any of the information contained in it must acknowledge this thesis as the source of the quotation or information. Abstract This thesis seeks to support the longer-term development of the community sector in Scotland, the United Kingdom (UK) and further afield, through consideration of a community sector theory and practice (CSTP): where, such a theory and practice is assumed to involve elements of both theorising as to actual, developing practices and theorising as to the impact of the broader workings of society (structure) on the forming and performing of such practices. The thesis focuses on a particular model and narrative of a community organisation as a ‘community anchor’: where, such an organisation is understood to be community-based and led, and to undertake a multi-purpose role across a range of local development, service provision and advocacy. The term community anchor has been/is active within policy-making, namely that of the New Labour UK Government (1997-2010) and, currently, SNP Scottish Government (2007-present). Within Scotland, the Scottish Community Alliance (SCA) has positioned a community anchor narrative within a particular narrative of community empowerment; the latter rooted in themes of community ownership and enterprise, local democracy, and local economic and social development (Pearce, 2003). This community anchor/community empowerment narrative (CACE) can be understood as one particular strand of a wider CSTP, a ‘CACE within a CSTP’ (CACE/CSTP) in fact, such that a CACE too can be supported and informed through theorising on practice and structural context. The thesis works to strengthen theoretical understanding and development relating to a CACE/CSTP, and then to draw from this to inform, interpret and analyse an empirical inquiry, using a qualitative and critical case-study research methodology, of three community anchor organisations and their respective communities – one from each of urban, rural and remote island contexts. Theoretical discussion that supports an understanding of a CSTP is developed through consideration of theorising on: post-1945 political economic trends in relation to public policy, particularly urban public policy, in the UK and currently as a dominant neo- liberalism, although as distinctive variants within policy-making in England and Scotland; the practices of community development and social enterprise, in particular relative to social structure and inequality; and, social structure and agency, through use of structuration theory (Giddens, 1984). The understanding of a CACE is deepened through consideration of: policy-making on community anchors within Scottish and English policy-making contexts; matters and issues of practice for community anchors – in particular as being ‘community-led’, developing ‘sustainable independence’ and undertaking a diverse, multi-purpose role; the role of the community sector and its development as part of the social economy; and the wider political economic dynamics of the nation state (Giddens, 1984; Pearce: 1993, 2003; Harvey, 2009 [1973]). The empirical inquiry, and the related interpretation and analysis, explore the three case- studies, and illustrate and develop theoretical understandings of a CACE/CSTP and a CSTP, more generally. In focusing on practice, the complexities of community-led practices, organisational independence (sustainable independence) from the state, and the integration of the breadth of working of a community anchor are considered both as activities on-the-ground and in relation to the state and market. In focusing on political economy, the complexity of the community sector’s relationship with the state and the market is explored. It is recognised that the sector will find itself undertaking a ‘community management’ role, seeking to limit social and economic crises, in response to neo-liberal economic and social marginalisation of many communities. Yet, such recognition can support the community sector in continuing with aspirations for a ‘community ownership’ and in seeking alternatives in relation to local economic and social development, service provision, political advocacy and policy-making. The resulting articulation of a CACE/CSTP can be used to inform a developing community sector research agenda(s) for both ‘the research community’ and community sector, and to inform and support discussions of policy and practice within community sector and wider policy-making. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following, very much, for their help and support with this thesis and related research over the last three and more years … … My research supervisors, Dr Chris McWilliams (first supervisor) and Professor Angela Hull (second supervisor), who have kept me on track, challenging my thinking along the way. More generally, to the wider academic and administrative staff teams, and my fellow postgraduates, within IHURER for selecting me for ESRC funding and providing many and various supports. … Laurence Demarco, from the Social Entrepreneurs Network Scotland (Senscot), and Angus Hardie, from the Scottish Community Alliance, for their input and time over the course of the same period; acting as an informal advisory group and, crucially, also challenging my thinking from the perspectives of community sector practices, theorising and representation within policy-making. In similar vein, I must recognise the thinking of John Pearce, for as becomes clear across the thesis, his theorising has been a crucial starting point for my own; yet sadly he died in 2011 and before I could meet him in person. … The three case-study organisations and their wider communities – Govanhill Housing Association in Govanhill, Glasgow; Creetown Initiative in Creetown and the parish of Kirkmabreck in Dumfries & Galloway; and Northmavine Community Development Company in Northmavine, Shetland – have also played thoroughly crucial and generous roles within the project: many thanks to all the staff, activists, volunteers and residents who gave of their time, whether through interviews or in other ways. Similarly, many thanks to the eleven other people working within the public and community sectors, who undertook formal/informal interviews that provided significant support to the development of my thinking and research. … The wider body of support that has given me both encouragement and ‘another life’, in particular my immediate family – Catherine, Kate, Beth, and Colin too – and friends – John and Nick – across the course of the process. While, and at risk of thanking anyone I’ve ever met, I’d like to recognise my wider family for ongoing crucial conversations, political and personal, over the last four plus decades – Hendersons, Ringler-Hendersons, Hoopers and Roberts – and more generally friends, colleagues and others; too many to list but including Nancy, Ellin, Richard, Kevin … all crucially getting me thinking. Finally, Charles for keeping me right on contested debates as to ‘sustainable economic growth’ and ‘sustainable development’, and for proof- reading work. ACADEMIC REGISTRY Research Thesis Submission Name: James Henderson School/PGI: Institute for Social Policy, Housing, Environment and Real Estate, School for the Built Environment Version: (i.e. First, Final Degree Sought Doctor of Philosophy Resubmission, Final) (Award and Subject area) Declaration In accordance with the appropriate regulations I hereby submit my thesis and I declare that: 1) the thesis embodies the results of my own work and has been composed by myself 2) where appropriate, I have made acknowledgement of the work of others and have made reference to work carried out in collaboration with other persons 3) the thesis is the correct version of the thesis for submission and is the same version as any electronic versions submitted*. 4) my thesis for the award referred to, deposited in the Heriot-Watt University Library, should be made available for loan or photocopying and be available via the Institutional Repository, subject to such conditions as the Librarian may require 5) I understand that as a student of the University I am required to abide by the Regulations of the University and to conform to its discipline. * Please note that it is the responsibility of the candidate to ensure that the correct version of the thesis is submitted. Signature of Date: Candidate: Submission Submitted By (name in capitals): JAMES HENDERSON Signature of Individual Submitting: Date Submitted: For Completion in the Student Service Centre (SSC) Received in the SSC by (name in capitals): Method of Submission (Handed in to SSC; posted through internal/external mail): E-thesis Submitted (mandatory for final theses) Signature: Date: Contents Chapter 1: Introductions and scene-setting (pp.1-46) Chapter 2: A developing qualitative and critical case-study research methodology (pp.47-79) Chapter 3: Developing theoretical background for a community sector theory and practice (pp.80-124) Chapter 4: Understanding a developing community anchor narrative (pp.125-162) Chapter 5: Constructing a community anchor/community empowerment narrative (pp.163-196) Chapter 6: Informing a theory and