CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84Political Theory and DemocracyPublic Policy and Administration ResearchLocal Governance and Planning

Power, participation, and political renewal: theoretical perspectives on public participation under New Labour in Britain

Open access
Barnes, M.·2004·Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society
DOI 10.1093/sp/jxh034
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article discusses the contribution of a study of public participation in two English cities to the theorization of the relationship between policy context and local action, the conceptualization of “publics” who get involved, and the micropolitics of deliberation within participative forums. It addresses these issues within the particular context provided by the discourses of the New Labour government in the United Kingdom but relates this to broader theorization of the way institutional rules and norms shape access, agenda setting, and modes of deliberation, of the mobilization of collective action within social movements, and of the relationship between styles of exchange and the legitimation of contributions to a process of citizen/official dialogue.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sp/jxh034

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Barnes et al. argued that representativeness in providing perspectives was achieved by merit of the lay representative's personal experience, particular characteristics or links with other networks.

    “As argued by Barnes et al., 178 representativeness in providing perspectives was achieved by merit of the lay representative's personal experience, particular characteristics (e.g.being an older person) or links with other networks (e.g.representatives from local or national charities).”

    From ReseArch with Patient and Public invOlvement: a RealisT evaluation – the RAPPORT study (2015) · cites this paper as [178]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Barnes, M.
Affiliations
University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Barnes, M.
Venue
Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2004-09-01
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
267-279
ISSN
  • 1072-4745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2893
DOI
10.1093/sp/jxh034
OpenAlex
W2142226417
Cited by
84
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
23.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Social Politics International Studies in Gender State & Society (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
  • UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Local Governance and Planning
Keywords
citizen participation, New Labour, publics, agenda setting, collective action, social movements, legitimation, power and participation, political renewal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review