Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Voluntarism in Urban Regeneration: Civic, Charity or Hybrid? Experiences from Danish Area-Based Interventions

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Area-based initiatives (ABIs) is a frequently used strategy within contemporary urban regeneration policies to tackle physical and social challenges in deprived neighbourhoods. A central characteristic of their approach is active involvement of local stakeholders as part of making robust and lasting improvements. The claim raised in this article is that urban regeneration mobilizes citizens through a narrow perception of “voluntarism” that tends to exclude vulnerable and socially marginalized citizens. The article presents a typology of voluntarism that makes a distinction between (a) social voluntarism, (b) civic voluntarism and (c) hybrid voluntarism, combining non-paid voluntarism with pro-profit activities. Empirically, we draw on studies from ABIs in Denmark where collaboration with charity organizations and hybrid organizations has been used to mobilize marginalized citizens in the urban regeneration areas. We find that collaborations with charity-based and hybrid organizations are sparse and small-scale so far, but appear promising with regards to involve socially vulnerable groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The programmes were found on the Ministry of housings’ homepage, http://www.sm.dk/Temaer/By-bolig/Byfornyelse/omraadefornyelse/Sider/Kortvisning.aspx, today located at: https://byfornyelsesdatabasen.dk/omraadefornyelse/0/3

  2. There were 74 ABIs established, but only 61 were on a stage where they have formulated a written programme.

References

  • Agger, A., & Jensen, J. O. (2015). Area-based Initiatives—and their work in bonding, bridging and linking social capital. European Planning Studies, 23(10). https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.998172

  • Agger, A, & Kahr Andersen, C. (2018). Stedsans - samskabelse gennem omverdensinddragelse. Roskilde University.

  • Agger, A., & Jensen, J. O. (2015). Area-based initiatives—and their work in bonding, bridging and linking social capital. European Planning Studies, 23(10), 2045–2061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., & Larsen, J. N. (2009). Exclusion in area-based urban policy programmes. European Planning Studies, 17(7), 1085–1099. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310902949646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agger, A., Roy, P., & Leonardsen, Ø. (2016). Sustaining area-based initiatives by developing appropriate “anchors”: the role of social capital. Planning Theory & Practice, 17(3), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1195435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, J. G. (2012). Convergence of welfare reforms in social services. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(2), 515–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9262-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, J., & Pløger, J. (2007). The dualism of Urban Governance in Denmark. European Planning Studies, 15(10), 1349–1367. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310701550827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R. (2008). European urban policies and the neighbourhood: an overview. In Proceedings of the ICE - Urban Design and PlanningAtkinson, R. (2008) ‘European Urban Policies and the Neighbourhood: An Overview’, Proceedings of the ICE - Urban Design and Planning. Thomas Telford. https://doi.org/10.1680/Udap.2008.161.3.115, 161(3), 115–122.

  • Bailey, N. (2012). The role, organisation and contribution of community enterprise to urban regeneration policy in the UK. Progress in Planning, 77(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2011.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bang, H., & Sørensen, E. (2001). The Everyday Maker Building political rather than social capital. In P. Dekker & E. M. Uslaner (Eds.), Social Capital and Participation in Everyday Life (pp. 148–162). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, K. P. R., Cozzi, G., & Mantovan, N. (2013). “The Big Society”, public expenditure, and volunteering. Public Administration Review, 73(2), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassi, A. (2014). David Billis: hybrid organizations and the third sector: challenges for practice. Theory and Policy. Nonprofit Policy Forum,, 5(2), 395–401. https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2014-0015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batty, E., Beatty, C., Foden, M., Lawless, P., Pearson, S., & Wilson, I. (2010). The New Deal for Communities Experience: A final assessment The New Deal for Communities Evaluation: Final report-Volume 7. Retrieved from www.communities.gov.uk

  • Billis, D. (2010). Towards a theory of hybrid organizations. In Billis, D. (ed.) Hybrid organizations and the third sector. Palgrave Macmillan

  • Billis, D., & Rochester, C. (Eds.). (2020). Handbook on Hybrid Organisations. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785366116

  • Couch, C., Sykes, O., & Börstinghaus, W. (2011). Thirty years of urban regeneration in Britain, Germany and France: The importance of context and path dependency. Progress in Planning, 75(1), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2010.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czischke, D., Gruis, V., & Mullins, D. (2012). Conceptualising social enterprise in housing organisations. Housing Studies, 27(4), 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2012.677017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Defourny, J., Hulgård, L., & Pestoff, V. (2014). Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective: Routledge.

  • Dekker, K. (2007). Social capital, neighbourhood attachment and participation in distressed urban areas. A case study in The Hague and Utrecht, the Netherlands. Housing Studies, 22(3), 355–379.

  • Durose, C., van Hulst, M., Jeffares, S., Escobar, O., Agger, A., & de Graaf, L. (2016). Five ways to make a difference: perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods. Public Administration Review, 76(4), 576–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engberg, L. A., & Larsen, J. N. (2010). Context-orientated meta-governance in Danish urban regeneration. Planning Theory & Practice, 11(4), 549–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2010.525379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eu-Comission. (2015). The EU Future Cities Competition: Realizing Urban European Strategy 2020.

  • European Commission. (2017). Report from the Comission to the Council on the Urban Agenda for the EU, pp 1–13.

  • Ferilli, G., Sacco, P. L., & Tavano Blessi, G. (2016). Beyond the rhetoric of participation: New challenges and prospects for inclusive urban regeneration. City, Culture and Society, 7(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2015.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foord, J., Ginsburg, N., Boddy, M., & Parkinson, M. (2004). Whose hidden assets? Inner city potential for social cohesion and economic competitiveness. In M. Boody & M. Parkinson (Eds.), City Matters Competitiveness, Cohesion and Urban Governance (pp. 287–306). Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froggett, L. (2015). Public Innovation, Civic Participation and the Third Sector - A Psychosocial Perspective. In Annika Agger, B. Damgaard, A. H. Krogh, & E. Sørensen (Eds.), Collaborative governance and public innovation in Northern Europe (pp. 231–248). Sharjah: Bentham Books.

  • Goodlad, R., Burton, P., & Croft, J. (2005). Effectiveness at what? The processes and impact of community involvement in area-based initiatives. Environment & Planning C: Government & Policy, 23(6), 923–938. https://doi.org/10.1068/c45m.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. (2015). Community Anchors. Think Piece. What works Scotland, November 2015

  • Henderson, J., Scotland, W. W., Revell, P., & Dunbar, S. (2018). Transforming communities? Exploring the roles of community anchor organisations in public service reform, local democracy, community resilience and social change. In What Works Scotland. Retrieved from http://whatworksscotland.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/WWSExploringTheRolesOfCommunityAnchorOrganisationsInPublicServiceReform.pdf

  • Henriksen, L. S., Smith, S. R., & Zimmer, A. (2012). At the eve of convergence? Transformations of social service provision in Denmark, Germany, and the United States. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(2), 458–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-011-9221-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. O., Engberg, L. A., Forman, M., & Suenson, V. (2010). Netværk og forankring i områdebaseret byfornyelse [Networks and Anchoring in Areabased Interventions]. Danish Building Research Institute. SBi 2010:13

  • Jones, P. S. (2003). Urban regeneration’s poisoned chalice: Is there an impasse in (community) participation-based policy? Urban Studies, 40(3), 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000053932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenneth Balfelt. (2014). http://kennethbalfelt.org/mobile-hellesteder/.

  • Larsen, Jakob Norvig, Jensen, J. O., & Agger, A. (2012). Områdefornyelse og frivillighed – samarbejde med udfordringer og muligheder.

  • Lawless, P., & Pearson, S. (2012). Outcomes from Community Engagement in Urban Regeneration: Evidence from England’s New Deal for Communities Programme. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(4), 509–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.728003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, C, & Conradson, D. (2006). Landscapes of voluntarism: New spaces of health, welfare and governance (Christine Milligan & D. Conradson, Eds.). Bristol: The Policy Press.

  • Murtagh, B., & McFerran, K. (2015). Adaptive utilitarianism, social enterprises and urban regeneration. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(6), 1585–1599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (1998). Partnerships in Local Economic Development: A bridge too far for the voluntary sector? Local Economy, 12(4), 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/02690949808726405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, J., Tyler, P., & Brennan, A. (2005). Assessing the effect of Area Based Initiatives on local area outcomes: some thoughts based on the national evaluation of the Single Regeneration Budget in England. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SocialRespons. (2017). Når ideer kommer op at flyve.

  • Stender, Marie; Mertner, Simon; Hauxner, K. (2010). Byen som dagligstue? Retrieved from http://www.mbbl.dk/sites/mbbl.omega.oitudv.dk/files/dokumenter/publikationer/byen_som_dagligstue_web.pdf

  • Tosics, I. (2015). Integrated regeneration of deprived areas and the new cohesion policy approach. In URBACT II: An URBACT contribution to the European Urban Agenda.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Programme. (2016). sustainable urbanization strategy.

  • Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. BUILD, Aalborg University, Denmark, A.C. Meyers Vænge 15, 2450, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Jesper Ole Jensen

  2. Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Universitetsvej 1, 25.2, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark

    Annika Agger

Authors
  1. Jesper Ole Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Annika Agger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jesper Ole Jensen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jensen, J.O., Agger, A. Voluntarism in Urban Regeneration: Civic, Charity or Hybrid? Experiences from Danish Area-Based Interventions. Voluntas 33, 297–307 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00297-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00297-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation