No abstract

Behavioural explanations of poverty and disadvantage have figured heavily in political rhetoric in the era of austerity, as a means to understand trajectories into poverty and subsequent relationships between benefit claimants and the state. These discourses are not restricted to political debate, as previous studies demonstrate they impact upon public consciousness and structure the ways that the general public think about poverty, as well as shaping the ways in which people living on low incomes are treated. Drawing upon the testimonies of 62 people in England and Scotland experiencing poverty, this article seeks to understand our participants’ responses to these discourses, in particular: how these behavioural explanations impact upon their understanding of their own situations, as well as their self perceptions; how these discourses shape their relationships with others, in terms of their experience of disrespect; and how participants seek to dissociate themselves from their stigmatising implications.

No abstract

Partnerships have become established as a significant vehicle for the implementation of rural development policy in Britain. In promoting new working relationships between different state agencies and between the public, private, and voluntary sectors, partnerships have arguably contributed to a reconfiguration of the scalar hierarchy of the state. In this paper we draw on recent debates about the ‘politics of scale’ and on empirical examples from Mid Wales and Shropshire to explore the scalar implications of partnerships. We investigate how discursive constructs of partnership are translated into practice, how official discourses are mediated by local actors, the relationship between partnerships and existing scales of governance, and the particular ‘geometry of power’ being constructed through partnerships. We argue that the existing scalar hierarchy of the state has been influential in structuring the scales and territories of partnerships, and that, despite an apparent devolution of the public face of governance, the state remains crucial in governing the process of governance through partnerships.

Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policyWhile the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.

Whilst attention has previously focused on the importance of monolithic ethnic identities on migrant place-making less attention has been paid to how placemaking proceeds in super-diverse urban neighbourhoods where no single ethnic group predominates. This paper makes an original contribution by identifying the factors that shape migrants affinity with, or alienation from, super-diverse neighbourhoods.Through using and critiquing an analytical framework developed by Gill (2010) that identifies 'ideal' and 'pathological' place-making strategies, the paper contrasts two super-diverse neighbourhoods in the UK with different histories of diversity. We show how 'ideal' migrant place-making is more likely to occur where there is a common neighbourhood identity based around diversity, difference and / or newness, and where those with 'visible' differences can blend in. In contrast, 'pathologies' are more likely where the on-going churn of newcomers, coupled with the speed and recency of change, undermine migrant's affinity with place and where the diversity of the neighbourhoodis not yet embedded. Even where neighbourhood identity based on diversity is established, it may alienate less visible migrants and culminate in a new form of (minority) white flight.Keywords -Super-diversity; neighbourhood; migrant place-making 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 This paper contributes new knowledge about the ways in which migrant place-making proceeds in super-diverse areas. It highlights how multiple aspects of super-diversity and the visibility of individuals can be equally important as ethno-national identity in shaping attachment and affinity to the neighbourhood. In so doing, it moves beyond existing analyses of migrant place-making that focus on single ethnic groups. IntroductionThe paper identifies experiences of place-making in two different areas: one with a long history of diversity and another more recently diversifying. It extends existing knowledge to long-standing interests on the influences shaping place-making in the United States (U.S.) and Western Europe (see Amith, 2005; Juan, 2005;Fortier, 2000;Ryan et al., 2008).Migrant place-making has been recognised as a way for migrants to forge and assert a collective identity amongst host populations, and particularly when faced with issues of discrimination (Castles and Davidson 2009;Gill, 2010). In addition, place-making amongst migrant populations can be understood as a mechanism -both physically and conceptually -to establish the validity and aspirations of a new community (Gill 2010).However, place-making can be both constructive and destructive. It can provide the opportunity for migrants to retain a national identity in their destination countries, lead to conflict and issues of exclusion, alienation, resistance and can become a catalyst for racism (Amith, 200...

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. AbstractMuch has been written that details the decline in living standards following the 'credit crunch' in the UK. It remains that we understand to a lesser degree the lived reality of poverty through the Great Recession and into the era of austerity. This article draws on testimonies of 62 participants from low income households conducted in three different areas of the UK during 2012-13 to document the pressures that this period brought to bear on these households. According to these testimonies, the experience of poverty intensified in key respects: first, participants reported feeling, more than ever before, that they were 'existing, rather than living' due to the meagre budgets they were forced to live on; second, the precarious nature of work and social security contributed to a sense of insecurity that was all pervasive in our participants' lives; third, due to the pejorative political rhetoric and media coverage of poverty, our participants felt that their lives were placed under increased scrutiny which deleteriously impacted their wider relationships and sense of belonging. Our analysis demonstrates the profound consequences for those living on low incomes of the continued shift to residual forms of state welfare and the increased reliance on the 'Big Society' as a means to deal with the pressures identified in this article.

The notion of social harm has sporadically interested critical criminologists as an alternative to the concept of crime. In particular, it has been viewed as a means to widen the rather narrow approach to harm that criminology offers. More recently, the publication of Beyond Criminology: Taking Harm Seriously has renewed interest in the notion of social harm. The book asserted a number of very valid reasons for a social harm approach that provoked a number of interesting critical responses. The article seeks to respond to five recurring questions: Should the social harm perspective move beyond criminology? If so, where should the perspective locate itself? From this position, how will the perspective continue to engage within 'law and order' debates and address the concerns of those affected by crime? If the notion of crime is problematic, how will the perspective form an alternative definition of harm? Moreover, without a notion of crime and the accompanying concept of criminal intent, how would the perspective allocate responsibility for harm? The article is not offering definitive answers to these questions, but possible directions for the perspective's future development.This paper is primarily a product of the discussions that took place in the Social Harm stream at the American Society of Criminology 2006 meetings, Los Angeles. It was my first visit to the ASC, as well as my first visit to Los Angeles. Both experiences helped clarify my thinking on the future issues for a social harm perspective and, perhaps most importantly reinforced the importance of the emergent perspective. The ASC meetings should not have surprised me-I had been forewarned. However, there is probably no better place than the discipline's largest annual conference to confirm your suspicions about its parlous condition. Whilst the ASC has a highly organised, vibrant and energised Critical Criminology division, its activities are somewhat dwarfed by the mass of 'administrative' criminology which filled the conferences' 664 sessions. The ASC showcases 'off the peg'