Community anchors, Scottish policy-making and aspirations for working 'at scale'

UK policy-making has generated a use of the term ‘community anchor’ distinct from that in the USA where public, private and non-profits – including larger ‘anchor institutions’ – may all loosely be described as... [ view full abstract ]

UK policy-making has generated a use of the term ‘community anchor’ distinct from that in the USA where public, private and non-profits – including larger ‘anchor institutions’ – may all loosely be described as community anchors in relation to local regeneration. In the UK, a community anchor organisation has come to be understood both by sector researchers and advocates (Thake, 2001; Weaver, 2009; Hutchison & Cairns, 2010; Henderson, 2015; Henderson & McWilliams, 2017) and by (some) governments – UK New Labour Government (Home Office, 2004) and SNP Scottish Government (2011) – as a multi-purpose, locally-controlled local community organisation, most likely of place. The scope of such multi-purpose-ness will include providing and supporting (or aspirations too): local economic and social economic development; design and provision of local services including those publicly-funding, partnered and/or contracted; community-building activity; and local democratic activity, leadership and advocacy (Hutchison & Cairns, 2010; Henderson, 2015).

In particular emphasis is placed within this model by advocates and researchers on the role of community social enterprise as a means for local development and service provision, but also in supporting community anchor organisations to achieve a much sought after ‘sustainable independence’ (Weaver, 2009). Such independence to be understood as a financial independence from the state and robust governance structure concerned for the longer-term that supports the anchor in sustaining its ‘local mission’ rather than becoming simply an instrument of government policy implementation.

In Scotland, the adoption by the SNP Scottish Government (2011) of community anchor organisations as key players in ‘community-led regeneration’ has given a certain increased visibility to the community controlled housing associations and community development trusts that are best placed to undertake the role. Further, the central public service reform narrative in Scotland for a collaborative governance established by the ‘Christie Commission’ (2011) has highlighted the potential of such independent community organisations as well as the third sector more generally to support reform. And this is reflected in the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 with its emphasis on the varied role of ‘community bodies’ in relation to participation, service provision and asset transfer (public to community). Danson and Whittam (2011) therefore argue for a Scottish and collective policy approach between state and civil society that is distinctive to that in England, where ‘Big Society’, smaller state rhetoric has been active under the Conservative-led Coalition UK Government (2010-2015).

In this Discussion Paper, brief examples of community anchors in Scotland (Henderson, 2014; Henderson & McWilliams, 2017; Henderson et al., forthcoming) will be used to illustrate the potential for: partnership of ‘scale’ between state and community anchors, e.g. shared service hub and complex layers of regeneration activity and planning; and joint ventures between community anchors and private enterprise that generate significant financial returns for re-investment in community organisations and community ‘infrastructure’.

These illustrations will highlight current opportunities and challenges for both: the state as it seeks public service reform and effective approaches ‘at scale’ to regeneration, place-making and preventing inequality: and, the community sector, its oft-held aspirations for a local democratic, ‘mutualist’ practice, and the realities of working with the state (Henderson & McWilliams, 2017).

Draft 08.03.17, James Henderson

Bibliography:

‘Christie Commission’ (2011) Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services, Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

Danson, M and Whittam, G (2011) ‘Scotland's Civic Society v. England's Big Society? Diverging Roles of the VCS in Public Service Delivery’, Social Policy and Society, 10, 353-363.

Henderson, J (2014) Towards a critical understanding of community anchors and a community sector theory and practice, PhD thesis: Heriot-Watt University.

Henderson, J (2015) Community Anchors (online), Report, Edinburgh: What Works Scotland

Henderson, J and McWilliams, C (2017) ‘The UK community anchor model and its challenges for community sector theory and practice’ [online], Urban Studies, 1- 17.

Home Office, UK Government (2004) Firm Foundations: The Government’s Framework for Community Capacity Building, London: Home Office Communications Directorate.

Hutchison, R and Cairns, B (2010) Community organisations: Sustainability and independence. In Billis, D. (ed) Hybrid Organisations and the Third Sector: Challenges for Practice, Theory and Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Scottish Government (2011) Achieving a Sustainable Future: Regeneration Strategy, Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

Thake, S (2001) Building Communities Changing Lives: the contribution of large, independent neighbourhood regeneration organisations [online], York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation/York

Weaver, M (2009) Principles, paradigms and practice as barriers to ‘sustainable independence’ for community anchors (online). London: University of East London.