Instrumental and interpretative methods in evaluating urban programmes

Urban Policy and Research

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 83-96

  Murtagh, Brendan ^a   Sterrett, Ken ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Collaborative planning; Evaluation; Institutional audit; Instrumental; Interpretative

Indexed keywords

EID: 65949117812     PISSN: 08111146     EISSN: 14767244     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08111140600590999     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bailey, N., 2003. Local Strategic Partnerships in England: the continuing search for collaborative advantage, leadership and strategy in urban governance. Planning Theory and Practice, 4 (4): 443–457.
2. Booher, D., and Innes, J., 2002. Network power in collaborative planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21: 221–236.
3. Carp, J., 2004. Wit, style and substance, how planners shape public participation. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23: 242–254.
4. Castells, M., 1989. The Informational City, Oxford: Blackwell.
5. Coaffee, J., and Healey, P., 2003. My voice: my place': tracking transformations in urban governance. Urban Studies, 40 (10): 1979–1999.
6. Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 1999. The MEANS Collection: Evaluating Socio-economic Programmes, Brussels: CEC.
7. Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2000. Indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation in the New Programme Period 2000–2006: Methodological Working Paper No. 3, Brussels: CEC.
8. Coopers and Lybrand. 1998. Mid-Term Evaluation of the Peace and Reconciliation Programme in Northern Ireland and the Border Counties of Ireland 1994–99, Belfast: Coopers and Lybrand.
9. Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DLTR). 2002. Urban Policy Evaluation Strategy Consultation Document, London: DTLR.
10. District Partnership for the Derry City Council Area. 1998. Pathways for Peace and Prosperity, Derry/Londonderry: DPDCCA.
11. European Institute for Urban Affairs (EIUA) & Local Government Centre (LGC). 2004. Local Strategy Partnership Evaluation and Action Research Programme, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
12. Fukuyama, F., 1997. Social capital, The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. 19: 375–484.
13. Hamdi, N., and Goethert, R., 1997. Action Planning for Cities: A Guide to Community Practice, Chichester: Wiley.
14. Healey, P., 1996. Consensus-building across difficult divisions: new approaches to collaborative strategy making. Planning Practice and Research, 11 (2): 207–216.
15. Healey, P., 2000. Planning theory and urban and regional dynamics: a comment on Yiftachel and Huxley. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24 (4): 917–921.
16. Hughes, J., Knox, C., Murray, J., and Greer, J., 1998. Partnership Governance in Northern Ireland, Dublin: Oak Tree Press.
17. Khakee, A., 1998. Evaluation and planning: in separable concepts. Town Planning Review, 69 (4): 359–374.
18. KPMG. 2000. Evaluation of Sub-Programme 6, District Partnerships of the Peace and Reconciliation Programme for Northern Ireland and the Border Counties of Ireland 1994–99, Belfast: KPMG.
19. Maginn, P. J., 2004. Urban Regeneration, Community Power and the (In)Significance of ‘Race’, Aldershot: Ashgate.
20. Marsden, D., and Oakley, A., 1991. Future issues and perspectives in the evaluation of social development. Community Development Journal, 26 (4): 315–328.
21. Murtagh, B., 2002. The Politics of Territory: Policy and Segregation in Northern Ireland, Houndsmill: Palgrave.
22. Murtagh, B., 2003. “ Territoriality, research and policy making in Northern Ireland ”. In Researching the Troubles, Edited by: Hargie, O., and Dickson, D., 209–226. Edinburgh: Mainstream.
23. North West Community Network (NWCN). 1997. Report of the Consultation Process in the Derry/Londonderry District Partnership Area, Derry: NWCN.
24. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). 2004. Assessing the Impact of Spatial Interventions: Regeneration, Renewal and Regional Development, The 3Rs Guidance, London: ODPM.
25. Porter, N., 1998. Rethinking Unionism: An Alternative Vision for Northern Ireland, 2nd edn, Belfast: Blackstaff.
26. PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC). 2003. Ex Post Evaluation of the Peace and Reconciliation Programme in Northern Ireland and the Border Counties of Ireland 1994–99, Belfast: PWC.
27. Putnam, R., 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Reeves, D., 2005. Planning for Diversity: Policy and Planning in a World of Difference, London: Routledge.
29. Rhodes, J., Tyler, P., and Brennan, A., 2003. New developments in area-based initiatives in England: the experience of the Single Regeneration Budget. Urban Studies, 40 (8): 1399–1426.
30. Roberts, P., 2003. Partnership, programmes and the promotion of regional development: an evaluation of the operation of the Structural Funds regional programmes. Progress in Planning, 59 (1): 1–69.
31. Rydin, Y., 2005. Geographical knowledge and policy: the positive contribution of discourse studies. Area, 37 (1): 73–78.
32. Shirlow, P., and Murtagh, B., 2004. Capacity-building, representation and intra-community conflict. Urban Studies, 41 (1): 57–70.
33. Silverman, R., ed. 2004. Community Based Organization: The Intersection of Social Capital and Local Context in Contemporary Urban Sociology, Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
34. Soja, E., 2000. Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions, London: Blackwell.
35. Taylor, M. 1995. Unleashing the Potential: Bringing Residents to the Centre of Regeneration, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
36. Templegrove Action Research (TAR). 1995. Submission on the Derry/Londonderry Area Plan 2011, Derry/Londonderry: TAR.
37. Van den Berg, L., Van der Meer, J., and Pol, P., 2004. Organising capacity and social policy in European cities. Urban Studies, 40 (10): 1959–1978.
38. Wong, C., 2003. Indicators at the crossroads, ideas, methods and applications. Town Planning Review, 74 (3): 253–279.
39. Yiftachel, O., and Ghanem, A., 2004. Understanding ‘ethnocractic’ regimes: the politics of seizing contested territories. Political Geography, 23: 647–676.