Part Four: Methods of Data Collection

This chapter has concentrated on the issue of what we regard as knowledge and has in part offered a framework for scrutinising how secure different knowledges might be. Such concerns, however, do not obviate the need to base research findings on data that is accurate and reliable. The investigation of the reception of urban renewal proposals in Whitefield was carried out using interviews with some of the remaining residents, and also by referring to representations which had been made at the public inquiry and to newspaper reports. Some residents supported the demolition proposals, but the principal aim of the research in both locations was to assess the contribution that non-established forms of knowledge had made to the shape of the renewal strategy. It was not possible to interview the planners involved in making the initial application for compulsory purchase powers because they had moved to other jobs and could not be traced.

Networks of support for a market analysis based approach to renewal were traced to national government decision making arenas and to policy work in Liverpool. Evidence of these networks was drawn principally from research and committee/ policy documents. Typically, this literature supports normative arguments for the kind of policy action that should be carried out or the way that it should be carried out. Its purpose is often to sound persuasive and to accord legitimacy to the advocated approach. It can be read in two ways. If it is read as intended, the author is expected to make a judgement, if only a preliminary one, as to whether the argument is persuasive. However, if it is read in order to understand why the author has articulated the argument in one way rather than another, and if it is then placed within a wider analysis of network building and discursive strategising, then it becomes a valuable resource.

Chapter five, for example, explores the arguments that were made by housing market researchers to forecast that economic growth would lead to a continued decline in the ‗worst‘

neighbourhoods. The process of making any argument requires that particular concerns are emphasised and others are either explicitly challenged or deliberately left out (Law, 2004).

The analysis therefore considers the concerns that housing market researchers raised, and the epistemological techniques they used to arrive at these concerns. In this instance this approach to analysis highlights that the housing market research failed to investigate the influence of changes in governmental policy or of the management practices of housing associations on vacant housing. This omission was productive, because it allowed researchers to move the

59 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY focus towards concerns which were shared by multiple actors, and to thereby generate an alliance of support around a particular construction of vacant housing.

The majority of the empirical research in this thesis directly sources research and policy literature, but work by Chris Allen in Liverpool was also used in chapter six to explore processes of delivering urban renewal in Kensington. Allen‘s work offered a valuable source of information since he reported on eighty four interviews which he had undertaken with residents and stakeholders engaged in the renewal proposals. At the time of carrying out data collection for the Liverpool chapter the majority of the residents he had spoken to had moved out of the area. Allen used his interviews to construct an argument that the views of working class households were marginalised by a housing market renewal discourse that replicated a dominant, middle class view of housing as ‗a space of positions and position-taking‘ (Allen, 2008, p. 73). By contrast, he argued that working class households viewed housing in a more mundane way, simply as a place to live.

Elements of Allen‘s work dealt with the arguments advanced by HMRI proponents as ‗doxa‘

and explored the use of these arguments in community engagement forums in the Kensington area. Allen reported on interviews with community representatives and other residents and provided evidence that their attempts to influence the shape of renewal proposals had failed where they conflicted with the dominant position advanced by proponents of the HMRI.

Chapter six draws only on Allen‘s descriptions of the community engagement process, as described in his book. Allen uses this section of his book to explain the tensions between HMRI ‗doxa‘ and its mixed reception by residents. I understand this account slightly differently, as the imposition of the dominant narratives guiding renewal in Liverpool onto a diverse community which has had little influence on the principal, substantive elements of that renewal strategy. Allen approaches this process from a class-based phenomenological perspective, rather than a network-based perspective and consequently he focuses on the way the residents‘ understood Kensington (as a place to live rather than a declining, low demand neighbourhood). This is important as it suggests the residents never accepted the role defined for them by housing market research as victims, eager to be emancipated from a declining area. However, his amalgamation of resident views into a generally coherent working class perspective at times seems to obscure a depth of attention to diverse interests among residents that would have been sought if he had adopted an ANT perspective.

60 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY Throughout the thesis, analysis of research, policy documents and critical accounts is used to develop a story of how institutional alliances were developed, and how durable command over policy implementation was achieved. Central to this account is an appreciation of causal narratives which have purported to provide universal explanations of urban phenomena. An attention to non-humans, specifically to official policy documents and research reports, has been instrumental to following the emergence of causal narratives and their use to provide legitimisation for particular courses of policy action. The initial concerns which have informed analysis of these documents and reports include questioning how it was able to be written (what were its conditions of possibility), who wrote it and for what purpose. The epistemological routes which facilitate the arguments made are attended to and the normative judgements and assumptions in those routes are drawn out. This aids discussion of the productive power of such assumptions in the generation of arguments and supporting evidence which allows actors to justify, or set the foundations, for a joint approach, such as defining a local authority‘s policy on urban renewal. The matters of concern raised in these arguments often highlight and address potential areas of resistance, which are themselves (manifestly) absent from the text. This can be seen, for example, in the use of the ‗adjacency effects‘ argument in chapter five to counter the potential challenge that existing regeneration initiatives were already capable of tackling vacancy problems. It is also possible to discern the intended audience of a document from the style in which it is written, with chapter five highlighting differences between a ‗passionate‘ submission to the government‘s comprehensive spending review and a ‗technical‘ report to the Select Committee. The former emphasises the most convincing arguments that can be made while the latter provides additional detail and reinforces this with a scholarly style designed to accord the venture with academic legitimacy. All of this information informs the development of a wider account of the generation of collective support by highlighting the influence of absent actors on the content of texts.

The fact that arguments are intended to be persuasive, and that tactics are employed to achieve this, provides a wealth of information about the form of legitimacy being pursued and the author‘s assessment of the optimum strategy for maximising legitimacy. This information is at times a decade old, which has often made it impossible to trace the authors and to rely on interviewees' recollections of their view of what happened. The subject is also politically sensitive and it is difficult to gather information about informal networks and to assess the validity of any information that is volunteered. Data collection difficulties are illustrated by

61 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY issues around freedom of Information requests, regeneration companies are not subject to Freedom of Information laws and local authorities have at times severely restricted the information they will release on the grounds that it is commercially sensitive (Neild, 2007b).

Similarly, an interviewee within one of the institutions involved with the HMRI had been reprimanded by the Council standards board for protesting when he was prevented from entering a meeting he was entitled to attend. He raised concerns about the probity of public meetings and their records.

...the standards board are so now keen to prevent the public to know the culture of repression, they‘ve now demanded that objectors like me cannot even field the proceedings, ‗cos we field the proceedings to keep an accurate office recording from being corrupted by the council officers. They have now demanded, this body that‘s supposed to have openness and transparency on its agenda, has now demanded their investigations and hearings be held without being filmed, because they find it intimidating. You see the truth is incredibly dangerous. (Webb, 2009b)

Despite the difficulties, which necessitated a reliance on official documentation, contacts were made wherever possible with those involved in the development and implementation of the HMRI, and these sources have been used where possible to scrutinise the conclusions drawn in the documentary analysis.

The research literature that was used to support the construction of the HMRI was an invaluable source of evidence because it set out the detailed chain of logic which proponents of the initiative used to support their arguments. This literature was accompanied by official reports and was circulated through formal democratic processes. As such, there can be confidence that the evidence considered in this thesis was the same as that which politicians on select committees and spending reviews held in their hands as they considered the merits of the programme. As with all records, however, there are limitations on what this tells us about the processes that occurred. In both the case study of the origins of the HMRI, and the case of the dispute over the future of Whitefield, anecdotal accounts (Cole, 2008a; Webb, 2007a) pointed to the importance of informal lobbying that complemented the formal procedures. Official records do not provide a good account of how persuasive these more informal tactics were; finding information about them is difficult but they can often be an important factor in deciding how decisions are made (Hillier, 2000). In an attempt to incorporate as much of this kind of information as possible, informal telephone conversations

62 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY were held with those who have an ‗ear to the ground‘ in Whitehall. A prominent journalist, who has recently published a book containing research on the HMRI, was contacted, as were officers of SAVE Britain‘s Heritage, English Heritage and others (see Appendix one for a list). Information provided in the accounts that were received was never relied on solely to make the arguments in this thesis, but was matched with other evidence available within policy and research documents. Over the course of the research around eight to ten telephone conversations were held, together with a similar number of face to face interviews. These often yielded very general, background information about the HMRI and its controversial aspects; they are referenced within the text where they directly support arguments made in this thesis.

Despite the potential for informal processes to result in omissions in the research there are two key reasons why I do not feel that this prejudices the thesis‘ results. The first of these is the issue of legitimacy. Ian Cole has talked of the HMRI process as a battle, a contested process (2008a). Drawing on my own experience of working to deliver a HMRI programme, I know that officials need to find ways of maximising their legitimacy in such processes. One way of doing this is to ensure that all the strongest arguments are recorded in official documentation.

It is then possible to appear knowledgeable and confident in informal discussions by referring to the papers. Furthermore, the papers provide extra details that can be useful for responding to anticipated challenges from rival actors. Absent actors may therefore still be present within official documentation. The second safeguard against the importance of unaccounted-for discussions is ANT‘s definition of an actor. Such discussions are only important to an ANT account if they result in knock-on consequences for the process of network building. By following the evolution of the HMRI network, any substantial changes should become apparent, together with the need for an explanation of them. While informal lobbying may have played an important part in securing the initiative, this work suggests that no new arguments had a significant impact on the way the network continued to evolve.

Two chapters in this thesis focus on events in Liverpool. Chapter five, on the origins of the HMRI, follows a research process which took place in Liverpool between 1999 and 2001. It is based on published research, secondary information and official reports. The case study of Liverpool in chapter six has a similar emphasis on these sources, although a number of contextual field work activities were also carried out. Regeneration officers working in nearby Sefton and Wirral provided guided tours of the renewal proposals in these areas during the

63 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY early phases of the research. Three conferences were also attended, where presentations were made by some of the actors involved in the decision making processes in Liverpool, and these tended to re-affirm conclusions that were drawn from official documentation. Kensington resident Elizabeth Pascoe presented to the Royal Geographical Society/ Institute of British Geographers conference in Manchester and the ‗Capital, Culture and Resistance‘ conference in Liverpool. Activists of the Welsh Streets area, which is nearby to Kensington and subject to a similar HMRI process, also presented at the Liverpool conference. In addition, the

‗Regeneration is 30‘ conference in Liverpool was attended, and this included a presentation from Cath Green, Interim Executive Director of Community Services at Liverpool City Council. Cath Green was a key proponent of proposals for the redevelopment of part of Kensington, at the Edge Lane West compulsory purchase order inquiry. A small part of that same inquiry was also visited, and three separate, unaccompanied site visits were made to areas in Liverpool affected by clearance, including Kensington, Wavertree, Anfield and Sefton. Informal conversations were held with an academic, who has been a prominent academic critic of the HMRI, and an interview and conversation was held with a Liverpool Councillor who has objected to HMRI-sponsored demolition in the city.

Interviews are used more extensively in chapter seven‘s investigation of the HMRI dispute in Whitefield. At the beginning of the investigation, representatives of Homes Under Threat and the Ancient Monuments Society took me on a six hour walking tour of the area, showing me around historic features and renovated housing. They also introduced me to a local resident who had spoken out at the Whitefield inquiries and at the later ODPM committee investigation into the HMRI. In addition to these contacts, I carried out further interviews with resident activists and attended a meeting of the local community forum. The forum was useful because I observed differences in the views of residents: some just wanted any action as soon as possible to remedy dereliction, while others preferred to hold out in the hope of achieving a heritage vision for the area. Later interviews were carried out with a heritage officer who had objected to the compulsory purchase order for Whitefield, as well as with other residents and the local regeneration officer (see appendix two for a list of interviews).

Unfortunately, many of the council officers who had been involved in the compulsory purchase order dispute some years earlier had been replaced and, despite attempts at contact, could not be reached. The interviews that took place were nonetheless useful because they provided information about how the proposals had developed following the public inquiries.

The interview with the heritage officer provided information about how heritage interests

64 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY were being handled by the pathfinder after the dispute over clearance. It also become apparent, from talking to the regeneration officer and attending the community forum, that the Council‘s allegedly improved partnership process was not committed to providing full answers in response to residents‘ questions or to providing any commitments in response to their requests. The reasons given by the regeneration manager for the content of the new renewal proposals also lacked consistency and was not properly informed by official justifications given elsewhere in written documents. The regeneration officer‘s arguments tended to be supported only by hearsay rather than evidence or deliberative processes.

The interviews undertaken in Whitefield were valuable because they identified what the principal issues of concern were to those who objected at the inquiry and provided leads to the official information that was available. As a result, formal records of events such as the public inquiry and neighbourhood renewal assessment processes were obtained. These provided more detail about the arguments that had been made for and against the clearance of the area.

These records are useful because they catalogue earnest attempts to preside in a conflict situation. The case studies in this thesis have both been particularly controversial, and the research could be criticised for focusing on particularly poorly handled cases. However, ANT case studies are not presented as typical of other cases. The objective is not to construct a holistic, romantic narrative, therefore the claim is not that all cases are as hard fought as the ones selected in this thesis. The existence of intense conflict is invaluable to ANT research because the uncertainty of outcome forces rival actors to mobilise their strongest resources.

As the following chapters demonstrate, identifying those resources is the first step towards understanding the wider networks of interests, values and controls which characterise the contemporary regime of urban renewal.

3.4.2 Discussion

This chapter has provided a detailed discussion of the reasons why a combination of Foucauldian genealogical analysis and actor-network theory form an excellent framework for an inductive investigation of the research questions outlined in chapter one. Historical ways of thinking, and the durable frameworks of law and governance that surround them, frame the practicality of emergent responses to urban and social problems. Foucauldian analysis therefore contributes to an understanding of current developments by unearthing the historical lineage attached to present-day concepts and practices. Nevertheless, the core research areas explored in chapters five to seven of this thesis require a more process-driven approach that

65 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY offers clearer tools for understanding practices of long distance control, and of unanticipated processes of translation. This chapter has therefore reviewed the premises of actor-network theory, which provides these tools. It has discussed ANT‘s ability to acknowledge multiple

65 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY offers clearer tools for understanding practices of long distance control, and of unanticipated processes of translation. This chapter has therefore reviewed the premises of actor-network theory, which provides these tools. It has discussed ANT‘s ability to acknowledge multiple