Contested Governance and Definitions of Need in the Distribution of Funding: Investigating the Regeneration-Funding Paradox and the Role of UK National Lottery Funding in Regeneration

Abstract

The author explores the paradox of a burgeoning accepted definition of regeneration need together with a finite pot of money with which to fund it, and debates as to what consequently constitute the best funding-distribution structures and funding-allocation principles. This in turn provides the backdrop for an examination of aspects of the previously unresearched role of UK National Lottery funding in regeneration, as a potential variant in the contested-funding context. With the aid of results of an interview-based research project and a broader analysis of nationwide press reporting, it is concluded that Lottery funding plays both a qualitative and a quantitative role in regeneration. This is by enabling practical contestation of the status quo but also by supporting and complementing it, illustrating the validity of various dimensions of the debates. Such a capacity is explicable in terms of its unusual, part-independent, part-dependent (on government) governance configuration and positioning. However, Lottery funding is no panacea, for it exhibits as well as relieves certain tensions and trade-offs associated with the paradox. In terms of wider debates, the author demonstrates that governance and power are neglected in conventional discussions concerned with the formulaic assessment of funding need. It is also concluded that, in contrast to moves towards rationalisation and simplification, there is value in having a variety of funding streams (structures and distribution principles), albeit with consideration of how to make this work better.