Power, control, communities and health inequalities III: participatory spaces—an English case

Author:

Powell Katie1,Barnes Amy1,Anderson de Cuevas Rachel2,Bambra Clare3,Halliday Emma4,Lewis Sue5,McGill Rory2,Orton Lois2,Ponsford Ruth6,Salway Sarah7,Townsend Anne4,Whitehead Margaret2,Popay Jennie4

Affiliation:

1. School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

2. Department of Public Health, University of Liverpool, Whelan Building, Liverpool L69 3GB, UK

3. Institute of Population Health Sciences, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK

4. Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YG, UK

5. School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

6. Department of Public Health Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15 − 17 Tavistock Place, London, UK

7. Department of Sociological Studies, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Abstract

Summary This article—third in a series of three—uses theoretical frameworks described in Part 1, and empirical markers reported in Part 2, to present evidence on how power dynamics shifted during the early years of a major English community empowerment initiative. We demonstrate how the capabilities disadvantaged communities require to exercise collective control over decisions/actions impacting on their lives and health (conceptualized as emancipatory power) and the exercise of power over these communities (conceptualized as limiting power) were shaped by the characteristics of participatory spaces created by and/or associated with this initiative. Two main types of participatory spaces were identified: governance and sense-making. Though all forms of emancipatory power emerged in all spaces, some were more evident in particular spaces. In governance spaces, the development and enactment of ‘power to’ emerged as residents made formal decisions on action, allocated resources and managed accountability. Capabilities for alliance building—power with—were more likely to emerge in these spaces, as was residents’ resistance to the exercise of institutional power over them. In contrast, in sense-making spaces residents met informally and ‘made sense’ of local issues and their ability to influence these. These processes led to the development of power within capabilities and power to resist stigmatizing forms of productive power. The findings highlight the importance of designing community initiatives that: nurture diverse participatory spaces; attend to connectivity between spaces; and identify and act on existing power dynamics undermining capabilities for collective control in disadvantaged communities.

Funder

National Institute for Health Research

School for Public Health Research

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health (social science)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3