Area-Based Positive Discrimination and the Distribution of Well-Being

Abstract

This paper examines the distribution of well-being among a number of ecological type areas in Dundee. Comparisons are made between the results produced by using 'object-related' and 'subjective' social indicators. In calculating summary level of living scores for individuals, an attempt is made to take into account variations in personal priorities. The extent to which the ecological structure of the city provides a useful framework for area-based interventions to relieve deprivation is assessed. By the early years of the 1960s it was becoming increasingly apparent that full employment together with the universalistic provisions of the welfare state had failed to eradicate poverty in Britain (see Harvey, 1960; Wedderburn, 1962; Townsend, 1962). From that decade, areabased approaches became an essential tool of social policy. Programmes were devised which would allocate special resources to people living in designated localities to help fulfil their 'distinctive' needs (see Holtermann, 1975a; Mason et al., 1977; Edwards and Batley, 1978). The late 1960s therefore witnessed the establishment of General Improvement Areas, Educational Priority Areas, Community Development Projects and the Urban Programme, followed in the next decade by Housing Action Areas and the Inner Area Studies. Their historic origins can be traced to the 'active slumming and evangelical work of the Charity Organization Society' and Octavia Hill's housing visitors (Townsend, 1976, p. 169), and more recently to the same concern with the imbalances in the operation of the space-economy which led to the development of regional policies. However, the immediate forerunners of the British area-based policies were the American Headstart, Model Cities and the Community Action Programs (see Edwards and Batley, 1978). The adoption of area-based approaches in Britain was, perhaps, inevitable. There existed clearly recognizable areas of physical decay within cities. 'Common sense' suggested that other problems such as educational disadvantage were also geographically concentrated (Gray, 1975). Moreover, local authority officers tended to view deprivation in terms of area rather than class (Stewart, Spencer and Webster, 1976). The policies rested upon the assumptions that: i) there existed small identifiable areas where a high proportion of the population was deprived, ii) that the deprived were concentrated into such areas, iii) that deprivation could be alleviated by action taken within the areas themselves and iv) that because of a neighbourhood or multiplier effect, the same resources could alleviate more deprivation when the target population was geographically concentrated than when it was scattered (Holtermann, 1975a). Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S. 6, 53-67 (1981) Printed in Great Britain This content downloaded from 40.77.167.81 on Mon, 12 Sep 2016 04:11:07 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms