Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haworth, A.
Right arrow Articles by Manzi, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1, 153-165 (1999)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098993790
© 1999 Urban Studies Journal Limited

Managing the 'Underclass': Interpreting the Moral Discourse of Housing Management

Anna Haworth

School of the Built Environment, Department of Housing, University of Westminster, 35 Marylebone Road, London NW1 5LS, UK, haworta{at}westminster.ac.uk

Tony Manzi

School of the Built Environment, Department of Housing, University of Westminster, 35 Marylebone Road, London NW1 5LS, UK, manzit{at}westminster.ac.uk

This paper examines contemporary housing management practice by attention to a changing discourse within social policy, emphasising duties over rights. Current policy initiatives are based upon concerns about the collapse of foundational assumptions and a perceived decline in moral responsibility. This concern is most commonly articulated in debates about the existence of an urban underclass, linked to anti-social behaviour on housing estates. The paper argues that a communitarian outlook has exerted a significant impact on contemporary initiatives incorporating a strongly judgmental bias. As a consequence, housing practice discriminates between behaviour in social housing and privately owned property. Drawing upon post-liberal perspectives, the conclusion suggests that the predominance of a deontological discourse has resulted in policies of social control of residents.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br J Soc WorkHome page
P. M. Garrett
Making 'Anti-Social Behaviour': A Fragment on the Evolution of 'ASBO Politics' in Britain
Br. J. Soc. Work, July 1, 2007; 37(5): 839 - 856.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Critical Social PolicyHome page
P. M. Garrett
'Sinbin' solutions: The 'pioneer' projects for 'problem families' and the forgetfulness of social policy research
Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2007; 27(2): 203 - 230.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Critical Social PolicyHome page
P. Squires
New Labour and the politics of antisocial behaviour
Critical Social Policy, February 1, 2006; 26(1): 144 - 168.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban StudHome page
J. Uitermark
'Social Mixing' and the Management of Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods: The Dutch Policy of Urban Restructuring Revisited
Urban Stud, March 1, 2003; 40(3): 531 - 549.
[Abstract] [PDF]