Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.561208
Title: Citizen participation in the rehabilitation of housing in Moss Side East, Manchester
Author: Wheale, Gerald Arnold
Awarding Body: University of Manchester
Current Institution: University of Manchester
Date of Award: 1979
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Abstract:
This study shows the extent of citizen participation in the rehabilitation of housing in Moss Side East in the period 1971 to 1978. The phenomenological method of participant observation was adopted as the most suitable research tool for use in this community setting. It has been set within the framework of national housing policy and the provision made for public participation in planning and housing legislation. The development of housing policy in the City of Manchester has been outlined and the policy of the City Council with regard to public participation has been indicated. Against a general description of Moss Side East drawn from a variety of sources has been set the particular activities of residents seeking to secure the rehabilitation of their houses. Attention has been focussed upon the activity of two main groups, the Moss Side Housing Action Group which began as an informal residents group, and the Haykin Avenue Residents Association. The activity of a third group, the Mormanby Street Residents Association, has also been mentioned. The period from September 1971 to December 1974 has been examined to show resident participation prior to Local Authority commitment to a programme of rehabilitiation by the improvement of housing. Resident activity in the period from the appointment of the Local Authority Area Co-ordinator in charge of the Noss Side improvement programme in January 1975 to the end of the research period in December 1978 has been examined to show the patterns of citizen participation which emerged once the Local Authority was committed to an improvement strategy. An assessment of the Local Authority improvement programme and of the success of the residents groups in the light of their declared objectives has been undertaken and a comparative study of the residents groups made which indicates their significant differences and similarities. The contributory roles of the Moss Side Churches, of Mosscare Housing Ltd. and of the Longsight/Moss Side Community project have also been indicated and the role of the Project worker as a Community Education Organiser concerned with non-formal methods of education described and commented upon. On the question of public participation the requirements of legislation and the advice given in Department of the Environment circulars and publications have been indicated. The recommendations of the Skeffington Report on public participation have been discussed. The elements for a model of participation have been identified and such a model has been formulated. A syllabus for education in participation has been given in outline and the role of the community as a resource in participation has been stressed. The implications for community development theory and practice have been examined. The primary conclusions drawn from this study are as follows: - 1. That the Chief Officers of the Local Authority had a powerful influence upon the formulation of a strategy for improvement of housing which t'as implemented in the City. 2. That the performance of the Local Authority has fallen seriously short of successfully implementing its housing improvement programme in Moss Side East. 3. That the programme which was implemented did not create confidence about the future of the area in the residents of Moss Side East. 4. That the participation programme mounted by the Local Authority was not a success. 5. That what little participation has taken place has not generated confidence in either the intentions of the Local Authority with regard to the rehabilitation of housing in Moss Side or in the future of the area and that this result was predictable. 6. That a major block to effective participation in Moss Side East has been the attitude of Manchester Local Authority. 7. That the recommendations regarding participation outlined in D. O. E. Circular 14/75 and the lessons learned in prototype areas have not been implemented by Manchester Local Authority. 8. That although a climate favourable towards participation did not exist yet the residents and community workers in certain areas of Moss Side East did manage to secure a programme of improvement for the housing in their areas. 9. That the long-term objective of securing the future of the area is now in jeopardy because of the increasing lack of confidence felt by residents and community workers alike.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.561208  DOI: Not available
Share: