Introduction
With approximately 10,100 residents, Ordsall is one of the smallest of 20 total wards within the city of Salford by population (ONS, 2021). Located in the east of the city, shown in Figure 1 (see Appendix), the ward borders neighbouring city Manchester as well as the newly regenerated Salford Quays (Salford City Council, 2022). This Ordsall community, to whom this briefing is addressed, are united by location and therefore place-based policy and governance across time. Drawing upon theory from geographer David Harvey (1989), this briefing claims that challenges facing this community stem from a city-wide transition from a managerial to entrepreneurial governance strategy. Focus is given to Ordsall residents as, in being within close proximity to a site of significant regeneration such as Salford Quays, it is speculated that this community is more acutely exposed to governance-manifested processes of exclusion.
To fairly offer recommendations to this community, considering the challenges faced within the broader context of their urban environment, it is important to first assess suitability for the author’s doing so in terms of preconceived knowledge and wider positionality (England, 1994). Although not a member of the Ordsall community, through having family reside in Salford and visiting Ordsall and Salford Quays on numerous occasions, there is great awareness of the city dynamic. Therefore, whilst the approach to a study of challenges facing Ordsall residents and subsequent formulation of a set of community-level recommendations cannot be entirely objective, first-hand experience of the city provides the alternative benefit of facilitating a more informed evaluation of whether recommendations could be both feasible and implementable.
In addressing positionality, it is also appropriate to outline and justify the ontological and theoretical lenses utilised within this briefing – in simpler terms, what the urban is and how we can understand it respectively – as they largely influence the challenges identified and recommendations offered to the Ordsall community. What constitutes a just and sustainable city varies across stakeholder groups (Williams, 2009); a commonality in ontological outlook between Ordsall residents aligns with Castree et al.’s (2013) definition of community as “a grouping of people” with “a common set of customs and shared circumstances”, and is hence why the community level is appropriate for this report and in ventures towards urban sustainability. In line with critical urban theory (Brenner, 2012), the common problems identified within this briefing as faced by Ordsall residents are perceived to have stemmed from a broader shift to entrepreneurialism through a pervasive neoliberal growth agenda (Harvey, 1989). The marginalisation of Ordsall residents and subordination of their needs aligns with Lefebvre’s notion of varying “readings” of a city (Lefebvre, 1996 in Edensor, 2005, p. 4), and further parallels can be drawn between this and the interpersonal subjectivities in experience associated with standpoint theory (Castree et al., 2013). It is hoped that through recognising and utilising this lens, an urban power imbalance can be best acknowledged, and recommendations offered which can feasibly counteract representational disparities.
Following this introduction, the briefing outlines the historical context upon which Salford and the Ordsall community have been built and shaped, before detailing challenges faced by this community and how these are evidenced on the ground. Recommendations are then offered in response to these challenges to be adopted by the community to foster a more just and sustainable urban environment.
Challenges
The overarching challenge for the Ordsall community, this briefing argues, is that a transition from managerial to entrepreneurial governance across Salford during the last half-century has had a disproportionately exclusionary impact on the ward’s longstanding residents (Harvey, 1989). Understanding this assertion first requires a historical understanding of the exogenous forces which have brought about this shift in governance strategy:
Salford is one of several recognisable UK post-industrial cities, Liverpool being another example within northwest England (Killick, 2019). Managerial approaches to governance dominated in the city until the 1970s, oriented more towards Keynesian economics of welfare and fairer distribution of resources across a city’s population (MacLeod, 2011 in Black, 2015). However, a decline of Salford’s industrial base culminated in closure of the docks in 1982, creating a window of widespread unemployment and worsened deprivation; unemployment reached 32% in Ordsall during 1985 (Henderson et al., 2007). In response to this industrial decline Salford was remarkably quick to adopt a neoliberal approach to remaking the city (Black, 2015), mirroring regeneration strategies visible in other infrastructurally-similar areas such as London’s Docklands (Henderson et al., 2007). This means that the role the city was expected to play on the national stage had shifted to become growth-focused and tailored to privatisation. Importantly, an element of competition was introduced to obtaining investment, with government funding allocated to areas demonstrating the highest prospective returns (Black, 2015; Christophers, 2008). A performative aspect to regeneration was thus introduced over pursuit of greater city-wide equality; grand infrastructural development superseded poverty reduction efforts which would have made a less significant imprint on the national development stage (Black, 2015).
The incremental regeneration of Salford Quays is a clear exemplification of this, including the relocation of MediaCity to the site in 2011 (Black, 2015). Similar to how neoliberalism expected accumulated wealth to ‘trickle down’ to lower social groups, it was hoped that this regeneration would raise aspirations of local communities and eventually provide new employment opportunity (Jeffery and Jackson, 2012). However, reduced social provision in line with the neoliberal agenda unsurprisingly prevented any heightened ambition from being mobilised, with less than 1% of Salford residents who applied for a new job being successful (Carter, 2012). This redistribution of investment was therefore almost unanimously detrimental towards more deprived communities and residential groups such as those found within Ordsall, and – paired with austerity cuts to welfare provision and increased residential exclusion via gentrification – acted to perpetually exacerbate intra-city socioeconomic inequalities (Levitas, 2012). It is these widening socioeconomic inequalities which pose greatest challenge to the Ordsall community, manifested in several ways as evidenced below.
Index of Multiple Deprivation
The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) is a composite measure of relative deprivation, utilising seven domains of deprivation to calculate a single value for comparison across local areas (Penney, 2019). The Index is particularly useful for exemplifying how the change in governance outlined above has manifested as exacerbated inequality on the ground for several reasons. Firstly, the high spatial resolution of the Index – the Lower Layer Super Output Area (LSOA) level – allows both inter- and intra-ward disparities to be viewed within the wider city, meaning the indicator can reveal cross-scalar evidence of spatial exclusion (CDRC, 2022). Calculation of a single relative value additionally bypasses the complexity of considering each domain of the indicator in isolation, also indirectly appreciating how the socioeconomic aspects of an individual or community’s lifestyle intersect and therefore cumulatively influence lived experience. Figure 2 shows spatial variation in IMD decile within Ordsall and compared to neighbouring Salford Quays (IMD, 2019 in CDRC, 2022). The map highlights a stark difference in overall deprivation level between Salford Quays and Ordsall in 2019, with a transition from least to most deprived decile as you travel eastwards between the two wards. Interestingly, the boundary into the most deprived decile region corresponds closely with Ordsall’s ward boundary shown in Figure 1 (Salford City Council, 2022), highlighting clear geographical ward-level disparity, and therefore again supporting identification of Ordsall’s population as a group with some feature of commonality as required by the community definition stated earlier (Castree et al., 2013).
Housing
A second way in which the shift to entrepreneurial governance has manifested and posed challenge to the Ordsall community is through emerging inequalities in housing provision, tenure, and affordability. 809 additional affordable homes are required each year to meet Salford’s growing demands, yet current annual provision sits at around 280 homes for the entire city (Salford City Council, n.d.). Too much new housing is unaffordable, and some longstanding Ordsall residents have been priced out of property by gentrification processes associated with influx of young, skilled individuals (Jeffery and Jackson, 2012). Figure 3 highlights spatial variations in housing and service accessibility in 2019, showing – alongside other areas surrounding the Quays – another disproportionate impact on the Ordsall community (IMD, 2019 in CDRC, 2022).
Census data also reveals stark variation between Ordsall and the Quays regarding housing tenure, despite the wards being adjacent (ONS, 2021). The proportion of the community social renting in Ordsall was 36% in 2021, compared to 6% for Salford Quays and a national average of 17.1%, indicating much greater demand for affordable property within Ordsall (ONS, 2021). Between 2011 and 2021, however, private renting increased by 8% in Salford – the third highest rate in the UK (ONS, 2023). This evidence collectively implies that housing provision under entrepreneurial governance has failed to cater for the needs of the Ordsall community.
Personal Exclusion
Another key consideration is how these spatial differences are experienced at the personal level within the Ordsall community, and to what extent these spatial differences in housing and overall deprivation promote individual feelings of exclusion. Resident testimony via a BBC Radio show focusing on recent residential developments within Ordsall revealed that while longstanding residents have experienced improvement in the overall safety and security of their local area, this is to the detriment of a sense of belonging and integration into the wider city (You and Yours, 2022). One Ordsall resident testified that the city has become “a space where people don’t feel welcome”, noting how “the dual carriageway is often seen as a barrier between the two communities” (You and Yours, 2022). The dual carriageway in question separates Ordsall and Salford Quays, exemplifying how positioning of developmental infrastructure has become a further physical manifestation of the sense of othering promoted by regeneration practices. Further to this, community involvement in regeneration has been low, with focus dedicated to private investment almost entirely at the expense of wider public participation (Henderson et al., 2007). An entrepreneurial governance strategy can therefore be further labelled as unjust towards the Ordsall community due to resulting obstructions towards individual participation in democratic decision-making (Black, 2015). This interpretation again ties to Lefebvre’s writing on “readings” of a city (1996 in Edensor, 2005, p. 4), with power imbalances allowing some development aspirations to dominate over others – clearly observable in the case of Salford where a neoliberal reading via a select group has been allowed to take hold and pervasively control regeneration. This additionally draws on Black’s (2015, p. 26) notion of “foreclosure”, in which continued perpetuation of the entrepreneurial narrative by a small number of individuals etches a single development pathway with corresponding foreclosure of alternative interests.
Despite limitations in how many variables could be covered within the scope of this briefing, the above examination of spatial disparities in overall deprivation, housing tenure and feelings of inclusion emphasise differential treatment between wards. There is a strong indication that this social fragmentation stems from socially and spatially selective economic investment, with heavily funded areas such as Salford Quays consistently outperforming wards such as Ordsall where investment is more absent.
Recommendations
Through a shift in governance strategy the needs of the Ordsall community have become subordinated to the economic ambitions of the wider city, and – as outlined above – this has become increasingly evident on the ground through ward-level disparities in relative deprivation, housing provision and diminishing feelings of belonging and community cohesion. It is therefore essential that any recommendations offered to the community reflect this backdrop of differential treatment and seek to broaden public participation in relevant decision-making.
Recognition of this need to re-mobilise the voices of marginalised groups for solutions to be effective is far from novel. In commenting on distributional justice, Harvey draws upon Rawls’ assertion that this justice can only be achieved if “the advantages of the most fortunate promote the well-being of the least fortunate” (Rawls, 1969 in Harvey, 2009, p. 109). However, in the case of Ordsall this has largely failed as Salford’s socioeconomic returns on investment have not disseminated to the more deprived communities in much the same way that notions of trickle-down economics have been seen to fail elsewhere (Peck, 2005 in Christophers, 2008). This analysis implies that in an entrepreneurial urban system obsessed primarily with economic growth, recommendations towards reaching a more egalitarian society for the benefit of marginalised communities must deviate away from the economic dimension of development as far as tangible. Harvey then raises the argument for amplifying the voices of the more impoverished, to the extent that their approval becomes a prerequisite for decision-making (2009). Although unrealistic to aspire towards a complete societal rebalancing of power, inspiration can be taken from this broader theory to provide means for public participation for an otherwise disregarded community such as Ordsall.
Tackling Deprivation
The first recommendations in this briefing focus primarily on the economic domain of deprivation, seeking to encourage members of the Ordsall community to join, expand and create groups akin to the Salford Poverty Truth Commission (PTC) (Co-operative Councils Innovation Network, 2023). The commission was formed entirely by Salford residents and instigated in 2016, adopting a coalition structure by including both citizens with lived experience of poverty alongside those in higher positions of authority (Co-operative Councils Innovation Network, 2023). The overarching aim of the PTC is to mobilise voices within an otherwise marginalised group by providing a platform for those living in poverty to express needs and concerns, thereby facilitating cross-sector collaboration between those facing a problem and those with more power to implement effective solutions (Co-operative Councils Innovation Network, 2023). The views of residents facing poverty have been expressed largely through creative means such as poetry or drama, a noteworthy observation given its similarity to modes of creative resistance to gentrification observed in other post-industrial cities such as Liverpool (Co-operative Councils Innovation Network, 2023; Killick, 2019). Furthermore, a common thread of creativity throughout urban theory – from capitalist creative destruction in the remaking of a city (Harvey, 2014 in Black, 2015), to the gentrifying influx of a creative class (Florida, 2002), to recent evidence of creative resistance from communities (Killick, 2019) – invokes a sense of a community re-empowering themselves in the face of an otherwise pervasive development agenda.
Additional political support has been offered towards the work of Salford’s PTC through engagement from both Mayor of Salford Paul Dennett and Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham (Church Action on Poverty, n.d.). It would be a further recommendation to the Ordsall community to engage with opportunity for political participation wherever possible. This could be through writing a letter to the local councillor or MP or, for longer-term engagement, following agendas from councillor meetings such as Salford’s monthly Housing/Regeneration Briefing (Salford City Council, 2023). This is particularly true given Salford and Greater Manchester’s enduring left-wing political landscape, as it would be expected that those in positions of political authority would be more responsive towards projects employed in pursuit of a more egalitarian society. It is these individuals who have the means to communicate the needs of Ordsall’s community on a regional or national stage – and any investment or support gained through this political channel will likely be better tailored to the needs of the community if the needs are raised by community members themselves in the first instance.
In response to questions over why cross-sector collaboration is so important in these recommendations for yielding impactful solutions, it can be argued that if a community were to act in isolation against broader governance, this would fail to acknowledge that it is a difference in perception of the city between stakeholders which has led to exacerbation of the problems faced by the community in the first place. This links back to my earlier mention of different “readings” of a city, with the PTC exemplifying where the differing power relations of stakeholders are acknowledged but then utilised to enact viable change (Lefebvre, 1996 in Edensor, 2005, p. 4). As similarly noted by Lydon, a linkage of top-down and bottom-up practices should act to enhance “social capital” and build “tactical resilience” in pursuit of urban sustainability and justice (2017, p. 290,285). This point on collaboration is also particularly true given feelings of othering and separation already experienced by the Ordsall community; working with those in positions of authority would ideally act to bridge this social gulf and enhance community cohesion and belonging.
Housing
Approaching the challenge of housing provision, despite Salford City Council openly acknowledging that their current supply of affordable housing is far from meeting the city’s ever-increasing requirements, there is a growing sense that recent removal of government-imposed regulations could empower the Council to make more substantial change in coming years (Salford City Council, n.d.). Funding obtained in 2019 has facilitated planned construction of 129 new council homes across three wards – 53 of which are within Ordsall (Salford City Council, n.d.). Dérive is a supplementary organisation set up in 2017, owned entirely by Salford City Council and aiming to provide “truly affordable homes” (Dérive Salford, 2023). Through the organisation plans are in place for 300 new homes within Ordsall, with over 50% envisaged as being affordable and a selection available for rental to match Ordsall’s dominant mode of tenure as outlined above (Dérive Salford, 2023). Paul Dennett – City Mayor of Salford – claims that these homes will provide for “future generations”, highlighting an intergenerational scope to considerations which marks a key tenet of sustainability thinking (Dérive Salford, 2023). Considering growing political momentum towards affordable housing provision, what recommendations would be prescribed to the current Ordsall community to ensure that plans are actualised?
With a substantial proportion of planned housing implementation taking place within Ordsall, it is a strong recommendation for the community at this early stage to ensure that their imminent housing needs and the council’s proposals are closely aligned – and if not, to voice their concerns as widely as possible. To a certain extent this engagement has been facilitated by Dérive, with a “drop-in session” held via an afternoon and evening timeslot where residents could engage with the envisaged plans and communicate with those in charge of developing them (Dérive Salford, 2023). A questionnaire has also been released which asks for residents’ opinions on the redevelopment overall, its layout, housing types and its contribution to wider ward regeneration (Dérive Salford, 2023). It is further recommended that residents who did not attend the September session respond to the questionnaire, as this could provide accessible means of restoring power within the community towards democratic engagement – a challenge identified earlier in the briefing. A statement of community involvement will then be produced which should add transparency and accountability to the planning process and therefore reassure residents that their thoughts have been adequately listened to and acted upon (Dérive Salford, 2023). This engagement should additionally broaden community awareness of changes expected within Ordsall, working towards improved community cohesion as different groups’ visions for the city continue to be materialised in various ways. It would be hoped that this could not only cater to the regeneration needs of the community, but allow entrepreneurially-oriented changes to be made without residents feeling marginalised or ignored.
Conclusion
Within this briefing, challenges faced by the community of Ordsall regarding overall deprivation, housing affordability and social cohesion were identified as products of a city-wide shift in governance strategy from managerial to entrepreneurial (Harvey, 1989). This transition has orientated focus towards the economic dimension of development – largely at the expense of longstanding residents – to create a profitable but highly unequal and fragmented urban landscape.
Recommendations were offered which would hope to amplify the residential “reading” of the city and therefore rebalance power relations in a way which will act to promote more sustainable and inclusive urban development (Lefebvre, 1996 in Edensor, 2005, p. 4). The briefing advocates for residential participation in decision-making wherever possible, alongside political engagement to hopefully promote the community’s needs beyond the boundaries of the city. Commonality across the recommendations given is seen through cross-sector collaboration and a cooperative sentiment, whereby the community is advised to work with those in authority rather than against them as a means of further improving community cohesion.
While each city is a unique product of its history, residents, infrastructure and governance, Salford is far from alone in its industrial heritage and profit-oriented regeneration agenda (Peck et al., 2013). Therefore, although this community briefing has been tailored to address Salford’s Ordsall community, it is hoped that the recommendations offered can be adapted and translated to other deprived wards within the city, or beyond to cities experiencing the similar adverse impacts of a neoliberal agenda. Overall, it is hoped that this briefing addresses a wider need for more just and inclusive regeneration practices across urban areas to progress towards achieving sustainable urban development.
Appendix
Figure 1: Map showing the ward boundary of Ordsall
Source: Salford City Council, 2022
Figure 2: Map showing IMD 2019 deciles for Ordsall and Salford Quays
Source: IMD, 2019 in CDRC, 2022
Figure 3: Map showing Housing IoD 2019 deciles for Ordsall and Salford Quays
Source: IMD, 2019 in CDRC, 2022
References
Black, A. C. (2015) Foreclosing Futures: A Case Study of Urban Regeneration in Central Salford, PhD thesis, York, University of York.
Brenner, N. (2012) ‘What is critical urban theory?’, in Brenner, N. Marcuse, P. and Mayer, M. (eds), Cities for People, Not for Profit, Oxon, Routledge, pp. 11-23.
Carter, H. (2012) ‘For long-suffering Salford, the joke isn’t funny any more’, The Guardian, 13 April 2012 [Online]. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/13/salford-media-city-bbc (Accessed 23 October 2023).
Castree, N., Kitchin, R. and Rogers, A. (2013) A Dictionary of Human Geography, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CDRC (2022) Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) [Online]. Available at https://data.cdrc.ac.uk/dataset/index-multiple-deprivation-imd (Accessed 24 October 2023).
Christophers, B. (2008) ‘The BBC, the creative class, and neoliberal urbanism in the north of England’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 2313-2329.
Church Action on Poverty (n.d.) Tackling poverty in Salford: An inspirational story [Online]. Available at https://www.church-poverty.org.uk/tackling-poverty-in-salford-an-inspirational-story/ (Accessed 16 October 2023).
Co-operative Councils Innovation Network (2023) Salford Poverty Truth Commission: How a new approach to tackling poverty is succeeding in Salford [Online], Salford, Co-operative Councils Innovation Network. Available at https://www.councils.coop/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Poverty-Poverty-Truth-Commission-Salford-Council.pdf (Accessed 16 October 2023).
Dérive Salford (2023) Dérive Salford [Online]. Available at https://www.derivesalford.co.uk/ (Accessed 16 October 2023).
Edensor, T. (2005) Industrial Ruins: Spaces, Aesthetics and Materiality, Oxford, Berg.
England, K. V. L. (1994) ‘Getting Personal: Reflexivity, Positionality, and Feminist Research’, The Professional Geographer, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 80-89.
Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class, New York, Basic Books.
Harvey, D. (1989) ‘From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism’, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 3-17.
Harvey, D. (2009) Social Justice and the City, Georgia, The University of Georgia Press.
Henderson, S., Bowlby, S. and Raco, M. (2007) ‘Refashioning Local Government and Inner-city Regeneration: The Salford Experience’, Urban Studies, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 1441-1463.
Jeffery, B. and Jackson, W. (2012) ‘The Pendleton Riot: a political sociology’, Criminal Justice Matters, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 18–20.
Killick, A. (2019) ‘Resisting the Creative Economy on Liverpool’s North Shore: Art-Based Political Communication in Practice’, Westminister Papers in Communication and Culture, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1-17.
Levitas, R. (2012) ‘The Just’s Umbrella: Austerity and the Big Society in Coalition policy and beyond’, Critical Social Policy, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 320-342.
Lydon, M. (2017) ‘Resilient Streets, Resilient Cities’, in Lerch, D. (ed) The Community Resilience Reader, Washington, Island Press, pp. 279-292.
ONS (2021) Build a custom area profile [Online]. Available at https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/customprofiles/build/ (Accessed 16 October 2023).
ONS (2023) How life has changed in Salford: Census 2021 [Online]. Available at https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/censusareachanges/E08000006/ (Accessed 16 October 2023).
Peck, J., Theodore, N. and Brenner, N. (2013) ‘Neoliberal Urbanism Redux?’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 1091-1099.
Penney, B. (2019) The English Indices of Deprivation [Online], London, Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d8e26f6ed915d5570c6cc55/IoD2019_Statistical_Release.pdf (Accessed 23 October 2023).
Salford City Council (2022) Ward profiles [Online]. Available at https://www.salford.gov.uk/people-communities-and-local-information/my-local-community/ward-profiles/ (Accessed 16 December 2023).
Salford City Council (2023) Browse meetings – Property / Regeneration Briefing [Online]. Available at https://sccdemocracy.salford.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=159 (Accessed 25 October 2023).
Salford City Council (n.d.) Delivering affordable housing [Online]. Available at https://www.salford.gov.uk/housing/delivering-affordable-housing/ (Accessed 16 October 2023).
Williams, K. (2009) ‘Sustainable cities: research and practice challenges’, International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, vol. 1, nos. 1-2, pp. 128-132.
You and Yours (2022) BBC Radio 4, 15 June [Online]. Available at https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00187x4 (Accessed 16 October 2023).