Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.555235
Title: The Thames Gateway and the Social City : a comparative study of governance of Brownfield regeneration in the United Kingdom and Germany
Author: Shand, Rory
ISNI:       0000 0003 9028 6526
Awarding Body: University of Sheffield
Current Institution: University of Sheffield
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Abstract:
The thesis examines governance of two Brownfield (previously developed land) regeneration initiatives, in the Thames Gateway in the UK and the Social City in Germany. The thesis explores the effect of institutional design, modes of governance, relevant stakeholders, the norms and knowledge of underpinning policy processes, and evaluates policy outputs, outcomes, and best practice across the cases. Within these categories, it examines the role of communities, the effect of unitary and federal structures, and the relations between actors in governance, drawing upon the policy networks framework. In the case study areas of Barking and Thurrock in the Thames Gateway and Marzahn and Potsdam in the Social City, both regeneration initiatives ascribe important roles for communities in the governance process, and share goals such as improving housing, communal areas of land and educational facilities. The thesis uses the policy networks model to compare and contrast governance models of regeneration in the cases, arguing that despite the range of partners and agencies involved in delivery of regeneration projects in the UK and Germany, the projects and governance of each regeneration initiative was essentially driven by the centre, with resources distributed to only a select key actors and made for an asymmetrical power relationship between the centre and the network, with the centre able to intervene in these governance models and projects.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.555235  DOI: Not available
Share: