Active citizenship may be the Holy Grail of modern local government, but councils can have a huge impact on it if they try, claims Rick Muir From David Miliband to David Cameron, politicians of all parties are now championing the cause of active citizenship. The Government has introduced a range of measures to encourage people to get involved in politics and local affairs – children are now taught citizenship at school, the chancellor has been busily promoting volunteering among young people, and there have been numerous experiments aimed at encouraging more people to vote. Moreover, the Lyons review and the up-coming local government White Paper are likely to argue that local authorities should not merely see themselves as service providers, but should also aspire to be community leaders, responsible for promoting involvement in civic life. But can local government do anything to encourage citizens to become more active? The cynics doubt it. They argue that political participation is determined by underlying structural factors, such as economic deprivation, the strength of community ties, and the strength of local identity. If this was true, there would be little local councils could do to promote active citizenship. However, research published this month by ippr has found that local civic leadership has a major impact on levels of political involvement, and that where local politicians and council officers want to make a difference, they can. The research compared a number of different areas around the UK and found that while structural factors such as wealth and the strength of community ties matter, so too do the actions of local politicians, council officers and community leaders. Let’s take two otherwise-similar cases which vary significantly in terms of political participation. Both Hull and Middlesbrough are northern towns with a strong industrial heritage, but which underwent processes of de-industrialisation during the 1980s, leading to very high levels of unemployment. Both also appear to have high levels of social cohesion, manifested in a strong local identity. However, whereas average turnout across a number of local elections in Middlesbrough was 36%, it was just 20% in Hull. Moreover, surveys of local residents found that people in Middlesbrough were, in general, much more likely to participate in civic life, such as by contacting their local councillors or forming voluntary groups. Similar results were found for the London boroughs of Sutton and Merton. Like many parts of London, both these areas had relatively mixed populations, with wealthy areas neighbouring pockets of deprivation. In addition, residents reported similar levels of attachment and connection to their neighbours. And yet, there were major differences in the levels of political participation, with residents in Sutton being significantly more likely to have recently contacted a councillor or public official, donated money to an organisation, or signed a petition. What then explains these differences between otherwise-similar cases? ippr research found that local leadership matters. First of all, the approach of local politicians and council officers was crucial. In both Middlesbrough and Sutton the dominant political parties and senior management had taken imaginative approaches to engaging with local citizens, such as setting up ward-level community councils, and experimenting in new kinds of consultative techniques. Most of all, they clearly took community engagement seriously and made sure it fed into the mainstream work of the council. It is not just political leadership which matters, however. In both Sutton and Middlesbrough, the civic and voluntary sector was found to be regularly involved in formal consultation and discussion with the local authority through representative umbrella bodies. In the contrasting cases of Merton and Hull, voluntary sector activity was found to be less co-ordinated and disconnected from council policymaking. These findings show there is no need to be fatalistic about low levels of election turnout or participation in local civic affairs. Contrary to those who have argued that income levels and the strength of the local community determine levels of political engagement, this report shows that action by civic leaders and voluntary groups can make a crucial difference. n Rick Muir s a research fellow at the IPPR. Locality matters: making participation count in local politics by Vivien Lowndes, Lawrence Pratchett and Gerry Stoker is available from the Institute for Public Policy Research, www.ippr.org
