Transcript Document
Class, Citizenship and
Regeneration: Glasgow
and the CWGs 2014
Dr Kim McKee
Department of Geography & Sustainable Development
University of St Andrews
(Paper co-authored with Dr Kirsteen Paton, University of Glasgow &
Dr Gerry Mooney, Open University Scotland)
Outline
Introduction (thesis of the paper)
Classed Relations of Urban Regeneration
Citizenship & the Flawed Consumer
Regeneration as Gentrification
Case Study of CWGs 2014
Conclusion & Questions
Introduction
Advances critical exploration of current tenets of urban
regeneration through focus on CWGs 2014:
Central role of class in regeneration narratives
Targeting of ‘problem ‘people & ‘problem ‘places
To be reconstructed as consumer-citizens
Large-scale flagship events one way to challenge
‘flawed consumption’ (CWGs one example)
Explore ways in which CWGs seen as
deconstructing/reconstructing working-class lives
Emphasis on consumer-citizenship denies participation
& disadvantages those who cannot afford to consume
Synthesize insights from gentrification literature &
Foucauldian literature on neo-liberal governmentalities
Classed Relations of Urban Regeneration
Urban regeneration as a classed practice:
Concerned with regulation, management, control & social
reproduction of particular populations
Class often neglected in the urban literature, or when not
being denied, exist as ‘problems’ or ‘victims’
Presumption many social problems in Britain found
primarily in working-class estates (see, Damer 1989)
Apparent when narratives around ‘crisis of welfare’
mobilised – ‘Broken Society’ contemporary example
Class replaced/displaced by narratives around moralised
differences/boundaries/binaries
These moral geographies spatialised – particular classes
become associated with particular places (Skeggs 2004)
Social housing estates generally imagined as ‘other’ spaces
“…council housing is a living tomb. You dare not give
up the house because you might never get another, but
staying is to be trapped in a ghetto of both place and
mind” (Will Hutton 2007)
“Many social housing estates that were once well
functioning working class communities, with a range of
people on different incomes, have become, in many
inner city areas, ghettos of the poorest and neediest
people (Housing & Dependency Working Group 2008: 7)
Citizenship & the Flawed Consumer
Bauman (1998) asserts consumption is now the defining
feature of our post-modern society
Rose (2000) argues this reconfiguration of state-citizen
relations represent a new ‘politics of conduct’
Civilizing project aimed at reconciling individual
conduct with moral discourses of responsible behaviour
Individual welfare & success hinges upon the ability of
citizen-consumers to participate in the labour market &
enterprise their own lives
Twin processes of empowerment & responsibilisation
Defining feature of the New Labour government’
welfare reforms
Remains strong under current UK coalition (Broken
Society)
Political rhetoric of self-help & individualism has a long
history
Currently ‘Big Society’ in vogue
Not just about accessing consumption, but expectation
individuals will direct acts of consumption themselves
Reflects conditional nature of citizenship: stigmatisation
of those who cannot undertake normalised acts
Ability to consume has become an important marker of
distinction
Not only legitimates exclusion, but also creates dividing
practices
Image often conjured up is that of the problem social
housing estate
Policy & political discourses link homeownership with
desirable & responsible self-conduct
Housing consumption important point of distinction
between ‘successful’ & ‘flawed’ consumers
Serves to mobilise cultural stereotypes about
homeowners & social renters
BUT a major limitation of the consumer-citizenship
literature is lack of explicit class analysis (Kerr 1999)
Reflects Foucauldian origins of this argument; focuses
on subject formation & governing beyond the state
Study of gentrification looks at similar neighbourhood
based processes through geographic dynamics of capital
accumulation & supporting consumption practices
BUT in a way which is intrinsically classed
Regeneration as Gentrification
Gentrification debates traditionally underpinned by
Marxist (Smith 1996; Harvey 1982) & Liberal Humanist
accounts (Ley 1996)
Offers discrete economic & cultural explanations of
class transformations of neighbourhoods
Economic: identifies a rent-gap, which describes difference in
value of inner city land & its potential value if regenerated
Cultural: back to the city movement of middle-class suburban
dwellers, born out of consumption practices
Either way – process of class restructuring born out at
the neighbourhood level
Role of the state recognised as increasingly important
(Hackworth 2002; Slater 2006)
Recognition of fiscal benefit of attracting people &
capital to areas for competitive advantages:
Towards an Urban Renaissance (1999)
People and Place (2006)
Described by Hackworth (2002) as the creation of space
for the more affluent user
Effects upon & experiences of working-class residents
often absent
Exception to this is recent work by Uitermark et al
(2007) – gentrification a strategy to govern:
Policy-led gentrification does not have an immediate
profit nor necessarily lead to direct displacement
Additional objective: to civilise unruly populations in
‘declined’ areas
Used by local states to reshape relationship between
state & citizens (manage not displace w/c populations)
Synergies in these debates
Both Foucauldian & gentrification debates reveal:
Regeneration strategies are a form of urban restructuring
born out of neo-liberalism
Involve two key components of governance:
Marketisation & growth focused strategy of the state
Expansion of community & individual participation &
citizenship via consumption
Social interventions which ‘other’ the practices &
behaviours of w/c communities
Glasgow 2014: festival of consumption?
On November 9 2007 CWG’s Federation chose Glasgow
as host city for 2014 Games
“ [the CWGs will] bring a host of benefits to Glasgow and
Scotland, including everything from regeneration, job
creation, inward investment and just a huge pride in being
Scottish” (Nicola Sturgeon, Deputy First Minister)
Not alone in arguing CWGs would ‘transform’ Glasgow’s
East End (where new facilities & village located)
After several decades of neglect & ‘failure’, East End &
its population now has key role in city’s eco prosperity
“The economic position of the East End remains poor …
A complex set of factors combine to limit progress. The
area continues to have high levels and concentrations of
poverty and low levels of economic activity, and its
residents suffer from poor health, significantly affecting
their economic potential. The area still houses some of
the poorest communities in the UK and contains high
levels of derelict and contaminated land currently
unusable for economic activity” (East End Partnership,
undated, page 5)
Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics
SHETTLESTON SCOTLAND
% POPULATION INCOME DEPRIVED,
Table of figures
2008
35
15
% WORKING AGE POPULATION,
EMPLOYMENT DEPRIVED, 2008
25
12
% POPULATION AGED 60+ CLAIMING
GUARANTEED PENSION CREDIT, 2009
46
18
% POPULATION IN SOCIAL HOUSING,
2001
54
29
HOUSE SALES, MEAN PRICE, 2009
105, 302
159, 075
% PEOPLE WITHIN 500 METRES OF A
DERELICT SITE
82
30
HOSPITAL ADMISSIONS FOR ALCOHOL
MISUSE PER 100,000, 2001-04
2305
723
Alongside available brown-field sites for property
development, also offers a large reserve arms of labour
To ‘transform’ this area, however, also means concerted
political & policy effort to transform the local populous
Challenging ‘welfarism’ & offering other legitimated
forms of consumption pivotal
Strategy premised on particular understandings of – and
prejudices around – disadvantaged w/c of Glasgow
Importance of Glasgow’s East End
Key locale during Glasgow’s ‘second city’ era in late
19thC/early 20thC
Decline of Empire coupled with successive ravages of
de-industrialization & disinvestment = unemployment,
poverty & other social ills
East End occupies a particular role in dominant policy &
urban renewal discourses surrounding Glasgow:
Glasgow the vibrant post-industrial city
Holding back Glasgow & Scotland of the future
Role of sporting events in relation to urban economies
has been recognised for some time
Major role in urban governance seen in the
augmentation of partnership & coalitions for growth
Focus on long-term ‘legacies’ rather than short-term
fixes
Language of legacy belongs to family of ‘effects’ &
‘outcomes’ common in regeneration policy discourses
Key aspect of the legacy for Glasgow’s CWGs is placespecific
Wide-ranging & relate to outcomes for health,
education, employment & sustainability:
“An Active Scotland, a Connected Scotland, A Sustainable
Scotland and a Flourishing Scotland represent our
ambitions for a lasting and positive legacy. [The CWGs]
are about making faster progress towards a healthier
nation; developing healthy communities; and a strong and
flourishing economy” (SG 2009: 6)
Specific, localised interventions, targeted on Glasgow
East
Large cluster of venues (Athlete’s Village, Velodrome,
National Indoor Sporting Arena) be located there
Co-ordinated by the Clyde Gateway Urban Regeneration
Company; promise creation of a “dynamic and sought
after city centre location”
Improved transport links to rest of city & beyond (new
M74 motorway & EE Regeneration Road Route)
Latest phase of Glasgow’s renaissance & key element to
develop Glasgow/Scotland as top tourist destination
“Glasgow’s image, worldwide reputation and civic pride
will be strengthened as a result of hosting the Games.
The city will be showcased at its very best to hundreds
of thousands of visitors and hundreds of millions of TV
viewers worldwide. We already have an enviable
reputation for staging major sporting events and a
successful Games will cement our position as a top
destination” (GCC 2009: 14)
Creation of a “sustainable, vibrant new neighbourhood”
also central to legacy commitments (SG 2009: 33)
Post-Games, Athlete’s Village will be converted into a
new mixed-tenure residential community
Planned projections for social housing higher for 2014
than previous CWGs
However, new development unaffordable for lowincome East Enders & already = displacement
Legacy not equally felt by all of those residents
remaining in the East End
http://gamesmonitor2014.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/a-tale-of-displacementand-struggle/
Problematising ‘Legacy’
Highlights problem with using the language of ‘legacy’ –
nebulous & opaque
International evidence highlights some limited success
in relation to tourism & branding
In the main not very tangible, esp primary stated social
benefits pertaining to sport & health (Coalter 2004)
Forecloses idea there might be negative impacts,
contestation or resistance locally(Cashman 2009)
Porter (2009) underlines that displacement is the
defining feature of mega-sporting events
COHRE (2007) report suggests large sporting-events are
“often catalysts for redevelopment entailing massive
displacements and reductions in low cost and social
housing stock, all of which result in significant decreases
in housing affordability” (p11)
Already evident in London & Glasgow prior to the Games
getting underway (see Porter 2009)
Conclusion: a post-welfare East End?
Anything new in developments highlighted here?
Would suggest there are some significant changes with
the past:
Need to re-connect ‘marginal’ communities
Clear ‘social’ element inherent in current strategies
Central to the CWGs 2014 is the ‘normalisation’ of the
East End (and its population!)
Concern to promote tenure-mix & enable private sector
penetration local services = transform local aspirations
Workfare, employability, privatisation & regeneration
are entangled in a neo-liberal assault on ‘welfarism’
As Porter (2009: 395) as highlighted “displacement is a
defining feature of the mega-event”
Although not on the scale of Dehli, it has real, personal
consequences for those affected
As Harvey (2005) reminds us, neoliberalism is above all
a class project
Disadvantaged working class lives are seen as
problematic
Out of step with the new and modern Glasgow and
Scotland
Ignores roots causes of poverty in society
Questions?
Email: [email protected]
A full copy of the paper is available on request; will
soon be published online:
Paton, K; Mooney, G; and McKee, K. (In Press) “Class,
Citizenship and Regeneration: Glasgow and the
Commonwealth Games 2014”, Antipode.
Reference List
Bauman, Z. (1998) Work, Consumerism and the New Poor.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Cashman, R. (2003) What is ‘Olympic legacy’?, in: M. Moragas, C.
Kennett & N. Puig (eds) The Legacy of the Olympic Games, 1984–
2000 (pp 31–42). Lausanne: IOC.
Coalter, F. (2004) Stuck in the blocks? A sustainable sporting
legacy. In A. Vigor, M. Mean and C. Tims (eds) After the Gold
Rush: A Sustainable Olympics for London (pp 93–108). London:
IIPR and Demos.
Clyde Gateway (undated) A Dynamic City Location: Clyde
Gateway City Plan [online], available at:
http://www.clydegateway.com/downloads/cg_business_plan.doc
COHRE (Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions) (2007) Fair Play
for Housing Rights: Mega-Events, Olympic Games and Housing
Rights, available at: http://www.cohre.org/mega-events-report
Damer, S. (1989) From Moorepark to ‘Wine Alley’. Edinburgh
University Press: Edinburgh.
Glasgow City Council (2009) A Games Legacy for Glasgow,
Glasgow: GCC.
Hackworth, J. (2002) Post-recession gentrification in New York
City. Urban Affairs Review, 37: 815-843.
Harvey, D. (1982) The Limits to Capital. Oxford: Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Kerr, D. (1999) Beheading the King and Enthroning the Market: a
critique of Foucauldian governmentality. Science and Society
63(2): 173–202.
Porter, L; Jaconelli, M; Cheyne, J; Eby, D; and Wagenaar, H. (2009)
Planning Displacement: the real legacy of major sporting events: Just a
person in a wee flat: Being Displaced by the CWGs in Glasgow's East End
Olympian Master planning in London Closing Ceremonies: How Law,
Policy and the Winter Olympics are Displacing an Inconveniently Located
Low-Income Community in Vancouver Commentary: Recovering Public
Ethos: Critical Analysis for Policy and Planning. Planning Theory &
Practice 10 (3): 395-418.
Rose, N. (2000) Community, Citizenship and the Third Way. American
Behavioural Scientist 43: 1395-1411.
Scottish Government (2009) On Your Marks: a games legacy for Scotland.
Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Skeggs, B. (2004) Class, Self, Culture, London: Routledge.
Slater, T. (2006) ‘The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification
research’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 30(4):
737-757.