A ‘whole-of-government’ approach to urban regeneration:

The case of the Raploch Urban Regeneration Company

Abstract

The public sector increasingly needs to find new ways of coordinating itself to respond to

complex, inter-connected problems requiring holistic “whole-of-government” approaches.

Urban regeneration projects are, to a large degree, concerned with “wicked problems”

underlying deprivation, and are suitable contexts for holistic interventions encompassing

various public sector actors. This paper discusses the implementation of a “whole-of-

government” regeneration strategy in an area called Raploch, in the town of Stirling,

Scotland. The regeneration was delivered through a joint entity called Raploch Urban

Regeneration Company, a not-for-profit limited company set up by several public sector

organisations. In this paper, the extent to which Raploch Urban Regeneration Company

fulfils a “whole-of-government” approach to the delivery of urban regeneration is examined.

1. Introduction

Tackling enduring and intractable social problems, such as social exclusion, crime, health

inequalities and unemployment require public agencies to work in different ways. The

response of the public sector must address such “wicked issues” in a holistic manner where

problems are not viewed in isolation, but, rather, as interdependent on one another and public

agencies must deliver integrated services in order to fulfil this holistic approach. In recent

times, the terms “whole-of-government” or its synonym “joined-up-government” have

emerged to describe this phenomenon of integrated public service delivery in which several

public agencies coordinate themselves to tackle, in particular, social ills. Urban regeneration

projects are good contexts for “whole-of-government” public management strategies, as they

encompass physical, social and economic outcomes and, thus, require coordinated input from

a variety of public agencies. Arguably, such strategies result in more effective cooperation

among partners and greater innovation. However, implementing “whole-of-government”

approaches is challenging and requires significant cultural change. This study will present a

case study of a regeneration project in Raploch, an area in central Scotland, and examine the

extent to which the Urban Regeneration Company coordination approach, established by the

public sector partners, fulfilled the ideals of a “whole-of-government” strategy.

The authors have interests in this research beyond simple academic curiosity or their core

research interests. Both have close ties to the area and to the structures that aim to address the

issues this paper considers. The authors believe that this is advantageous in both the quality

and use-value of the research and that it has (positive) methodological implications. Chris

Ball was born and raised in Stirling and through his father – an academic and local councillor

– became interested in politics and social inequality. Chris’s main research interests are in

green entrepreneurship but he is also interested in making use of his father’s work in local

urban development and public management hence the focus here on the whole-of-

government approach to address ‘wicked problems’. Nick Telford was born in Sunderland,

northeast England and has lived in Stirling been resident on and off in Stirling since 1996 and

permanently since 2002. His academic background is in the arts and humanities which

developed into researching the marketing issues of creative entrepreneurship. Soon after

purchasing one of the new houses in Raploch, Nick volunteered for the board of Raploch

Community Partnership (RCP) which is a community development company and registered

charity that exists to promote the urban regeneration from within the community and which

was designed to work in partnership with the local authority, Stirling Council and the

Raploch Urban Regeneration Company (RURC). He has had, therefore, close partnership

experience of the Raploch Urban Regeneration Company and various stakeholders in the

regeneration. He was concerned not to conflict his personal and professional life with

volunteer work but ultimately thought that academic research from an interior perspective

would contribute positively to the theory and practice of urban regeneration. Partnering with

Chris seemed like an ideal solution to consider the matter at hand to give breadth, depth and

balance to understand this example.

The authors wish to give thanks to the respondents of this research and to those that have

contributed material. Although any conclusions drawn here are those of the authors, the

respondents have been given drafts and participated generously during challenging times.

2.1. The Changing Nature of Urban Regeneration in Scotland

Although a tenet of the post-war welfare state in Britain, and especially Scotland, the latter

part of the twentieth century has heralded a great decline in council housing. In the mid-

1970s, two thirds of the Scottish population lived in council housing – now under one third

do and council housing is not the “tenure of choice” any more, increasingly accommodating

the socially excluded – namely ethnic minorities, poor families, and the “long-term sick”

(Robertson, Smith and McIntosh 2008). Evans and Jones (2008) concur with this assessment,

saying that the large estates, built in the post-war era, are now associated with both “multiple

deprivation” and “crumbling housing infrastructure” (P.25). The emergence of estates

throughout the country in poor physical state and where relatively poor social conditions are

experienced, has led to substantial regeneration to tackle the deprivation present in these

areas. According to Dodds (2011) urban regeneration involves sets of policies targeting the

tangible physical and environmental issues within an estate as well as the more intractable

social and economic problems which exist. The attention on urban regeneration has arisen in

a context of economic restructuring, over the past few decades, leading to greater inequalities

in wealth among geographical areas (Dodds 2011). The emphasis is that regeneration is a

holistic process, that does not merely focus on the upgrading of physical housing

infrastructure, but which must also address the underlying social ills and lack of opportunity

in order to fully change the lives of those in the community concerned. Previously, the state

was the central actor in “urban redevelopment”, however, due to public-spending cuts both

during in the 1980s and in the current economic climate, there has been intense pressure to

involve the private sector in regeneration and, as a result, partnership among various actors

under new institutional structures, such as the Urban Regeneration Companies, have become

important (Evans and Jones 2008).

The Urban Regeneration Company model has been a principal method of undertaking major

regeneration projects. URCs are described as “dedicated arms-length bodies coordinating the

delivery of urban regeneration projects”( Urban Taskforce (2000) in (Shiel & Smith-Milne

2007). Under this model, public sector partners come together to set up a company limited

by guarantee (as in the case of Raploch) consisting of members who act as guarantors in case

of bankruptcy– a structure commonly used by not-for-profit organisations (Companies House

2013). In effect, the URC sets out a strategic overview for the area and draws up a plan with

partners for implementing this strategy (Scottish Government 2013). Scotland adopted the

URC model for urban regeneration projects following the Cities Review (2002) which

emphasised the possible advantages of URCs to reinvigorate the regeneration of Scottish

cities in view of the success which this model and enjoyed in England and Wales (Shiel &

Smith-Milne 2007). According to the review, URCs led to greater “focus” and “dynamism”

within regeneration projects and were an effective means of uniting various diverse actors

behind a single vision for a project with independence from the public sector and, thanks to

this, were successful in securing private sector finance and participation (Shiel & Smith-

Milne 2007). Scottish URCs are considered to have “catalytic abilities” in that they are able

to bring different stakeholders together to achieve economic, social, physical and

environmental outcomes, crucially through ensuring that local communities benefit from the

opportunities (i.e. training and, employment) resulting from the project (Shiel & Smith-Milne

2007) . In addition, the URCs deliver Scottish Executive Policy for regeneration and the

aims that this entails, whilst having the flexibility to adapt their structure to the dynamics of

the local area which they serve (Shiel & Smith-Milne 2007) – thus combining central

government control with local responsiveness. Overall, URCs can be conceived as

coordinating bodies which are charged with delivering national regeneration strategies whilst

attending to local needs. There are currently six URCs in existence in Scotland, including

Raploch URC (The Scottish Government 2013).

2.2 Raploch URC

In relation to the Raploch regeneration project, it is important to outline the context of the

community and its URC. Raploch is located on the edge of the city of Stirling and features

among the most deprived estates in Scotland. This is demonstrated by the most recent

Scottish Government statistics demonstrating that the four datazones which Raploch

comprises were ranked 24th

, 118th

, 144th

and 398th

of 3505 datazones in Scotland placing

most of the area in the top 5% of the most deprived areas of Scotland (The Scottish

Government 2009). Raploch is characterised by low educational attainment, poor housing,

poor health and high unemployment (Raploch Urban Regeneration Company 2004; Stirling

Council 2003) based on the most recent census data. The deprivation affecting contemporary

Raploch can be traced back to the inter-war period during which there was an influx of poor

families and throughout the later part of the 20th

century and the early 21st century the social

ills of violence, alcoholism, crime and, latterly, drugs have persisted (Robertson, Smith and

McIntosh 2008). According to Robertson, Smith and McIntosh (2008), previous

regeneration attempts throughout the 1980s and early 1990s have failed to address the

intractable problems in Raploch. The current Raploch URC project was intended to take a

more holistic approach to the regeneration, combining economic and social change with

physical and environmental improvements (Robertson, Smith and McIntosh 2008; Raploch

Urban Regeneration Company 2004). Ultimately, the URC project’s ambition is to create a

desirable and economically sustainable neighbourhood in Raploch, through focusing on five

strategic objectives: property, place, partnerships, prospects and people (Raploch Urban

Regeneration Company 2004). The structure of the URC project is displayed in the diagram

below:

Figure 1: Raploch URC Structure

(Reproduced from Shiel & Smith-Milne 2007)

The above diagram, found in Schiel & Smith Milne (2007) is a good visualisation of the URC

structure as it was intended. It does not show, however, the element of social housing which

is a key element of the project. The main body, Raploch URC Limited is the company

regrouping the public sector agencies and has a subsidiary which holds the land transferred

from Stirling Council. The URC, through its subsidiary, procured a development partner who

conducts the work and receives profits through the landholding company from the sale of

houses.

Raploch URC Ltd

Raploch URC Landholdings Ltd

Stirling Council

LAND

Home Buyers Houses

Sales

revenu

er

Development

Partner

Services

Profit

The Urban Regeneration Company is an innovative model of project delivery which is argued

to facilitate partnership and provide a targeted focus which integrates social and economic

outcomes in addition to the physical and environmental objectives. An essential element of

this structure was community consultation every step of the way. With Stirling Council

assistance the Raploch Regeneration Group was formed to facilitate this. This became

Raploch Community Partnership (RCP), a trust, and which is now an incorporated charity. A

tripartite relationship was formed between Stirling Council, the RURC and RCP.

Fragmentation still occurred, however, with the statutory Community Council also

representing community interests.

Research Aims

Examine the extent to which Raploch URC reflects a horizontal approach to wicked

problems targeted in the regeneration effort

-How effectively do public sector partners overcome organisational boundaries to

develop innovative solutions to wicked problems?

-How successfully are stakeholders engaged in Raploch URC and what is the

relationship among the public sector agencies forming the umbrella company?

Explore the Processes underpinning the collaborative working undertaken by Raploch

URC

-How far are the objectives of all the partners aligned? Do organisational objectives

conflict with network objectives?

-What mechanisms underpin joint working in Raploch URC?

What problems have hampered a horizontal approach to the regeneration of the

Raploch?

-What problems relating particularly to coordination and control within Raploch

URC have arisen?

-Now that the Raploch Regeneration Project is in financial difficulty, who is

responsible for salvaging it?

3. The Emergence of Whole-of-Government Approaches to Public Service Management

Whole-of-government strategies have emerged to address complex problems which concern

multiple sectors and policy domains in a context of increasing pressure for greater efficiency.

Such strategies manifest themselves in a variety of different forms and must confront

particular challenges associated with working horizontally which did not exist under the

NPM-era which was dominated by single purpose organisations and autonomous,

disaggregated models (Christensen and Laegreid 2007) of service delivery.

In outlining the concept of whole of government approaches it is necessary to discuss the

several different terms and descriptions, which broadly correspond to this type of strategy,

featuring in the public management literature. As far as terms are concerned, authors talk

about “collaborative public management” (Agranoff & McGuire 2004; Rigg & O’Mahoney

2012; Geddes 2012; McGuire 2006; Bryson 2006) referring to a situation where public sector

partners and agents from other sectors work together and share expertise and resources

(Agranoff & McGuire 2004; McGuire 2006) and even operate within multi-organizational

formats (Geddes 2012) to fulfil their objectives. The terms joined-up government (Davies

2009; Bogdanor 2007; Hodges 2012) and whole-of-government (Humpage 2005; Christensen

and Laegreid 2007) allude more explicitly to cross-sector working and the unification of

distinct organizations behind a shared outcome. In the literature, the nature of whole-of-

government approaches are explained through an analysis of the forms that they take in their

implementation, the core elements underpinning such approaches and the different

accountability frameworks guiding “whole-of-government” initiatives. . In a more abstract

sense, “whole-of-government” public service designs could be viewed as networks of

organisations which are increasingly replacing market and hierarchical systems of the NPM-

era (Powell 1990 in Agranoff & McGuire (2004)). These networks can either be controlled

by a formal agreement or they may be organic in nature, whereby they have no legal base

(Agranoff 2006). These networks are operationalized through a variety of structures

characterised by different degrees of collaboration. Agranoff & McGuire (2006) identify

casual partnerships, alliances, committees and much more formal coalitions and consortia

and, similarly, Bryson (2006) suggests a spectrum of cross-sector collaboration, with

organisations that have a loose relationship with each other at one end of the spectrum and

organisations which amalgamate to form a single unit at the other – representing complete

collaboration. A mid-point between these two poles exists in which the sharing of

information, power and the formation of joint initiatives are found (Bryson 2006). This

understanding of a horizontal network of organisations through which power, resources and

responsibilities are distributed is core to the “Whole-of-Government” model.

Christensen & Laegreid (2007) consider the overarching conditions of this holistic vision of

public services to be the horizontal coordination of services, service integration, the

exploitation of synergies among the partners and the bringing together of stakeholders

operating within a particular policy domain. Primarily, overcoming boundaries delimiting

the scope of participating organisations (Hodges 2012; Bogdanor 2007; Ryan & Walsh 2004)

- be they departmental, sectorial or central-local government (Hodges 2012) - is necessary to

enable collaborative working. Ryan & Walsh (2004) advocate “boundary-spanning

leadership”, promoting fruitful relationships among the partners (through focusing on

common objectives for instance), as a means of facilitating cross-boundary working.

McGuire (2006) suggests harnessing the strengths and weaknesses of each sector – public,

private and not-for-profit – and strong leadership as important factors and (Geddes 2012)

likewise stresses the sharing of knowledge and resources among partners. Crucially,

horizontal accountability consisting of shared objectives and responsibilities (Hodges 2012;

Humpage 2005; McGuire 2006; Bryson 2006) unifies partner organisations towards a

common goal, thus aids in eliminating organisational boundaries. Although “whole-of-

government” approaches are implemented in a variety of ways, the underlying theme is the

alignment of diverse organisations behind a set of common objectives.

It is due to the increased focus on wicked problems that whole-of-government solutions have

become popular in countries like the UK. Wicked problems have been particularly targeted

by the government of Tony Blair and are intractable social problems which are embedded in

communities (Bogdanor 2007; Humpage 2005) and include issues such as social exclusion,

drugs, alcohol and crime (Bogdanor 2005). These problems involve activities, behaviours

and cultures which are interrelated and, thus, necessitate organisations working laterally to

develop more radical, innovative solutions (Ling 2002) Clearly, problems of such complexity

and breadth do not respond to departmentalised interventions (Ross et al 2011; Bogdanor

2005) where policy and funding silos hamper innovation (Humpage 2005). Aside from

wicked problems, other pressures have led to the adoption of “whole-of-government”

approaches in the public sector. Crosby and Bryson (2005) discuss the economic challenges

caused by budget cuts and the “hollowing out of government” as a major trigger. They claim

that, in light of these financial difficulties, there is a greater need to bring in the private and

not-for-profit sectors to assist the public sector in delivering interventions more efficiently

using creative business models. Meeting rising expectations is also a driver of these new

approaches, with demands for integrated, “seamless services” (Humpage 2005; Christensen

and Laegreid 2007) in contrast to the flaws of the NPM-era which was dominated by the

fragmentation of service delivery. As a result of this fragmentation, the direction,

coordination and accountability of public services were compromised and, to counteract this,

the role of the centre in providing strategic direction, must be reaffirmed (Christensen and

Laegreid 2007). Arguably, the emergence of “whole-of-government” approaches to public

service management represents a new paradigm that may replace New Public Management.

Despite the potential which “whole-of-government” programmes demonstrate, the results are

often disappointing, with benefits often proving elusive and initiatives experiencing

substantial difficulties (Rigg & Mahoney 2012). Frequently, perceptions of partnership

among agencies involved differ and, as a result, previous “silo” mentalities endure and the

desire to avoid conflict among stakeholders means that these divergent perceptions are never

tackled (Davies 2009). These silo mentalities are caused in part by the institutional context of

the collaboration (Rigg & Mahoney 2012). The behaviour of members in joint initiatives is

determined by the organisation of which they were originally part and its management

systems (Rigg & Mahoney 2012) and participants from central government agencies

participating in local projects are particularly susceptible to being influenced in this manner

(Rigg & Mahoney 2012). O’Leary & Vij (2012) discuss the complications involved in

networks consisting of many individuals and organisations. They highlight conflicts between

organizational missions and the missions of the network leading to competing priorities.

Moreover, they mention the effect of different cultures and ways of operating which impact

on the functioning of the network and also power imbalances among members which hinder

collaborative efforts. A fundamental aspect of whole of government is ensuring that

accountability frameworks are appropriate. It is evident that the vertical accountability

frameworks which existed under previous regimes are incompatible with horizontally-

managed service delivery (Ryan & Walsh 2004; Hodges 2012). Effectively, there is a need

to not just reconcile accountability to central government with local objectives (Ling 2002)

but to also establish how responsibilities for outcomes should be shared among the partners

(Wilkins 2002). The need to balance central government strategy with responsiveness to

local needs is especially important in urban regeneration according to Dodds (2011) and joint

accountability structures must permit this balance to be reached. Whole-of-government”

commands a different set of competencies and, arguably, a radical cultural change in order to

succeed.

4.Study Design

This study employs a case study research design which is particularly appropriate for

exploratory studies which seek to answer “how” and “why” questions and in situations where

the phenomena of interest cannot be separated from the context in which they are situated

(Yin 2009). Clearly, this project is exploratory in that it seeks to deconstruct the relevant

processes at play within Raploch Urban Regeneration Company. Contextual factors, such as

the political and economic climate clearly have a major influence on the direction of urban

regeneration projects and therefore should be considered in this study.

There are three main purposes of case study strategies: generating theory, testing theory or

providing description (Eisenhardt 1989) and this research will use the case study data to test

theory and provide description through analysing how a whole-of-government strategy has

been implemented in reality, in this particular context of a regeneration project. Ultimately,

through this empirical work, findings emerge which provide useful insights for policy makers

interested both in “whole-of-government” public management strategies and urban

regeneration.

A case study strategy requires more than one data source (Yin 2009) and in this project the

two data sources were unstructured interviews with individuals involved in Raploch Urban

Regeneration Company and documents relating to the regeneration project and, therefore, the

method is qualitative in nature. The case study information is augmented by the possibility of

autoethnographic constributions based on Telford’s experience within the regeneration

project as the director of volunteer stakeholder organisation and Ball’s experience within the

local political scene.

As the introduction describes, the authors’ ‘insider’ links to the research subjects both

generated the interest to conduct this study and assisted in their ability to conduct empirical

research. It is believed that this has many advantages to access and insight. There remains,

however, the question of partiality and ethics. It is hoped that openness and transparency will

mitigate the potential for bias and that the discussion of this and the potential use of

autoethnographic methods within a range of other qualitative methods will form an integrated

and robust approach (Anderson 2006; Coffey 1999; Holt 2003).

5. Data Collected

The empirical data consisting of interviews and documents is summarised below:

Interviews with two elected representatives involved in the regeneration, one who

had participated from its inception and another who had more recent experience with

the URC.

Interviews with two employees of Stirling Council, two employees of the URC and

four employees Scottish Government agencies (National Health Service (NHS),

Scottish Enterprise, Communities Scotland and someone responsible for securing EU

support and funding)

Documents from Raploch URC. These included strategy documents, reports and

documents published online.

6.1. Case Study Analysis

Thematic coding, whereby data is classified according to recurring themes (Miles 1979) was

used to analyse both the interviews transcripts and the documents. Codes emerged both from

the literature and initial description of the content of the transcripts and the documents.

These codes were refined into the following broad categories:

Central government direction combined with local responsiveness within Raploch

URC,

The degree of alignment of public sector agencies forming Raploch URC

The URC whole-of-government approach and innovation

Frustrations hampering the whole-of-government regeneration project within Raploch

URC

6.2. Central government direction combined with local responsiveness within Raploch

URC

From the literature, it is argued that whole-of-government strategies reaffirm the role of the

centre in the delivery of public services to overcome the fragmentation and loss of control,

seen during the NPM-era (Christensen and Laegreid 2007). The Urban Regeneration

Company structure appears to enable the channelling of central government influence over

the regeneration project’s priorities. Respondent B said that the Scottish government awards

URC status (which allows access to central government funding of £15 million), so retains

significant degree of control over URC goals. Indeed, the respondent claimed that the

Scottish Government made the URC "jump through hoops" to obtain accreditation. It can be

seen, from document B, that Scottish Government strategic priorities of social justice,

community empowerment, sustainability, economic development, modernisation of

construction and care in the community feature in the business plan for the regeneration. The

power that the Scottish Government has to accredit and award funding to URCs allows it

leverage over the direction of regeneration projects and this is consistent with the whole-of-

government strategy of central oversight.

The Scottish Executive could have become a full member of the URC board and, according

to a government consultation on URCs, this would have boosted the credentials of the URC

among private sector developers and permitted risk sharing – where the Scottish Executive

would have adopted a share of the risk in exchange for the possibility of financial return,

should the URC make a profit. The Scottish Executive, however, did not become a full

member and this is perhaps a missed opportunity to deliver a true “whole-of-government”

regeneration project where central government, as one unit, has direct representation and

control within the URC.

Although the URC has accountability to central government aims, it must reconcile this with

being attentive to local needs - this is a requirement of the “whole-of-government”

philosophy (Ling 2002). In the Raploch regeneration, the community is empowered and

directly contributes to the decisions of the URC. A local umbrella organisation, Raploch

Community Partnership (RCP), regrouping the diverse community groups in the Raploch, is a

member of the board of the URC, and, through this membership, the community has direct

participation in the development of the regeneration project. However, the practice was more

difficult to implement, particularly as funding for both organisations became increasingly

uncertain. The URC delivered training to RCP delegates to the board but the high turnover of

these community representatives coupled with the demands on them as lay individuals did

not result in great success or inclusion of the community in decision making. Subsequently

(even if Telford says himself) considerable attempts have been made by the chairs of both

boards to make progress but funding and political uncertainties remain. That the URC is

based locally and adopts a limited company structure which has a board that can

accommodate community representation makes the regeneration project more accessible in

theory but in practice it is considerably more difficult.

6.3. The degree of alignment of public sector agencies forming Raploch URC

“Whole-of-Government” strategies necessitate the alignment of the goals of participating

public sector agencies and the removal of organisational boundaries (Christensen and

Laegreid 2007; Bryson 2006; McGuire 2006) in order to be successful. Strategy documents

had criticised the “silo mentality” that which had hindered previous regeneration projects in

the Raploch, with document H stating that:

“…the separate and uncoordinated structures had inhibited joint working.”

Overcoming these silos through bringing together bodies with different objectives was the

goal of the URC stressed respondent A. Structures, such as a Board on which the different

public agencies had a seat and a members’ agreement establishing a system of governance

among the partners to ensure the delivery of the business plan, discussed in document D,

formalised joint working within the URC. Ultimately, this was supposed to be conducive to

forming a common mission and a more coordinated regeneration project.

Aligning the systems of the partner public sector agencies within the URC was not always

straightforward. For example, the NHS was hesitant about whether it could become a formal

member of the URC board, according to respondent G and document C, or whether it would

have to manage its engagement with the URC through "contractual controls" (document C).

The URC is a essentially a joint-entity made up of public sector partner organisations and this

new form of organisation conflicted with the traditional procedures and culture of certain

partners, such as the NHS.

Although the design of the URC facilitated the alignment of partner organisations, there were

still instances of the systems of public partners being incompatible with this arrangement of

joint working where different agencies were united in a not-for-profit limited company.

6.4. Innovation

Whole- of-Government should lead to more innovative approaches to wicked problems and

also offer solutions to difficult issues inherent within regeneration projects. According to

{{136 Christensen,T. 2007}}, “whole-of-government” strategies should give rise to synergies

among participating agencies.

Bringing the partners together within the Urban Regeneration Company led to synergies in

terms of competencies and resources. The idea was that the components of the regeneration

project should be integrated, so that “the benefit to the area is greater than the sum of the

parts”, according to document B. Delivering the project as a multi-faceted regeneration effort

would add greater value, since many of the problems at the heart of the deprivation are inter-

dependent. There is an acceptance that previous regeneration efforts had been focused on

“single issues” (document B) and had failed to break the “cycle of deprivation” (document I)

and the URC was a means of bringing stakeholders together to devise more holistic and novel

solutions to enduring, “wicked” problems. Synergies of resources aided the delivery of an

ambitious masterplan and, according to respondent E, the public bodies

“….worked together to maximise the land available….”

The most striking example of this maximisation of available land was the transfer of council-

owned land in the Raploch to the NHS for the development of a Health Centre (document D),

dealing with the health side of the regeneration. Through working in the URC, opportunities

for pooling resources for the overall value of the regeneration were identified. However,

many of these have remained unexploited and the NHS pulled out of the project to centralise

its services elsewhere in the local authority area. NHS land in Raploch is now being sold for

development which is not included in the local master plan. The NHS’s refusal to engage in

the URC structure then its ultimate action of selling land for development has undermined the

URC’s work.

Process innovation in terms of the delivery of the regeneration project emerged under the

URC “whole-of-government” approach with document E mentioning:

“…innovative solutions to legal, funding, taxation, procurement and business

issues that arise in regeneration projects…”

This can be seen especially in relation to procurement where there was an acknowledgment

that new procurement processes would be required to manage private sector investment and

enable the delivery of “complementary aspects” of the regeneration (document B). The fact

that each public sector agency was included in the five bid evaluation teams (which assessed

community benefit, innovation, finance, technical and legal aspects which the private sector

provider should deliver) meant that the diverse priorities of the public agencies were reflected

in all dimensions of the bid evaluation and that a wide range of perspectives influenced the

evaluation. Naturally, this would lead to innovation in integrating additional elements into

the contracts.

Innovation in tackling wicked problems was reflected in synergies both in competencies and

resources and also improvements to processes and this led to more holistic strategies and this

corresponds to the ideals of the “whole-of-government” philosophy.

6.5. Frustrations hampering the whole-of-government approach to the Raploch

Regeneration Project

As has been discussed before, the implementation of “whole-of-government” strategies can

encounter difficulties and do not always meet expectations as (Rigg & Mahoney 2012) has

highlighted.

The “rubbing of boundaries” among stakeholder s was identified by respondent E as a

problem within the URC arrangement. The respondent alluded specifically to the conflict

between the responsibilities of traditional council services (i.e. community services) and the

specific activities of the URC in Raploch. Obviously the URC organises specific and

targeted projects in the areas of social work and community services which exist in tandem

with those run by the traditional departments of the council. Misunderstanding of the roles

and responsibilities of the URC in relation to the traditional council departments may lead to

confused and incoherent service provision. Moreover, mission conflict between the goals of

individual partner organisations forming the URC and the common mission of the URC was

observed. For example, respondent E gave the example of the NHS which was eager for

more resources to be allocated to health within the project, however, greater resources for

health would be at the cost of another key element of the project – housing, for instance.

Partner public sector organisations have their own departmental interest which they are eager

to pursue within the URC and it is still difficult for them to distance themselves from this

interest and have a wider perspective on the project as required by a whole-of-government

strategy. From this evidence, it can be seen that the collaborative approach of Raploch URC

was weakened by organisational boundaries relating primarily to a too limited understanding

of responsibilities on the part of the partner agencies.

Distance between the Raploch regeneration project and its dominant public sector partner,

namely Stirling Council resulted from the formation of this arms-length Urban Regeneration

Company. Council workers who had not been selected for prestigious (and lucrative)

secondment to the URC felt a certain sense of resentment and this hampered relations

between the two bodies, according to respondent G. Secondly, there was a lack of continuity

in terms of council officials who engaged with the URC, with respondent G claiming that

there was a long period of time where no one at the council took charge of what was

happening at the URC, stating that:

“It was only when things were going pear shaped that the people started getting

interested at the council”

This distance between the council and the arms-length body of the URC meant that the

project could more easily deviate off course, as the strongest public sector stakeholder is not

following developments as closely as desirable.

Although structures like the URC are argued to minimise the negative effects of political

interference, there is also the potential, as has been seen in Raploch, for important public

sector stakeholders such as local authorities to lose oversight over the direction of “whole-of-

government” projects and this can have serious consequences.

As a result of volatile economic and political conditions, the Raploch Regeneration project

currently faces major difficulties and the URC’s finances are strained. Since the financing of

the regeneration project was, to a large degree, dependent on the proceeds of house sales, the

dramatic housing market collapse has delayed the building of new housing and denied the

URC of funds for socio-economic regeneration work, according to respondent G. Naturally,

the private developer will only build if there is a realistic prospect of profit from sales, so the

current low house prices leads to blockage. With reference to the impact of political changes,

a new administration in the council placed less importance on building social housing in the

Raploch area, according to respondent G, which further reduced investment and compounded

the difficulties of the URC. In addition, two of the original founding partners in the URC

(Scottish Enterprise Forth Valley and Communities Scotland) were dissolved by the Scottish

Government after 2007 and they were replaced sporadically on the Board of the URC

(respondent G). In light of this economic and political volatility affecting the URC, there is a

real question of which public sector actor takes ultimate responsibility for salvaging the URC

regeneration project – especially since many of the original partners no longer exist. In a

“whole-of-government” project, especially one that uses a special vehicle for its

implementation, this issue of ownership can be complicated.

Overall, the endurance of organisational boundaries observed within the URC concurs with

the literature on the difficulties of whole-of-government strategies. However, challenges

specific to the Raploch regeneration extend beyond this – issues of control and contingency if

problems arise are important.

7. Conclusions

This study explores the implementation of a whole-of-government regeneration project by

Raploch Urban Regeneration Company – a joint entity consisting of a group of public sector

partners and in so doing examines certain links between the theory surrounding whole- of-

government and practice. A principal contribution of this paper is that it focuses on a new

context for whole-of-government, namely urban regeneration efforts. Regeneration is

suitable context for such a coordinated approach from the public sector because of the lack of

response of deprivation to “single issue” initiatives, as discussed in section 6.4. Raploch

URC furthers holistic solutions in facilitating synergies among partner agencies and process

innovation.

Secondly, this paper goes further in highlighting the problems which whole-of-government

initiatives can confront. Aside from challenges to do with organisational boundaries and

accountability, the dangers of loss of control and the contingencies if such programmes enter

crisis are discussed in section 6.5. Given the volatility in which Raploch URC has operated,

it presents an excellent case for examining these complexities affecting collaborative public

management efforts.

Moreover, the processes at work within a collaborative public management setting are

uncovered in this research and explanations are advanced as to how these processes impact

on: innovation, alignment and the reconciliation of central government influence and local

responsiveness throughout sections 6.1 to 6.4. The mechanics of “whole-of-government” are

discussed as opposed to concentrating on the rationale behind such initiatives and their

outcomes.

It is important to state the limitations that are inherent in this research. The study is location-

specific, examining the dynamics within one country, namely Scotland, and this weakens the

applicability of its findings to other locations with different political and economic contexts.

In addition, the focus is one URC and this limits the scope of the project – analysis of other

URCs would benefit the case study. Finally, there are methodological weaknesses, such as

the fact that interviewees and documents were selected on a convenience basis and the

analysis was impressionistic and thus susceptible to the subjectivity of the interviewees.

However, all interviewees had a strong connection with the URC, so their integrity is rather

strong and this counteracts this weakness.

As regards the implications of this work, for the research community, it offers insights into

how collaborative management strategies are implemented. For practitioners working in

regeneration, this research presents a new perspective on how public sector organisations can

organise themselves to address complex, cross-cutting problems and also highlights potential

areas of difficulty in whole-of-government settings.

6153 words

References

Agranoff, A. & McGuire, M. 2004, Collaborative Public Management: New Strategies for

Local Government, 1st edn, Georgetown University Press, Georgetown.

Agranoff, R. 2006, "Inside Collaborative Networks: Ten Lessons for Public Managers",

Public administration review, vol. 66, pp. 56-65.

Anderson, L. 2006, "Analytic Ethnography", Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol. 35,

no. August, pp. 371-372.

Bogdanor, V. (ed) 2005, Joined-Up Government, 1st edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Bryson, J.M. 2006, "The Design and Implementation of Cross-Sector Collaborations:

Propositions from the Literature", Public administration review, vol. 66, no. Supplement s1,

pp. 44-55.

Christensen, T. & Laegreid, P. 2007, "The Whole-of-Government Approach to Public Sector

Reform", Public administration review, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 1059-1066.

Coffey, A. 1999, The Ethnographic Self: Fieldwork and the Representation of Identity.,

Thousand Oaks, London.

Companies House 2013, , Incorporation and Names [Homepage of Companies House],

[Online]. Available: http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gp1.shtml [2013,

13/01/].

Crosby, B. & Bryson, J. 2005, "A leadership framework for cross-sector collaboration",

Public Management Review, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 177-201.

DAVIES, J.S. 2009, "The Limits of Joined-Up Government: Towards a Political Analysis",

Public Administration, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 80-96.

Dodds, S. 2011, Government Urban Regeneration Practice: Review of UK Evidence,

Communities Analytical Services, Scottish Government, Edinburgh.

Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989, "Building Theories from Case Study Research", Academy of

Management Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532-550.

Geddes, L. 2012, "In Search of Collaborative Public Management", Public Management

Review, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-20.

Hodges, R. 2012, "Joined-Up Government and the Challenges to Accounting and

Accountability Researchers", Financial Accountability & Management, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 26-

51.

Holt, N.L. 2003, "Representation, Legitimation, and Autoethnography: An Autoethnographic

Writing Story", International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 18-28.

Humpage, L. 2005, "Experimenting with a "whole of government": Indigenous Capacity

Building in New Zealand and Australia", Policy Studies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 47-66.

Jones, P. & Evans, J. 2008, Urban Regeneration in the UK, 1st edn, Sage, London.

Kettl, D.F. 2006, "Managing Boundaries in American Administration: The Collaboration

Imperative", Public administration review, vol. 66, pp. 10-19.

Ling, T. 2002, "Delivering joined–up government in the UK: dimensions, issues and

problems", Public Administration, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 615-642.

McGuire, M. 2006, "Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We Know and How

We Know It", Public administration review, vol. 66, pp. 33-43.

Miles, M.B. 1979, "Qualitative Data as an Attractive Nuisance: The Problem of Analysis",

Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 590-601.

Morse, R.S. 2010, "Bill Gibson and the Art of Leading Across Boundaries", Public

administration review, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 434-442.

O‘Leary, R., Gerard, C. & Bingham, L.B. 2006, "Introduction to the Symposium on

Collaborative Public Management", Public administration review, vol. 66, pp. 6-9.

O’Leary, R. & Vij, N. 2012, "Collaborative Public Management: Where Have We Been and

Where Are We Going?", American Review of Public Administration, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 507-

522.

Raploch Urban Regeneration Company 2004, Raploch Urban Regeneration Company Ltd

Business Plan, Raploch Urban Regeneration Company, Stirling.

Rigg, C. & O'Mahoney, N. 2012, "Frustrations in Collaborative Working", Public

Management Review, vol. 0, no. 0, pp. 1-26.

Robertson, D., Smith, J. & McIntosh, I. 2008, "The Raploch: A history, people's perceptions

and the likely future of a problem housing estate.", Architectural Heritage, vol. 19, pp. 83-97.

Ross, S., Frere, M., Healey, L. & Humphreys, C. 2011, "A Whole of Government Strategy

for Family Violence Reform", Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 70, no. 2, pp.

131-142.

Ryan, C. & Walsh, P. 2004, "Collaboration of Public Sector Agencies: Reporting and

Accountability Challenges.", International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. 17,

no. 7, pp. 621-631.

Scottish Government 2013, , Urban Regeneration Companies [Homepage of Scottish

Government], [Online]. Available: Urban Regeneration Companies [2013, 13/01].

Shiel, L. & Smith-Milne, D. 2007, Best Practice in Establishing Urban Regeneration in

Scotland, The Scottish Government, Edinburgh.

Stirling Council 2003, Stirling by Numbers: 2001 Census Results, Stirling Council Area

[Online].Available:http://www.stirling.gov.uk/documents/chief-executive-office/chief-

executive-office/research/stirlingcouncilprofile.pdf [2013, 07/03].

Sullivan, H. & Skelcher, C. 2002, Working Across Boundaries: Collaboration in Public

Services, 1st edn, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

The Scottish Government 2009, , Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation [Homepage of The

Scottish Government], [Online]. Available: http://simd.scotland.gov.uk/Stirling/Raploch

[2012, 19/10].

Wilkins, P. 2002, "Accountability and Joined-up Government", Australian Journal of Public

Administration, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 114.

Yin, R.K. 2009, Case Study Research Design and Methods, 5th edn, Sage, London.