Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T10:27:37.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘Responsible’ Tenant and the Problem of Apathy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2009

Kim McKee
Kim McKee*
Affiliation:
Department of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow E-mail: kim.mckee@ges.gla.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the last decade, the UK New Labour government has emphasised tenant participation in housing policy. Consequently, those individuals who decide to opt out of participation processes have been problematised as ‘apathetic’, and identified as needing to be ‘empowered’ through professional interventions. Drawing on research about community ownership in Glasgow, this paper argues that tenants' reasons for not getting involved are more than simply lack of interest. Tenants articulated an instrumental approach to participation, and rejected the conflation of tenant participation with tenant management. Practical barriers also obstructed their latent motivation.

Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 25 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baistow, K. (1994)/5), ‘Liberation and regulation? Some paradoxes of empowerment’, Critical Social Policy, 14, 42, 34–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M., Newman, J. and Sullivan, H. (2007), Power, Participation and Political Renewal, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Catterall, M. and Maclaran, P. (1997), ‘Focus group data and qualitative analysis programs: coding the moving picture as well as the snapshot’, Sociological Research Online, 2, 1, at http://www.scoresonline.org.uk/scoresonline/2/1/6.html [accessed 4 April 2007].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, D. and Kintrea, K. (2000), ‘Community-based housing organisations and the local governance debate’, Housing Studies, 15, 4, 533–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, D., Kintrea, K. and Kay, H. (1996), ‘Direct democracy in practice: the case of community ownership housing associations’, Policy and Politics, 24, 4, 359–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J. (2005), ‘New Labour's citizens: activated, empowered, responsiblized, abandoned?’ Critical Social Policy, 25, 4, 447–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J., Newman, J., Smith, N., Vidler, E., and Westmarland, L. (2007), Creating Citizen-Consumers: Changing Publics and Changing Public Services, London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Communities Scotland (2007), Glasgow Housing Association Inspection Report, Edinburgh: Communities Scotland.Google Scholar
Cruikshank, B. (1999), The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M., Mooney, G., Poole, L., and Davis, H. (2005), ‘Housing stock transfer in Birmingham and Glasgow: the contrasting experiences of two UK cities’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 5, 3, 327–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) (2000), Quality and Choice: A Decent Home For All, Housing Green Paper, London: DETR.Google Scholar
Dwyer, P. (2002), ‘Making sense of social citizenship: some user views on welfare rights and responsibilities’, Critical Social Policy, 22, 2, 273–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flint, J. (2003), ‘Housing and ethopolitics: constructing identities of active consumption and responsible community’, Economy and Society, 32, 3, 611–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibb, K. (2003), ‘Transferring Glasgow's council housing: financial, urban and housing policy implications’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 3, 1, 89–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glasgow Housing Association (GHA) (2006), Tenant Participation Strategy 2005/07, Glasgow: Glasgow Housing Association.Google Scholar
Goodlad, R. (2001), ‘Developments in tenant participation: accounting for growth’, in Marsh, D. and Cowan, A. (eds), Two Steps Forward: Housing Policy in the New Millennium, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Heron, E. and Dwyer, P. (1999), ‘Doing the right thing: Labour's attempt to forge a new welfare deal between the individual and the state’, Social Policy and Administration, 33, 1, 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickman, P. (2006), ‘Approaches to tenant participation in the English local authority sector’, Housing Studies, 21, 2, 209–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintrea, K. (2006), ‘Having it all? Housing reform under devolution’, Housing Studies, 21, 2, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, C. and Marston, G. (2005), ‘Workfare as welfare: governing unemployment in the advanced liberal state’, Critical Social Policy, 25, 3, 374–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee (2007), ‘Community ownership in Glasgow: devolving local control or a centralizing process?’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 7, 3, 319–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee (2008), ‘Transforming Scotland's public sector housing through community ownership: the reterritorialisation of housing governance?’, Space and Polity, 12, 2, 183–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee, and Cooper, V. (2008), ‘The paradox of tenant empowerment: regulatory and liberatory possibilities’, Housing, Theory and Society, 25, 2, 132–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milnward, L. (2005), ‘Just because we are amateurs doesn't mean we aren't professional: the importance of expert activists in tenant participation’, Public Administration, 83, 3, 735–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, J. (2001), Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society, London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paddison, R., Docherty, I., and Goodlad, R. (2008), ‘Responsible participation and housing: restoring democratic theory to the scene’, Housing Studies, 23, 1, 129–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, C., Gray, P., and Muir, J. (2003), ‘Devolving housing policy and practice in Northern Ireland 1998–2002’, Housing Studies, 18, 2, 159–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riseborough, M. (1998), ‘More control and choice for users? Involving tenants in social housing management’, in Marsh, A. and Mullins, D. (eds), Housing and Public Policy: Citizenship, Choice and Control, Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, S. (2000), ‘The People's Republic of Yoker: a case study of tenant management in Scotland’, Journal of Co-operative Studies, 33, 1.Google Scholar
Scott, S. (2004), ‘Managing housing in the social rented sector’, in Sim, D. (ed.), Housing and Public Policy in Post-Devolution Scotland, Coventry: Chartered Institute of Housing.Google Scholar
Scottish Office (1999), Investing in Modernisation: An Agenda for Scotland's Housing, Housing Green Paper, Edinburgh: Scottish Office.Google Scholar
Simmons, R. and Birchall, J. (2007), ‘Tenant participation and social housing in the UK: applying a theoretical model’, Housing Studies, 22, 4, 573–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somerville, P. (1998), ‘Empowerment through residence’, Housing Studies, 13, 2, 233–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somerville, P. (2005), ‘Community Governance and Democracy’, Policy and Politics, 33, 1, 117–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh Assembly Government (2003), The Process and Effects of Stock Transfer Programmes: A Literature Review, Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.Google Scholar