The Ownership of Assets by Place-based Community Organisations: political rationales, geographies of social impact and future research agendas

Citation

Moore T & McKee K (2014) The Ownership of Assets by Place-based Community Organisations: political rationales, geographies of social impact and future research agendas. Social Policy and Society, 13 (4), pp. 1-13. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-policy-and-society/article/ownership-of-assets-by-placebased-community-organisations-political-rationales-geographies-of-social-impact-and-future-research-agendas/6A90860EBD5F28ECBAFD51EB869E20A6; https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746413000481

Abstract
This article calls for a more nuanced understanding of the links between the motivations, trajectories and policy environments of community asset organisations and the geographies of their social impact. While potential for the ownership of physical assets by place-based community organisations can be found in new localism powers in all four jurisdictions of the UK, there may be differences in policy articulation and implementation that enable or limit the social benefits community asset organisations are thought to deliver. Furthermore, community assets are premised on their intrinsic tie and value to place, with social cohesion, communal mobilisation and identification of mutual interest thought to be at their heart. This article reviews research in this field set in relation to recent policy developments, and identifies an important need to better understand how the personal and social geographies of impact are delivered in, and influenced by, different spatial contexts and political frameworks.

Keywords
place, community assets, community governance, third sector, housing

Notes
This paper was published at my previous university and I'm not sure of the acceptance date - St Andrews should have this information in their repository.

People

Dr Kim McKee

Senior Lecturer, Housing Studies