Tests modernos de la relatividad general

“Over the last two decades the gap between these worst estates and the rest of the country has grown..It shames us as a nation, it wastes lives and we all have to pay the costs of dependency and social division‖ (Blair, 1998 cited in Social Exclusion Unit1998:1).

Central to the narrative contained in the New Labour document „Bringing Britain Together‟

was the argument that processes of industrial change and decline, forces beyond human control, along with the rise of the service sector, have destroyed the economic basis of many local communities and inner cities by removing unskilled entry level manufacturing jobs (Atkinson, 2000). At the same time, social changes, such as the decline of the family, have undermined the social basis of communities in these areas (Atkinson, 2000). This situation has been exacerbated by inappropriate government policies (that is, human actions),

128 particularly with regard to housing, which have concentrated „the poor and unemployed together in urban neighbourhoods where hardly anyone has a job‟ (Social Exclusion Unit, 1998:9). The construction and representation of council estates as „problem places‟ was central to the New Labour urban renaissance programme. This echoes what Johnstone and Mooney (2007) said about council estates being long represented as posing a „problem‟ to the local government and to agencies engaged in the delivery of local services. In New Labour‟s much heralded „urban renaissance‟, the council estate is often counterposed against the vision of a revitalised urban citizenship, in which „responsible‟ and „orderly‟ communities are involved in the management of their own neighbourhoods (Johnstone and Mooney, 2007). In many respects there are enduring legacies from the past here. For instance, Haylet (2003, 690) points out that those labelled as socially excluded by the Labour governments are clearly not viewed positively, since to be validated as a full citizen, it is necessary to achieve

„…inclusion in the cultural mainstream and labour market participation‟. A browse through the literature on housing reveals that the problem estate is probably the one with the most enduring appeal for „housing experts‟, politicians and academics alike. In order to unravel the extent of social exclusion, that Labour government developed indices of Multiple Deprivation. This will be discussed further in Chapter Five, in relation to the study area, Chapeltown, Leeds. In addition, New Labour‟s approach to urban problems is scrutinized, in Chapters Five and Six in the context of the data obtained on New Labour‟s regeneration activities in the study area in 2006.

3.5. Summary

The city has long been portrayed as a place of „social disorder‟ and „social disorganisation‟

(see Chapter One). The discussions above have shown that there has been continuity in the discourse which carries the notion of the „inner city‟ as a „problem‟ locale. The identification

129 of urbanisation with poverty, deprivation, „decay‟ and disorder has persisted in political and popular discourses on the inner cities and their residents. Whereas a few things have changed - for example, the emergence of the concept of neighbourhood - the labelling of the inner city as a „problem‟ persists in the understanding of politicians, and their approaches to urban renaissance. These issues are examined in detail in Chapter Five, with reference to the study area of Chapeltown in Leeds.

In summary, this chapter has been able to highlight that:

Dangerous places and people continue to have a powerful resonance in urban policy interventions in Britain. That is, the definition of urban problems has an important role to play in the legitimisation of policies. According to Rogers (1990) the inner-city problem is principally a political construction, one shaped by the terms and language of political culture.

The explanation of urban disorder and social disorganisation in political discourse clearly identifies the people living in inner-cities themselves as constituting the problem which has to be solved.

There is also embedded within political discourse the notion of the remoralising and responsibilising residents of „disorderly communities‟.

The language of social exclusion carries with it the notion of problematic citizens.

Meanwhile, the next chapter examines the methodological questions and the research methods used in carrying out this research.

130 Chapter Four

Research Methods and Methodology 4.0. Introduction

Bryman (2004) rightly argued that the practice of social research does not exist in a bubble, and that research methods are not simply neutral tools, but are intrinsically linked with the ways in which social scientists envision the connection between different viewpoints about the nature of social reality and how it should be examined. What this reveals is that there is often disagreement amongst social scientists about some fundamental issues of research (Moses and Knutsen, 2007). For example, social scientists often disagree on issues such as the appropriateness of methods, the overall objectives of scientific inquiry or study and the competing claims. Although methodology is a simple enough term, it is commonly wrapped in ambiguity. The reason is that „methodology‟ is sometimes used as a synonym for

„methods‟, although these two terms are not synonyms. Methodology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the science of methods and procedures. According to Moses and Knutsen (2007), methodology refers to the ways in which we acquire knowledge; in other words, „how we know‟. Specifically, it is often used to refer to a set or system of methods, principles, and rules used in a particular discipline; for example, social science methodology.

„Method‟, on the other hand, refers to the research techniques or technical procedures of a discipline.

This chapter discusses how the research for this thesis was conducted. It covers both the methodology and the methods used. It accounts for the research design, the data collection strategies, and other procedures that were implemented to ensure a high standard of rigour throughout each stage of the research process and to strengthen the credibility and integrity of

131 the research. The chapter has three main sections: Section 4.1 explains the methodological rationale behind the case study method. In this section, the researcher argues that case study method is a viable method of investigation, despite the misunderstanding and stereotyping of the method as a weak offshoot of the social sciences. In this regard, the researcher discusses the writings of various scholars on the case study method and methodology, as well as questions of generalization. Also covered in this section are the reasons for adopting the case study method for this research. Section 4.2 examines the data collection instruments used for this research. Also considered in this section are issues of sampling, access, research ethics, documentary data and direct observation, as well as the validity and the reliability of the research process. It highlights the need for qualitative research not to be too restricted to the use of terminologies such as „reliability‟ and „validity‟, but to search for more relevant forms of description in order to „richly‟ capture the complexities and varieties of issues. Section 4.3 looks at the „insider and outsider‟ debate with regard to the role of the researcher during the research process. The conclusion to the chapter is provided in Section 4.4.

The aims of the researcher during the field work were to:

1. Examine the nature and extent of „disorder‟ on the Chapeltown Estate, Leeds.

2. Obtain the residents‟ perceptions of the social and economic conditions in which they live, as well as their perceptions of disorder, and the impact of disorder on their communites.

3. The nature and extent of the participation and consultation that took place with residents and key actors within the community during the periods of the implementation of urban regeneration programmes in the area.

These research aims to provide some answers to the overarching research questions presented in the introduction to the thesis.

132 4.1. Case Study Method: the raison d'être

4.1.1. What is a Case?

Before examining what a case study is, it is imperative to explore the question of „what is a case?‟ The term case is one of the many basic methodological constructs that have become distorted and corrupted over time, due to what Ragin (2000) refers to as the arguments that exists between quantitative and qualitative social science. However, there are two dichotomies in how cases are conceived: (1) whether they are seen as involving empirical units or theoretical constructs and (2) whether these, in turn, are understood as general or specific (Ragin, 2000). The first dichotomy (whether the question of cases involves empirical units or theoretical categories) is common in discussions of social science methodology, and overlaps with the philosophical distinction between realism and nominalism (Ragin, 2000).

For instance, realists believe that there are cases „out there‟, and see cases as either given or empirically discoverable, whilst nominalists think cases are theoretical constructs that primarily exist to serve the interests of investigators. They also see cases as the consequences of theories or of conventions (see Ragin, 2000:8). The second dichotomy focuses on the generality of case categories. It raises questions such as: are case designations specific and developed in the course of research (e.g. through in-depth interviews or historical research) or are they general (e.g. individuals, families, cities, firms) and relatively external to the conduct of the research? (Ibid). In order to address these dichotomies, Ragin developed a conceptual map for answers to the question, „what is a case?‟drawing on the work of Douglas Harper (Small N‟s and Community Case Studies), Diane Vaughan (theory elaboration: the heuristics of case analysis), Micheal Wieviorka (case studies: history or sociology) and Jeniffer Platt (Cases of Cases…of cases).

133 Table 1: Conceptual map for answers to “What is a Case?”

Understanding of Cases Case Conceptions

In this conceptual map are four cells - two cells signifying an understanding of a case as an empirical unit („cases are found‟ and „cases are objects‟) and two cells signifying an understanding of a case as a theoretical construct („cases are made‟ and „cases are conventions‟). „Cases are found‟ and „cases are made‟ are specific conceptions of case, while

„cases are objects‟ and „cases are conventions‟ are general conceptions of case.