Urban geography, relevance, and resistance to the “policy turn

Urban Geography

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 697-708

  Imrie, Rob ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Applied geography; Public policy; Relevance

Indexed keywords

GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH; URBAN GEOGRAPHY;

EID: 17644401475     PISSN: 02723638     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.25.8.697     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abler, R., 1993, Desiderata for geography: An institutional view from the United States. In R. Johnston, editor, The Challenge for Geography: A Changing World, A Changing Discipline. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 215-238.
2. Berry, B., 1973, A paradigm for modern change. In R. Chorley, editor, Directions in Geography. London, UK: Methuen, 3-22.
3. Berry, B., 1994, Let’s have more policy analysis. Urban Geography, Vol. 15, 315-317.
4. Berry, B., 2000, Challenges and opportunities. Urban Geography, Vol. 31, 189-192.
5. Berry, B., 2001, The Chicago School in retrospect and prospect. Urban Geography, Vol. 22, 559-561.
6. Brook, S. and Gagnon, A., editors, 2000, Social Scientists, Policy, and the State. New York, NY: Praeger.
7. Bulmer, M., 1986, The use and abuse of social science. In M. Bulmer, K. Banting, S. Blume, M. Carley, and C. Weiss, editors, Social Science and Social Policy. London, UK: Allen and Unwin, 275-296.
8. Cabinet Office, 1999, Professional Policy Making for the 21st Century. London, UK: Strategic Policy Team, Cabinet Office.
9. Coppock, T., 1974, Geography and public policy: Challenges, opportunities and implications, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 63, 1-16.
10. Davies, H., Nutley, S. and Smith, P., editors, 2000, What Works: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services. London, UK: Policy.
11. Department for Education and Employment, 2000, Influence or Irrelevance: Can Social Science Improve Government? London, UK: Author.
12. Dorling, D. and, Shaw, M., 2002, Geographies of the agenda: Public policy, the discipline and its (re)“turns.” Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 26, 629-646.
13. Edwards, C., 2003, Disability and the discourses of the Single Regeneration Budget. In R. Imrie and M. Raco, editors, Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol, UK: Policy, 163-180.
14. Ellin, N., 2001, Post Modern Urbanism. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
15. Flyvbjerg, B., 2001, Making Social Science Matter. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Foucault, M., 1994, So it is important to think. In J. Faubian, editor, Michel Foucault: Power. London, UK: Penguin, 454-458.
17. Hamnett, C., 2003, Contemporary human geography: Fiddling while Rome burns? Geoforum, Vol. 34, 1-3.
18. Harvey, D., 1974, What kind of geography for what kind of public policy, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 63, 18-24.
19. Imrie, R., 1996, Transforming the social relations of research production in urban policy evaluation, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 28, 1445-1464.
20. Imrie, R. and Raco, M., 2003, editors, Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol, UK: Policy.
21. Jackson, P., 1993, Changing ourselves: A geography of position. In R. Johnston, editor, The Challenge for Geography: A Changing World, A Changing Discipline. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 198-214.
22. Lees, L., 2003a, Policy (Re)turns: Gentrification research and urban policy—Urban policy and gentrification research. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 35, 571-574.
23. Lees, L., 2003b, Visions of “urban renaissance: The Urban Task Force report and the Urban White paper. In R. Imrie and M. Raco, editors, Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol, UK: Policy, 61-82.
24. Markusen, A., 1999, Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: The case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies, Regional Studies, Vol. 33, 869-884.
25. Martin, R., 2001, Geography and public policy: The case of the missing agenda. Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 25, 189-210.
26. McDonald, M., 2003, Getting out there. The Office, Vol. 1, 5.
27. Morrison, Z., 2003, Cultural justice and addressing “social exclusion”: A case study of a Single Regeneration Budget project in Blackbird Leys, Oxford. In R. Imrie and M. Raco, editors, Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol, UK: Policy, 139-162.
28. ODPN (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister), 2002, Planning and Diversity. London, UK: Author.
29. Peck, J., 1999, Grey geography? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, n.s., Vol. 24, 131-134.
30. Raco, M., 2003, Assessing the discourses and practices of urban regeneration in a growing region. Geoforum, Vol. 34, 37-55.
31. Rappert, B., 1999, The uses of relevance: Thought on a reflexive sociology. Sociology, Vol. 33, 705-723.
32. Rose, J., 1951, Geography in practice in the federal government, Washington. In G. Taylor, editor, Geography in the Twentieth Century. London, UK: Methuen, 566-586.
33. Sanderson, I., 2000, Complexity, Evaluation, and Evidence-Based Policy. Paper presented at European Evaluation Society: 4th Conference, Lausanne, Switzerland. Available from I.Sanderson@lmu.ac.uk
34. Sanderson, I., 2002, Evaluation, policy-learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, Vol. 80, 1-22.
35. Schneider, A. and Ingram, H., 1997, Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence, KS. University Press of Kansas.
36. Shaw, I., 1999, Qualitative Evaluation. London, UK: Sage.
37. Shotland, R. and Mark, M., editors, 1985, Social Science and Social Policy. London, UK: Sage.
38. Solesbury, W., 2002, The ascendancy of evidence. Planning Theory, Vol. 3, 90-96.
39. Unwin, T., 1994, The Place of Geography. London, UK: Unwin Hyman.
40. Van der Knapp, P., 1995, Policy evaluation and learning: Feedback, enlightenment, or argumentation? Evaluation, Vol. 1, 189-216.
41. Walker, R., 2000, Welfare policy: Tendering for evidence. In H. Davies, S. Nutley, and P. Smith, editors, 2000, What Works: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services. London, UK: Policy, 141-161.
42. Weiss, C., 2000, The uneasy partnership endures: Social science and government. In S. Brook and A. Gagnon, editors, 2000, Social Scientists, Policy, and the State. New York, NY: Praeger, 97-111.
43. Weiss, C., 2001, What Kind of Evidence is Evidence-Based Policy? Third International Inter-Disciplinary Evidence Based Policies and Indicator Systems Conference, Proceedings, 284-291.
44. Wheeler, J., 2000, Have we lost a generation of urban geographers? Urban Geography, Vol. 21, 377-379.
45. Willinsky, J., 2000, If Only We Knew: Increasing the Public Value of Social Science Research. London, UK: Routledge.
46. Williams, W., 1998, Honest Numbers and Democracy: Social Policy Analysis in the White House, Congress, and the Federal Agencies. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
47. Wyly, E., 2004, Geographies of the United States in the year 2004. Professional Geographer, Vol. 56, 91-95.
48. Wyly, E. and Hammel, D., 1999, Islands of decay in seas of renewal: Housing policy and the resurgence of gentrification. Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 10, 711-771.