Confronting the reality of anti-social behaviour

Abstract

A significant body of thinking around the UK Government's antisocial behaviour (ASB) policy agenda draws its inspiration from postFoucauldian governmentality theory. This is an indispensable body of work that has been particularly productive when grounded in empirical research studies which have critically analysed the way governmental rationalities are translated into policy 'on the ground'. This article argues, however, that there is a need to move beyond 'the social construction of reality' thesis prevalent in this approach and direct our attention to ontologically focused questions. It contends that critical realism could effectively complement governmentality perspectives and deepen our understanding of ASB policy by enabling researchers to move beyond a focus on the 'construction' of ASB to the 'reality' of ASB.

Subverting Social Policy on the Front Line: Agencies of Resistance in the Delivery of Services

“…The contingency of outcomes in any specific service delivery context is, we have argued, a consequence of the complex interaction between reflexive subjects involved in multiple relations of power and objective factors that present both opportunities for and constraints on action. As a number of analysts have noted, one form of action that can be pursued is ‘resistance’ to policy and service imperatives, resulting in their possible ‘subversion’ (Flint 2002; Ewick and Silbey 2003; McDonald and Marston 2005; McKee 2009; Parr 2009). While this possibility has been recognized, however, there has until recently been little sustained examination of what these terms mean, the forms they take or how and why they occur (Barnes and Prior 2009).…”

The Inspection House and Neglected Dynamics of Governance: The Case of Domestic Visits in Family Intervention Projects

“…Carr (2009, p. 84) states that the role of the women who are employed by family intervention projects and their compliance and resistance to government rhetoric are of interest. Indeed such analysis of the roles, practices and resistance mechanisms of project workers has already been undertaken (Parr, 2008(Parr, , 2009Parr & Nixon, 2009). The paper now turns to empirically investigating these issues.…”

“…Many criticisms of panoptic paradigms and governmentality have previously been made, with a call for more nuanced analysis of the 'messy realities' of governance and how governors and the governed think, act and negotiate in specific, contingent and local situations (Atkinson & Kintrea, 2004;Franklin, 2000;Frauley, 2007;Hamm, 2009;Holt, 2009;McKee, 2009McKee, , 2011Parr, 2008Parr, , 2009Schneider, 2009). Carr (2009, p. 84) states that the role of the women who are employed by family intervention projects and their compliance and resistance to government rhetoric are of interest.…”

Sceptical, Disorderly and Paradoxical Subjects: Problematizing the “Will to Empower” in Social Housing Governance

“…It draws on discursive, as opposed to material practice, for its evidence base, thereby concentrating on the rationales of governing as manifest in key documents, rather than the more specific and concrete 'art of governing'. By disregarding the messy empirical realities of governing, such studies are unable to explain why governmental strategies do not always deliver their desired or intended effects (see also , Clarke 2008;Parr 2009). …”

“…Foucault's later work on governmentality has become increasingly influential within housing studies (see for example, Flint 2003Flint , 2004Cowan and McDermont 2006;McKee and Cooper 2008;McIntyre and McKee, 2008;Parr, 2009). Combining an analysis of political rationalities with the study of governing practices, it highlights the productive nature of power, and the way in which particular forms of subjectivity are formed, shaped and mobilised.…”