| Abstract: | Michael Young and Gerard Lemos’ (1997 Young, M. and Lemos, G. 1997. The communities we have lost and can regain, London: Lemos and Crane. Google Scholar]) text The communities we have lost and can regain has had a substantial influence on New Labour's communitarian thinking. This paper critically examines a specific aspect of New Labour's communitarian agenda, namely, its use of public housing policy to rebuild communities in order to combat social exclusion on so-called ‘sink estates’. The paper is presented in four main parts. The first part of the paper discusses how, why and to what extent ‘community’ has been lost, with particular reference to public housing estates. The second part examines why community rebuilding is now seen as the solution to the problems caused by the loss of community on public housing estates and, to this end, pays particular attention to the communitarian values that underpin New Labour's third way. The third part of the paper examines some empirical studies of community in order to highlight the key characteristics of ‘community’ and thereby develop a critical understanding of what New Labour are currently seeking to achieve. The fourth part of the paper juxtaposes this discussion of ‘community’ with a discussion of emerging socio-economic trends that have been identified in the literature on late modernity and globalization. By highlighting emerging socio-economic trends such as residential mobility into the community debate, the paper concludes by criticizing the policy of community building as ‘good for you’. Our key point is that community building restricts the residential mobility of poorer households and exacerbates (rather than combats) their social exclusion because a key indicator of social inclusion is their ability to take advantage of the social, cultural and economic opportunities that so often exist ‘elsewhere’. |
