Between any scientific discovery relevant to a problem facing society, and the delivery of an effective policy solution, lies the no-man’s land of implementation uncertainty.
On 28th July 2014, I gave a talk at the University of Cambridge to a group of educational psychologists gathered at the ‘Implementing Implementation Science’ conference. The challenge, I explained, was about navigating through three sets of tricky issues:
* Being Scientific about Science
* Being Sensible about Public Policy
* Being Effective about Implementation
Here are my notes for the talk, addressing each of these key issues:
Being Scientific about Science
Rethinking our epistemological assumptions:
• What do we really know about science? Does it give us a picture of reality or a succession of hypotheses?
o Science as a system of standard procedures & indisputable proof
o Science as continuous with intuition & spiritual understanding
o Science as common sense, but whose common sense?
o Science as a revisable probabilistic & empirically checkable set of tools
• Degrees of predictability in different spheres of investigation. What is expected in anticipating the movement of planets or particles may not be an appropriate model for anticipating the changing behaviour or attitudes of people.
o Policy makers and the naïve model of scientific certainty
o Acceptable variations of predictability v. Unacceptable fluctuations of reliability
o Cause & effect of behavioural changes
• What are the criteria for replicability? The conditions for technological replication need to be adapted to the setting in question.
o Replicability in impact of physical clearance of harmful substance
o Replicability in impact of prescription of medication
o Replicability in impact of caring support
Being Sensible about Public Policy
Preparing for delivery obstacles:
• The challenge of managing political expectations: how implementation failures can simply be a case of ‘over-hyping’ or ‘under-selling’.
o The twin nightmare of setting criteria for evaluation forms AND agreeing what to put into the press release.
• Over-hyping what may be achieved is a recipe for disaster.
• Under-selling the actual value of a policy is self-defeating (for it will lead to under-investment).
• The problem of guiding delivery: there is no such thing as ‘pressing a button’ in initiating a social policy solution.
o Even the paradigm of rolling out an inoculation programme has proven to be problematic.
o Recipients of treatment/initiatives are not mindless subjects.
o And people who ‘deliver’ the solutions are not mere mechanisms – e.g., of sending out disempowered staff to tell the public about a public body’s commitment to empowerment.
• The need for patience and active learning: how lack of curiosity kills the policy mouse.
o Science’s key strength is its empirically-based revisability: e.g., when there are many variables, you have to learn from what actually happens – alley gate example and community safety.
o Community health projects: the need for relationships to build up in neighbourhoods.
o The financial regime stamps out cautious and responsible management of public funds (spend it or lose it syndrome – support for asset transfer).
Being Effective about Implementation
Promoting cooperative problem-solving in schools:
Research commissioned by the Carnegie UK Trust (& ALT) into the impact of student participation in schools and colleges found that :
o students were happier and felt more in control of their learning; while disruptive behaviour in class was reduced.
o it had the twin effect of teachers’ practice improving and students gaining in awareness of the learning process;
o enhanced skills of communication and competence as a learner;
• Communication is an integral part of policy delivery: if you’re too vague, delivery is lost in translation – E.g., more participation -> formal school council with no major decision, and no wider engagement with most pupils
• Training: People are partners, not tablets: you can’t just hand them out – E.g., restorative justice in schools: some heads claim they do it because they sit perpetrators and victims down to talk about it (BUT HOW is the key)
• Evolving Procedures (Observation changes quantum outcome, interaction generates social impact): E.g., implementing solution development rather than delivering solutions in participatory budgeting. You need wider engagement, proper sampling & explaining, effective facilitating, before the exercise can deliver priorities young people take ownership in.
Sunday, October 12, 2014
Saturday, September 13, 2014
‘Dystopia of the Powerful’ Novels
Introduction
Dystopian fiction provides a dramatic means to draw attention to what life may be like if power continues to be concentrated in an unaccountable few. The two widely acclaimed novels, Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, hold up a mirror to the dark arts of societal manipulation, political intrigues, and the dangers of becoming disempowered.
You can find out more about both novels (including the reviews from general readers as well as those involved in political education) as follows:
• For the satirical Whitehall through the Looking Glass, set in a technologically futuristic but otherwise realistic Whitehall (as only a long time insider can depict), where the government itself has been taken over by the Consortium, click on: Guide to Whitehall
• For the allegorical Kuan’s Wonderland, set in the mysterious world of Shiyan where a young boy has been forcibly transported to, and no one he encounters is what they appear to be, click on: Guide to Kuan
(The two novels can be read independently of each other, though they have plot and character connections)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Do we know who are accumulating power at our expense?
• What are the tricks used to get people to back those who will only exploit them?
• Why the longer we leave politics to the powerful, the worse things will get for us?
• What does it take to unmask and challenge those who want us to be completely powerless against them?
• Do we understand how people can be motivated by different ideals and concerns to unite around a common cause of ensuring none is too powerful to oppress others?
How to get hold of these novels
For Whitehall through the Looking Glass, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
For Kuan’s Wonderland, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
Options for further engagement
You can:
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share the novel(s) with others through a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the novel(s) as the basis for a class on promoting political reflections through dystopian fiction
The Equality Trust, for example, has chosen Kuan’s Wonderland as a key text for engaging young people in exploring the problem of inequality. See their Young Person’s Guide to Inequality (Stories Page), and the teaching aid to promote class discussion, which can be downloaded for free (but beware of spoilers) by clicking on: ‘A Novel Exploration of Inequality’
The WEA has used Kuan’s Wonderland as a basis to engage learners about the problem of inequality. See the WEA page.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, and the two probably best known dystopian novels – Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Huxley’s Brave New World – the following are also worth reading for their respective vision of how society could turn out if a powerful elite were allowed to accumulate wealth, government positions, and control over the media and the use of force:
• Atwood, M., The Handmaid’s Tale
• Bachman, R. (aka Stephen King), The Running Man
• Bradbury, R., Fahrenheit 451
• Lewis, S., It Can’t Happen Here
• London, J., The Iron Heel
• Moore, A., V for Vendetta
• Wyndham, J., The Chrysalids
Dystopian fiction provides a dramatic means to draw attention to what life may be like if power continues to be concentrated in an unaccountable few. The two widely acclaimed novels, Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, hold up a mirror to the dark arts of societal manipulation, political intrigues, and the dangers of becoming disempowered.
You can find out more about both novels (including the reviews from general readers as well as those involved in political education) as follows:
• For the satirical Whitehall through the Looking Glass, set in a technologically futuristic but otherwise realistic Whitehall (as only a long time insider can depict), where the government itself has been taken over by the Consortium, click on: Guide to Whitehall
• For the allegorical Kuan’s Wonderland, set in the mysterious world of Shiyan where a young boy has been forcibly transported to, and no one he encounters is what they appear to be, click on: Guide to Kuan
(The two novels can be read independently of each other, though they have plot and character connections)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Do we know who are accumulating power at our expense?
• What are the tricks used to get people to back those who will only exploit them?
• Why the longer we leave politics to the powerful, the worse things will get for us?
• What does it take to unmask and challenge those who want us to be completely powerless against them?
• Do we understand how people can be motivated by different ideals and concerns to unite around a common cause of ensuring none is too powerful to oppress others?
How to get hold of these novels
For Whitehall through the Looking Glass, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
For Kuan’s Wonderland, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
Options for further engagement
You can:
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share the novel(s) with others through a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the novel(s) as the basis for a class on promoting political reflections through dystopian fiction
The Equality Trust, for example, has chosen Kuan’s Wonderland as a key text for engaging young people in exploring the problem of inequality. See their Young Person’s Guide to Inequality (Stories Page), and the teaching aid to promote class discussion, which can be downloaded for free (but beware of spoilers) by clicking on: ‘A Novel Exploration of Inequality’
The WEA has used Kuan’s Wonderland as a basis to engage learners about the problem of inequality. See the WEA page.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, and the two probably best known dystopian novels – Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Huxley’s Brave New World – the following are also worth reading for their respective vision of how society could turn out if a powerful elite were allowed to accumulate wealth, government positions, and control over the media and the use of force:
• Atwood, M., The Handmaid’s Tale
• Bachman, R. (aka Stephen King), The Running Man
• Bradbury, R., Fahrenheit 451
• Lewis, S., It Can’t Happen Here
• London, J., The Iron Heel
• Moore, A., V for Vendetta
• Wyndham, J., The Chrysalids
Communitarians: an introduction
Who are the 'Communitarian' thinkers? How have their ideas developed over time? And what are the core elements of the cooperative gestalt they advocate as vital to the development of inclusive communities?.
The term ‘communitarian’ first came into usage in the 1840s to describe the approach to community building through cooperative education and organisation that was promoted by Robert Owen and his followers in Britain and America [Note 1].
Owenites maintained that people’s lives could be substantially improved if they interacted with one another in mutually supportive communities, rather than carrying on with exploitative arrangements, which benefited a powerful few at the expense of the majority. They pressed for experimental alternatives to be developed to test out how social arrangements could be reformed irrespective of what traditional beliefs might be invoked to defend the status quo. And they believed education held the key to giving people the skills, confidence and will to bring about new socio-economic structures and power relations.
By late 19th/early 20th century, Owenite communitarian ideas of egalitarian cooperation and democratic solidarity were emerging as key elements in the converging political visions of the New Liberals in Britain, progressives like Dewey and Croly in America, Durkheim in France, and social democrats in Germany and Scandinavia.
This communitarian ethos infused the New Deal, the founding of the NHS, and the political consensus for safeguarding the common good in the post-War years. But it was to come under severe attack from market individualists in the 1980s. The rise of the ‘New Right’ ideology of Thatcher and Reagan privileged the elite who were able to manipulate the market to help them accumulate ever-greater wealth and power at the expense of other people’s security and wellbeing.
Against this corrosive trend, in the 1990s a group of social and political theorists in Britain and America adopted ‘communitarian’ as the name for their shared philosophical outlook. In their writings [Note 2], both the relativist notion of supposing individuals should be left alone to act as they wish, and the authoritarian demand to impose the rigid order of hierarchical communities, are equally rejected. Instead arguments are put forward for enabling ordinary citizens and those in leadership positions to find ways to build and sustain a more inclusive form of community life, with the help of shared learning, deliberative dialogues and participatory forms of collective decision-making.
Reviving the cooperative-communitarian tradition, these writers exposed the threats of relentless marketisation and plutocratic politics, which were turning people into disempowered beings unable to overcome marginalisation and oppression. Their yardstick for assessing reform is whether it will help people relate to each other in mutually supportive and democratically cooperative ways in shaping their political governance, the enterprise in which they work, their living conditions and environment, and any organisation that may impact on their lives. The development of the cooperative gestalt they promoted is to be guided by three principles:
The three key communitarian principles
First, the principle of cooperative enquiry requires anyone making an assertion to be judged with reference to the extent to which informed participants deliberating under conditions of thoughtful and uncoerced exchanges would concur. Any provisional consensus reached by one group of individuals must in turn be open to possible revisions. The ultimate strength of any truth claim rests with the likelihood of that claim surviving the critical deliberations of ever expanding communities of enquirers.
Secondly, the principle of mutual responsibility requires all members of any community to take responsibility for enabling each other to pursue those values that stand up to the test of reciprocity. What an individual may value cannot expect to command the respect from others if its pursuit is incompatible with the realisation of goals valued by others. The range of mutual responsibilities may cover the provision of protection and support for all who would otherwise be vulnerable.
Thirdly, the principle of citizen participation requires that all those affected by any given power structure are able to participate as equal citizens in determining how the power in question is to be exercised. All those subject to potentially binding commands should be entitled to learn about, review, and determine how to reform decision-making processes. This applies to not only government institutions, but also businesses, schools and community organisations.
The communitarian reform agenda
The form of community life favoured by communitarians is that which progressively evolves in the direction recommended by these principles. It follows that modern corporations as much as traditional communities must change to enable people to interact in far more cooperative and mutually respectful ways. It means that social cohesion is not to be secured from rigid homogeneity, but from the cultivation of common values that thrive on moral sensitivity and cultural diversity. It will challenge those who seek to construct a distorted sense of identity out of the ‘superiority’ they imagine they possess over those who are traditionally discriminated against. And far from focusing on just one’s own nation, or one’s neighbourhood community, it supports the authentic quest for a richer sense of belonging to a multiplicity of communities, and to the building of mutual support and cooperative relations across borders when that is essential in the age of globalisation.
--
Note 1:
Although some writers have combined praise for their idealised form of ‘community’ with reactionary defence of outmoded traditions and hierarchies, none of them has used the term ‘communitarian’ to describe themselves, for the understandable reason that the term is actually associated with the progressive philosophy espoused by a long line of thinkers. The term has been regarded in some quarters as having ‘anti-liberal’ connotation solely because in the 1980s, it was used by academic commentators as a generic label for an otherwise diverse group of thinkers (Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Michael Sandel, and Michael Walzer) who had one thing in common: they all penned criticisms of John Rawls’ liberal philosophy because it treated people as unencumbered selves without reference to their relationships to their communities. All these writers rejected the categorisation of them as ‘communitarians’, and apart from MacIntyre, their wider writings showed that they were not against liberal ideas in general, only particular formulations of them.
Note 2:
Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001).
Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Tam, H. (1998). Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Tam, H. (Ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Tam, H. (2011). ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, in Forum for promoting 3-19 comprehensive education, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
--
For more information, see the guide to Henry Tam’s Communitarianism.
The term ‘communitarian’ first came into usage in the 1840s to describe the approach to community building through cooperative education and organisation that was promoted by Robert Owen and his followers in Britain and America [Note 1].
Owenites maintained that people’s lives could be substantially improved if they interacted with one another in mutually supportive communities, rather than carrying on with exploitative arrangements, which benefited a powerful few at the expense of the majority. They pressed for experimental alternatives to be developed to test out how social arrangements could be reformed irrespective of what traditional beliefs might be invoked to defend the status quo. And they believed education held the key to giving people the skills, confidence and will to bring about new socio-economic structures and power relations.
By late 19th/early 20th century, Owenite communitarian ideas of egalitarian cooperation and democratic solidarity were emerging as key elements in the converging political visions of the New Liberals in Britain, progressives like Dewey and Croly in America, Durkheim in France, and social democrats in Germany and Scandinavia.
This communitarian ethos infused the New Deal, the founding of the NHS, and the political consensus for safeguarding the common good in the post-War years. But it was to come under severe attack from market individualists in the 1980s. The rise of the ‘New Right’ ideology of Thatcher and Reagan privileged the elite who were able to manipulate the market to help them accumulate ever-greater wealth and power at the expense of other people’s security and wellbeing.
Against this corrosive trend, in the 1990s a group of social and political theorists in Britain and America adopted ‘communitarian’ as the name for their shared philosophical outlook. In their writings [Note 2], both the relativist notion of supposing individuals should be left alone to act as they wish, and the authoritarian demand to impose the rigid order of hierarchical communities, are equally rejected. Instead arguments are put forward for enabling ordinary citizens and those in leadership positions to find ways to build and sustain a more inclusive form of community life, with the help of shared learning, deliberative dialogues and participatory forms of collective decision-making.
Reviving the cooperative-communitarian tradition, these writers exposed the threats of relentless marketisation and plutocratic politics, which were turning people into disempowered beings unable to overcome marginalisation and oppression. Their yardstick for assessing reform is whether it will help people relate to each other in mutually supportive and democratically cooperative ways in shaping their political governance, the enterprise in which they work, their living conditions and environment, and any organisation that may impact on their lives. The development of the cooperative gestalt they promoted is to be guided by three principles:
The three key communitarian principles
First, the principle of cooperative enquiry requires anyone making an assertion to be judged with reference to the extent to which informed participants deliberating under conditions of thoughtful and uncoerced exchanges would concur. Any provisional consensus reached by one group of individuals must in turn be open to possible revisions. The ultimate strength of any truth claim rests with the likelihood of that claim surviving the critical deliberations of ever expanding communities of enquirers.
Secondly, the principle of mutual responsibility requires all members of any community to take responsibility for enabling each other to pursue those values that stand up to the test of reciprocity. What an individual may value cannot expect to command the respect from others if its pursuit is incompatible with the realisation of goals valued by others. The range of mutual responsibilities may cover the provision of protection and support for all who would otherwise be vulnerable.
Thirdly, the principle of citizen participation requires that all those affected by any given power structure are able to participate as equal citizens in determining how the power in question is to be exercised. All those subject to potentially binding commands should be entitled to learn about, review, and determine how to reform decision-making processes. This applies to not only government institutions, but also businesses, schools and community organisations.
The communitarian reform agenda
The form of community life favoured by communitarians is that which progressively evolves in the direction recommended by these principles. It follows that modern corporations as much as traditional communities must change to enable people to interact in far more cooperative and mutually respectful ways. It means that social cohesion is not to be secured from rigid homogeneity, but from the cultivation of common values that thrive on moral sensitivity and cultural diversity. It will challenge those who seek to construct a distorted sense of identity out of the ‘superiority’ they imagine they possess over those who are traditionally discriminated against. And far from focusing on just one’s own nation, or one’s neighbourhood community, it supports the authentic quest for a richer sense of belonging to a multiplicity of communities, and to the building of mutual support and cooperative relations across borders when that is essential in the age of globalisation.
--
Note 1:
Although some writers have combined praise for their idealised form of ‘community’ with reactionary defence of outmoded traditions and hierarchies, none of them has used the term ‘communitarian’ to describe themselves, for the understandable reason that the term is actually associated with the progressive philosophy espoused by a long line of thinkers. The term has been regarded in some quarters as having ‘anti-liberal’ connotation solely because in the 1980s, it was used by academic commentators as a generic label for an otherwise diverse group of thinkers (Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Michael Sandel, and Michael Walzer) who had one thing in common: they all penned criticisms of John Rawls’ liberal philosophy because it treated people as unencumbered selves without reference to their relationships to their communities. All these writers rejected the categorisation of them as ‘communitarians’, and apart from MacIntyre, their wider writings showed that they were not against liberal ideas in general, only particular formulations of them.
Note 2:
Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001).
Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Tam, H. (1998). Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Tam, H. (Ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Tam, H. (2011). ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, in Forum for promoting 3-19 comprehensive education, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
--
For more information, see the guide to Henry Tam’s Communitarianism.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Climate Change: a philosophical debate
Climate Change: should science guide politics – or politics guide science?
A Day Conference and Colloquium arranged by the Philosophical Society of England (www.philsoc.co.uk)
Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London EC1V OHB.
Saturday, 11th October 2014, 10.30a.m. – 4.30 p.m.
Anthropogenic climate change has been described as one of the most serious problems facing the 21st century, yet public debate of the issue is plagued by uncertainty. What are the likely consequences and what costs would be involved in attempting to mitigate them? Science and mathematics are needed to test the empirical claims and to consider the questions they raise about risk assessment and probability. But, alongside the natural sciences, ethics, philosophy and the social sciences also have a crucial role to play.
PROGRAMME
10.30 a.m. Arrival and registration.
11.00 a.m. 'Cosmopolitan Ethics in the Anthropocene'
Michael Northcott, Professor of Ethics at the University of Edinburgh
Chair: Dr. Henry Tam
1 p.m. Lunch.
2 p.m. ‘Technology introductions in the context of decarbonisation: lessons from recent history’
Michael J Kelly, Professor of Technology, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge .
Chair: Professor Brenda Almond
3.45 p.m. Tea and opportunity for informal discussion
4.30 p.m. END OF CONFERENCE
Registration charge, including lunch and morning and afternoon tea or coffee, is £15.
Payment is required by October 1st 2014 but places can be reserved by sending a deposit of £5 to the Hon. Sec. at the address below. For conference enquiries please contact the Chair of the Society, Michael Bavidge: m.c.bavidge@newcastle.ac.uk. Cheques should be made out to ‘The Philosophical Society of England’ and sent to the Honorary Secretary of the Society Alan Brown, 9 Olney Court, Oxford OX14LZ.
Registered Charity No. 1140044.
A Day Conference and Colloquium arranged by the Philosophical Society of England (www.philsoc.co.uk)
Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London EC1V OHB.
Saturday, 11th October 2014, 10.30a.m. – 4.30 p.m.
Anthropogenic climate change has been described as one of the most serious problems facing the 21st century, yet public debate of the issue is plagued by uncertainty. What are the likely consequences and what costs would be involved in attempting to mitigate them? Science and mathematics are needed to test the empirical claims and to consider the questions they raise about risk assessment and probability. But, alongside the natural sciences, ethics, philosophy and the social sciences also have a crucial role to play.
PROGRAMME
10.30 a.m. Arrival and registration.
11.00 a.m. 'Cosmopolitan Ethics in the Anthropocene'
Michael Northcott, Professor of Ethics at the University of Edinburgh
Chair: Dr. Henry Tam
1 p.m. Lunch.
2 p.m. ‘Technology introductions in the context of decarbonisation: lessons from recent history’
Michael J Kelly, Professor of Technology, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge .
Chair: Professor Brenda Almond
3.45 p.m. Tea and opportunity for informal discussion
4.30 p.m. END OF CONFERENCE
Registration charge, including lunch and morning and afternoon tea or coffee, is £15.
Payment is required by October 1st 2014 but places can be reserved by sending a deposit of £5 to the Hon. Sec. at the address below. For conference enquiries please contact the Chair of the Society, Michael Bavidge: m.c.bavidge@newcastle.ac.uk. Cheques should be made out to ‘The Philosophical Society of England’ and sent to the Honorary Secretary of the Society Alan Brown, 9 Olney Court, Oxford OX14LZ.
Registered Charity No. 1140044.
Friday, August 22, 2014
Communitarianism: democracy & cooperation
Introduction
No political theory is uncontested. The ‘Question the Powerful’ project adopts as its premise the progressive position advocated by communitarians, civic republicans, and deliberative democrats – namely, that collective power should be exercised in accordance with the informed deliberations of all who are affected by that power to cultivate shared values and secure their common wellbeing. This position and its policy implications for education, business & employment, citizen protection, community development, and the role of government are set out in Henry Tam’s Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship, which was nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order, and widely praised by reviewers:
• “The book is an excellent statement of the communitarian approach to politics and citizenship.” - Desmond King, Professor of Politics, University of Oxford (Times Higher Education Supplement).
• “Philosophically and social-scientifically literate, Tam's mind is a galaxy of bright ideas, at once general and pragmatically specific.” - Tony Skillen, University of Kent (Radical Philosophy).
• “Tam … writes with clarity and conviction. A 'must' for all who care not only about communitarianism, but about community and indeed a good society.” - Amitai Etzioni, Professor of Sociology, George Washington University (Responsive Community).
• “The great strength of Tam's book is that he not only offers a clear conceptual framework for communitarianism … but also a practical agenda for how theory can be translated into action in schools, workplaces and the voluntary sector.” - Iain Byrne, University of Essex (Citizen).
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Why democracy cannot function without the deliberative engagement of citizens?
• What common values can be cultivated despite the differences in beliefs and customs?
• What are the key principles for guiding policy development to build more inclusive communities?
• How can the conflicting demands in society be constructively reconciled without making any unjust concession?
• In response to criticisms that communitarian democracy is either too idealistic/demanding or complacent/ineffectual, what are the counter-arguments?
How to get hold of the resources
You can order Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (paperback or hardback) from most high street or online bookstores. There are often cheap second hand copies available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
Macmillan Palgrave is currently considering bringing out an e-version of the book.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Communitarianism with others through a political forum or a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the book as the basis for a series of lessons on policy ideas that ought to be reflected in political priorities
Supplementary Texts
You can find out more about the communitarian approach by reading:
• 'Communitarians: an introduction' (2014): a guide to communitarian writers and their ideas.
• 'The Radical Communitarian Synthesis' (2014): a short historical account of the evolution of communitarian thought.
• ‘Cooperative & Communitarian: a common heritage’ (2012): a short piece on the common social and intellectual roots of the cooperative movement and communitarian critique of society.
Other works by key communitarian advocates for democracy:
• Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
• Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
• Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001, see below).
• Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
• Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
• Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. Henry Holt & Co. (For an excellent exposition of Dewey’s ideas, see Campbell, J., (1995). Understanding John Dewey. Open Court; and Ryan, A., (1955). John Dewey and the high tide of American Liberalism. WW Norton & Co.)
• Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
• Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Many leading communitarian thinkers such as Bellah and Selznick contributed to Tam, H. (ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
It is available (hardback/paperback) in bookshops and online bookstores.
No political theory is uncontested. The ‘Question the Powerful’ project adopts as its premise the progressive position advocated by communitarians, civic republicans, and deliberative democrats – namely, that collective power should be exercised in accordance with the informed deliberations of all who are affected by that power to cultivate shared values and secure their common wellbeing. This position and its policy implications for education, business & employment, citizen protection, community development, and the role of government are set out in Henry Tam’s Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship, which was nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order, and widely praised by reviewers:
• “The book is an excellent statement of the communitarian approach to politics and citizenship.” - Desmond King, Professor of Politics, University of Oxford (Times Higher Education Supplement).
• “Philosophically and social-scientifically literate, Tam's mind is a galaxy of bright ideas, at once general and pragmatically specific.” - Tony Skillen, University of Kent (Radical Philosophy).
• “Tam … writes with clarity and conviction. A 'must' for all who care not only about communitarianism, but about community and indeed a good society.” - Amitai Etzioni, Professor of Sociology, George Washington University (Responsive Community).
• “The great strength of Tam's book is that he not only offers a clear conceptual framework for communitarianism … but also a practical agenda for how theory can be translated into action in schools, workplaces and the voluntary sector.” - Iain Byrne, University of Essex (Citizen).
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Why democracy cannot function without the deliberative engagement of citizens?
• What common values can be cultivated despite the differences in beliefs and customs?
• What are the key principles for guiding policy development to build more inclusive communities?
• How can the conflicting demands in society be constructively reconciled without making any unjust concession?
• In response to criticisms that communitarian democracy is either too idealistic/demanding or complacent/ineffectual, what are the counter-arguments?
How to get hold of the resources
You can order Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (paperback or hardback) from most high street or online bookstores. There are often cheap second hand copies available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
Macmillan Palgrave is currently considering bringing out an e-version of the book.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Communitarianism with others through a political forum or a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the book as the basis for a series of lessons on policy ideas that ought to be reflected in political priorities
Supplementary Texts
You can find out more about the communitarian approach by reading:
• 'Communitarians: an introduction' (2014): a guide to communitarian writers and their ideas.
• 'The Radical Communitarian Synthesis' (2014): a short historical account of the evolution of communitarian thought.
• ‘Cooperative & Communitarian: a common heritage’ (2012): a short piece on the common social and intellectual roots of the cooperative movement and communitarian critique of society.
Other works by key communitarian advocates for democracy:
• Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
• Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
• Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001, see below).
• Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
• Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
• Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. Henry Holt & Co. (For an excellent exposition of Dewey’s ideas, see Campbell, J., (1995). Understanding John Dewey. Open Court; and Ryan, A., (1955). John Dewey and the high tide of American Liberalism. WW Norton & Co.)
• Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
• Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Many leading communitarian thinkers such as Bellah and Selznick contributed to Tam, H. (ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
It is available (hardback/paperback) in bookshops and online bookstores.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
The Radical Communitarian Synthesis
For a long time people were presented with an apparent dilemma. In small, primitive communities, human beings cooperated broadly as equals – learning through their pooled experience, sharing out fairly what they hunted and gathered, and expecting no one to treat others as their unquestioning subordinates. By contrast, in large, advanced communities, an esoteric elite (based on their priestly or financial engineering expertise) will tell others how society must be run; a minority will prosper while the majority will labour hard for much less; and those with vast concentrations of resources will dictate terms to others.
The choice was supposed to be limited to reverting to primitive equality and a life of basics, or accepting complex hierarchies, which are inseparable from wider provisions and social polarisation. With the exception of the Athenians in Greece and the Mohists in China, both of whom challenged exploitative power structures in the 5th/4th centuries BC, the history of social development encountered no new thinking on how to steer clear of both unenviable options for another two thousand years until the 17th century.
Three strands of thought emerged in the 16th/17th centuries that pointed to a new form of progressive social organisation that had inclusive cooperation at its heart. One key strand came from Francis Bacon (1561-1626), whose ideas revolutionised the conception of knowledge. For Bacon, knowledge was not something that only a few could access through some unfathomable means. In fact, if someone claimed to have discovered any truth but no one else could possibly cross-check its reliability, that was best taken as a sign that foolishness or trickery was at play. Instead, the advancement of knowledge was a cooperative enterprise in which enquirers should be able to obtain and examine empirical evidence through open exchanges, and the believability of any claim would rest on how it coped with scrutiny and experimentation. No doctrine, no text, no individual was to be immune from critical questioning and the demands for evidence. Bacon’s followers founded the Royal Society, which became a model institution for demonstrating of how knowledge claims were to be tested, refined or where appropriate, refuted. This approach was to spread to the development of natural and social sciences.
Then there were the moralists from Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648) to Quakers such as George Fox (1624-1691) and William Penn (1644-1791), who developed ethical ideas that echoed the vision set out by Thomas More (1478-1535) in his book, Utopia: an alternative to the divisive and unequal society that had become the norm. They applied the core injunction of loving thy neighbour as thyself, to the modern, commercial society. Unlike the Diggers who sought to revert to a primitive form of agricultural existence, the Quakers injected the ethics of equal respect for all into business management. Penn himself took this approach forward in organising the territories he inherited in America that later came to be known as Pennsylvania – where uniquely in those colonial days Native Americans were treated as equals.
Last but not least, the 17th century also witnessed James Harrington’s (1611-1677) Oceana and the Levellers’ advocacy for a large-scale redistribution of power. While earlier thinkers sympathetic to civic republicanism have tended to look nostalgically back at small city-states as where power could realistically be shared amongst all citizens, Harrington and the Levellers proposed remaking the whole of England into a democracy – Harrington recognised the need to distribute land to underpin the equalisation of power, and the Levellers rejected wealth as a barrier to having an equal vote. In the context of the English Revolution, these ideas heralded a movement for radical democratisation that continued despite the later restoration of the monarchy.
Although these three strands of thought each initiated a new push against the barriers to a more cooperative form of life, they remained largely separate currents until the 19th century. By the mid-1800s, for example, Owenite supporters not only advocated the development of cooperative work communities where productivity was not held back but enhanced by the equal respect accorded to all members, they were also amongst the backers of Edwin Chadwick and other public health champions who applied empirical evidence to drive forward sanitation reforms, and many were involved with the Chartist and emerging trades union movements to press for an extensive redistribution of power in society. The three currents were beginning to show signs of merging into one set of demands for epistemological, socio-economic, and political transformation.
In the 20th century these three strands finally came to be synthesised into a unified philosophy. Initially during the early 1900s the communitarian ideas of thinkers such as Dewey, Hobhouse, Durkheim, and Croly, set out an alternative vision for how society should be continuously improved by collaborative empirical research, incorporation of social objectives in all organisational development, and the empowerment of citizens through a democratic state. Then in late 20th/early 21st century communitarian advocates such as Selznick, Boswell, Bellah, and Tam argued for extensive educational, socio-economic, and political reforms to bring about the conditions necessary to support human cooperation in all domains. These reforms require the embedding of cooperative enquiry, mutual responsibility, and citizen participation in every organisational structure and culture. They call for the systematic inculcation of the cooperative gestalt through lifelong learning; the development of robust institutions where mutual security and prosperity can be inclusively advanced; and the radical redistribution of power to close the widening gap between the powerful and the rest.
What the radical communitarian synthesis has produced is an integrated set of prescriptions to revive mutuality in human interactions in a way that will, far from retreating from modernity, secure greater progress in innovation, diversity and our common wellbeing. With their help, private, public and voluntary organisations will be continuously reminded as to what changes they need to make to become more attuned to cooperative working, at the local, national and global levels.
[For more on radical communitarian ideas, see ‘Communitarianism’, and 'Communitarians: an introduction'. See also ‘Cooperation Denial’, for an outline of the radical communitarian critique of the opposition to cooperative interactions.]
The choice was supposed to be limited to reverting to primitive equality and a life of basics, or accepting complex hierarchies, which are inseparable from wider provisions and social polarisation. With the exception of the Athenians in Greece and the Mohists in China, both of whom challenged exploitative power structures in the 5th/4th centuries BC, the history of social development encountered no new thinking on how to steer clear of both unenviable options for another two thousand years until the 17th century.
Three strands of thought emerged in the 16th/17th centuries that pointed to a new form of progressive social organisation that had inclusive cooperation at its heart. One key strand came from Francis Bacon (1561-1626), whose ideas revolutionised the conception of knowledge. For Bacon, knowledge was not something that only a few could access through some unfathomable means. In fact, if someone claimed to have discovered any truth but no one else could possibly cross-check its reliability, that was best taken as a sign that foolishness or trickery was at play. Instead, the advancement of knowledge was a cooperative enterprise in which enquirers should be able to obtain and examine empirical evidence through open exchanges, and the believability of any claim would rest on how it coped with scrutiny and experimentation. No doctrine, no text, no individual was to be immune from critical questioning and the demands for evidence. Bacon’s followers founded the Royal Society, which became a model institution for demonstrating of how knowledge claims were to be tested, refined or where appropriate, refuted. This approach was to spread to the development of natural and social sciences.
Then there were the moralists from Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648) to Quakers such as George Fox (1624-1691) and William Penn (1644-1791), who developed ethical ideas that echoed the vision set out by Thomas More (1478-1535) in his book, Utopia: an alternative to the divisive and unequal society that had become the norm. They applied the core injunction of loving thy neighbour as thyself, to the modern, commercial society. Unlike the Diggers who sought to revert to a primitive form of agricultural existence, the Quakers injected the ethics of equal respect for all into business management. Penn himself took this approach forward in organising the territories he inherited in America that later came to be known as Pennsylvania – where uniquely in those colonial days Native Americans were treated as equals.
Last but not least, the 17th century also witnessed James Harrington’s (1611-1677) Oceana and the Levellers’ advocacy for a large-scale redistribution of power. While earlier thinkers sympathetic to civic republicanism have tended to look nostalgically back at small city-states as where power could realistically be shared amongst all citizens, Harrington and the Levellers proposed remaking the whole of England into a democracy – Harrington recognised the need to distribute land to underpin the equalisation of power, and the Levellers rejected wealth as a barrier to having an equal vote. In the context of the English Revolution, these ideas heralded a movement for radical democratisation that continued despite the later restoration of the monarchy.
Although these three strands of thought each initiated a new push against the barriers to a more cooperative form of life, they remained largely separate currents until the 19th century. By the mid-1800s, for example, Owenite supporters not only advocated the development of cooperative work communities where productivity was not held back but enhanced by the equal respect accorded to all members, they were also amongst the backers of Edwin Chadwick and other public health champions who applied empirical evidence to drive forward sanitation reforms, and many were involved with the Chartist and emerging trades union movements to press for an extensive redistribution of power in society. The three currents were beginning to show signs of merging into one set of demands for epistemological, socio-economic, and political transformation.
In the 20th century these three strands finally came to be synthesised into a unified philosophy. Initially during the early 1900s the communitarian ideas of thinkers such as Dewey, Hobhouse, Durkheim, and Croly, set out an alternative vision for how society should be continuously improved by collaborative empirical research, incorporation of social objectives in all organisational development, and the empowerment of citizens through a democratic state. Then in late 20th/early 21st century communitarian advocates such as Selznick, Boswell, Bellah, and Tam argued for extensive educational, socio-economic, and political reforms to bring about the conditions necessary to support human cooperation in all domains. These reforms require the embedding of cooperative enquiry, mutual responsibility, and citizen participation in every organisational structure and culture. They call for the systematic inculcation of the cooperative gestalt through lifelong learning; the development of robust institutions where mutual security and prosperity can be inclusively advanced; and the radical redistribution of power to close the widening gap between the powerful and the rest.
What the radical communitarian synthesis has produced is an integrated set of prescriptions to revive mutuality in human interactions in a way that will, far from retreating from modernity, secure greater progress in innovation, diversity and our common wellbeing. With their help, private, public and voluntary organisations will be continuously reminded as to what changes they need to make to become more attuned to cooperative working, at the local, national and global levels.
[For more on radical communitarian ideas, see ‘Communitarianism’, and 'Communitarians: an introduction'. See also ‘Cooperation Denial’, for an outline of the radical communitarian critique of the opposition to cooperative interactions.]
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Henry Tam (biographical & bibliographical note)
Henry Tam leads the Question the Powerful political education project, which promotes awareness and application of the ideas set out in his publications, policy advice and public talks, to counter the dystopian threats of power inequalities.
His academic books and novels are concerned with exposing the dangers of allowing an elite to acquire too much power, and showing how cooperative communities can revive democracy. His widely acclaimed writings include: Communitarianism (a political treatise nominated by New York University Press for the for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order); Kuan’s Wonderland (a political fabe described by the president of the Independent Publishers Guild as “an unmissable page-turner”); Whitehall through the Looking Glass (“an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion” - Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister); and Against Power Inequalities (a global history praised by the Secretary-General of Cooperative UK as the work of “a master storyteller”). His essays appear regularly on ‘Question the Powerful’.
He is currently the Director of the University of Cambridge’s Forum for Youth Participation & Democracy. He is also Visiting Professor, Social Policy & Education, at Birkbeck, University of London; Fellow of the Globus Institute for Globalization and Sustainable Development, University of Tilburg (the Netherlands); and Chair of the Communitarian Forum, UK (1995-2000). He has been a guest speaker at many institutions, including: the University of Oxford; the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation (Harvard, USA); the Warsaw Institute of Sociology; the National School of Government; the London Business School; the BBC; Metropolitan Police Authority; Church Action on Poverty; and the South Place Ethical Society.
Between 2003 and 2010, he was the UK Government’s Head of Civil Renewal & Deputy Director for Community Empowerment, with lead responsibility on national policies for the involvement of citizens in shaping public decisions. The cross-government ‘Together We Can’ programme he developed was showcased at the 2008 international meeting of the Global Network of Government Innovators (USA). During 2010-2011 he was the UK’s Head of Race Equality. He has also been the Home Office’s Director for Community Safety & Regeneration (East of England); and Head of the Correctional Services Standards Unit. Prior to joining the senior civil service, he was the Deputy Chief Executive at St Edmundsbury Borough Council, where his work on democratic engagement won a Best Practice Award from the Prime Minister in 1999. In recognition of his success in introducing more effective engagement and communication approaches in the public sector, he was elected Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Marketing in 1993.
He read Philosophy, Politics & Economics at the Queen’s College, University of Oxford; and obtained his PhD in Philosophy from the University of Hong Kong.
List of Key Publications
• Against Power Inequalities: a history of the progressive struggle, (new edition) QTP: 2015.
• 'Communitarianism, sociology of', in International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Elsevier, 2015).
• ‘Let’s Talk About Democracy’ in nED (the network for Education & Democracy): (August 2014).
• ‘What would Whitehall be like in fifty years’ time?’ in Despatches, the Civil Service College newsletter (Vol.2 July 2014, p.2).
• ‘Whitehall through the Looking Glass: a novel exposé of corporate government’, published interview in Shout Out UK, 8 May, 2014).
• Whitehall through the Looking Glass (a novel). QTP: 2014.
• 'Communitarianism', in the Encyclopedia of Action Research (Sage Publications, 2014).
• 'Progressive Lifelong Learning: pros and cons', NIACE Journal, 'Adult Learning', winter, 2013.
• 'Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education’, Forum journal, Volume 55 Number 2 2013.
• 'The Curious Case of Chinese Politics in Britain’, The Orient (2013).
• 'When Plato met Potter’, Book Brunch (published 18 June 2013).
• 'Cooperative Problem-Solving: what it means in theory and practice', FYPD, University of Cambridge, 2013 (download article here). Polish version, 'Demokracja: lekcje kooperatywnego rozwiazywania problemow’, published in edukacja obywatelska w dziataniu, ed. by Kordasiewicz, A. & Sadura, P., (Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warsaw, 2013).
• Kuan's Wonderland (a novel). QTP: 2012.
• ‘Citizen Engagement and the Quest for Solidarity’, in After the Third Way: The Future of Social Democracy in Europe>, ed. by Olaf Cramme and Patrick Diamond (London, I.B. Tauris, 2012).
• ‘Democratic Participation and Learning Leadership’, published in Polish as ‘Szkola liderow’ in Partycypacja: przewodnik krytyki politycznej, ed. by Sadura, P. & Erbel, J. (Wydawnictwo Krytyki Politycznej, Warsaw, 2012).
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, Forum, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
• Komunitaryzm, (Polish translation of Communitarianism, by J Grygienc & A Szahaj), Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikolaja Kopernika, Torun 2011.
• ‘Through Thick & Thin: what does it really take for us to live together’, in Ethnicities, ed. by Dina Kiwan, Volume 11 Issue 3 September 2011.
• ‘The Big Con: reframing the state-society debate’, PPR Journal, Volume 18, Issue 1, March-May 2011.
• Against Power Inequalities: reflections on the struggle for inclusive communities, (original edition) Birkbeck, London University, 2010.
• ‘The Importance of Being a Citizen’, in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010).
• ‘Bringing up Citizens’ – review of Patrick Keeney’s Liberalism, Communitarianism & Education, in PROSPERO (Autumn issue, 2009).
• Review of White, S. and Leighton, D. (ed.) Building a Citizen Society: the emerging politics of republican democracy (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 2008) in RENEWAL (Vol. 17 No.2, Summer 2009).
• ‘Citizens’ Access to Power’, in County Beacon (the County Councils Network magazine) April 2008.
• ‘Power to the Citizen’, in VINE (the Voluntary Organisations’ Network North East newsletter) Summer 2008.
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• ‘The Hidden Barriers to Collaboration’ in The Collaborative State, ed. by Simon Parker and Niamh Gallagher, (London: Demos, 2007).
• ‘The Case for Progressive Solidarity’, in Identity, Ethnic Diversity & Community Cohesion, ed. by M. Wetherell, M. Lafleche & R. Berkeley, (London: Sage, 2007).
• ‘Communities in Control’, New Start (Volume 8, No. 345, 23 June 2006).
• ‘Civil Renewal & Diversity’, in Social Capital, Civil Renewal & Ethnic Diversity (Proceedings of a Runnymede Conference), 2005.
• ‘Live and Let Eat’, a review of Steven Lukes’ Liberals & Cannibals: The Implications of Diversity, in The Responsive Community, Spring/Summer 2004.
• Progressive Politics in the Global Age (ed.) (Cambridge: Polity, 2001).
• ‘What is the Third Way’, review of The Third Way and The Third Way and its Critics (by Anthony Giddens), for The Responsive Community. (Summer 2001).
• ‘The Community Roots of Citizenship’, in Citizens: Towards a Citizenship Culture, ed. by B. Crick (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2001).
• Review of Schools and Community: The Communitarian Agenda in Education (by James Arthur with Richard Bailey), for the Cambridge Journal of Education. (May 2000).
• 'Rediscovering British Communitarianism', The Responsive Community, (reprinted in the Co-op Commonweal) Spring, 1999.
• 'Time to take a stand: Communitarian Ideas and Third Way Politics', International Scope Review Vol 1, Issue 1, 1999.
• ‘Communitarian Ideas and Third Way Politics', Local Government Voice, July 1999.
• Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (Macmillan, 1998).
• Putting Citizens First, with John Stewart (Municipal Journal/SOLACE, 1997).
• Punishment, Excuses & Moral Development (ed.) (Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1996).
• 'Communitarianism and Citizens Empowerment', Local Government Policy Making, January 1996.
• 'Communitarianism and Humanism: The Need for a Citizens' Movement', The Ethical Record, February, 1996.
• 'Education and the Communitarian Movement', Journal for Pastoral Care in Education, September 1996.
• The Citizens Agenda (The White Horse Press 1995).
• 'Crime & Responsibility' in B. Almond (ed.) Introducing Applied Ethics (Blackwell's 1995).
• 'Enabling Structures' in D. Atkinson (ed.) Cities of Pride (Cassell 1995).
• 'Recognise Your Responsibilities', The Professional Manager, March 1995.
• 'The Real Communitarian Challenge', County News, May 1995.
• 'Towards a Communitarian Philosophy', Philosophy Today, May 1995.
• 'Communitarianism & the Co-operative Movement', The Co-op Commonweal, Issue 2 1995.
• 'Community Movement', Local Government Management, Autumn 1995.
• 'Take the Community Route to People Power', Local Government Chronicle (24/11/95).
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector (ed.) (Harlow: Longman, 1994).
• 'Empowerment: Too Big a Task?' The Professional Manager, March 1994.
• Citizenship Development: Towards an Organisational Model (LGMB 1994).
• Serving the Public: Customer Management in Local Government (Harlow: Longman 1993).
• 'Power to the People' Local Government Management Summer 1993.
• 'How Should We Live?' The Philosopher, October 1993.
• Responsibility & Personal Interactions: A Philosophical Study of the Criteria for Responsibility Ascriptions (Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).
His academic books and novels are concerned with exposing the dangers of allowing an elite to acquire too much power, and showing how cooperative communities can revive democracy. His widely acclaimed writings include: Communitarianism (a political treatise nominated by New York University Press for the for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order); Kuan’s Wonderland (a political fabe described by the president of the Independent Publishers Guild as “an unmissable page-turner”); Whitehall through the Looking Glass (“an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion” - Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister); and Against Power Inequalities (a global history praised by the Secretary-General of Cooperative UK as the work of “a master storyteller”). His essays appear regularly on ‘Question the Powerful’.
He is currently the Director of the University of Cambridge’s Forum for Youth Participation & Democracy. He is also Visiting Professor, Social Policy & Education, at Birkbeck, University of London; Fellow of the Globus Institute for Globalization and Sustainable Development, University of Tilburg (the Netherlands); and Chair of the Communitarian Forum, UK (1995-2000). He has been a guest speaker at many institutions, including: the University of Oxford; the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation (Harvard, USA); the Warsaw Institute of Sociology; the National School of Government; the London Business School; the BBC; Metropolitan Police Authority; Church Action on Poverty; and the South Place Ethical Society.
Between 2003 and 2010, he was the UK Government’s Head of Civil Renewal & Deputy Director for Community Empowerment, with lead responsibility on national policies for the involvement of citizens in shaping public decisions. The cross-government ‘Together We Can’ programme he developed was showcased at the 2008 international meeting of the Global Network of Government Innovators (USA). During 2010-2011 he was the UK’s Head of Race Equality. He has also been the Home Office’s Director for Community Safety & Regeneration (East of England); and Head of the Correctional Services Standards Unit. Prior to joining the senior civil service, he was the Deputy Chief Executive at St Edmundsbury Borough Council, where his work on democratic engagement won a Best Practice Award from the Prime Minister in 1999. In recognition of his success in introducing more effective engagement and communication approaches in the public sector, he was elected Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Marketing in 1993.
He read Philosophy, Politics & Economics at the Queen’s College, University of Oxford; and obtained his PhD in Philosophy from the University of Hong Kong.
List of Key Publications
• Against Power Inequalities: a history of the progressive struggle, (new edition) QTP: 2015.
• 'Communitarianism, sociology of', in International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Elsevier, 2015).
• ‘Let’s Talk About Democracy’ in nED (the network for Education & Democracy): (August 2014).
• ‘What would Whitehall be like in fifty years’ time?’ in Despatches, the Civil Service College newsletter (Vol.2 July 2014, p.2).
• ‘Whitehall through the Looking Glass: a novel exposé of corporate government’, published interview in Shout Out UK, 8 May, 2014).
• Whitehall through the Looking Glass (a novel). QTP: 2014.
• 'Communitarianism', in the Encyclopedia of Action Research (Sage Publications, 2014).
• 'Progressive Lifelong Learning: pros and cons', NIACE Journal, 'Adult Learning', winter, 2013.
• 'Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education’, Forum journal, Volume 55 Number 2 2013.
• 'The Curious Case of Chinese Politics in Britain’, The Orient (2013).
• 'When Plato met Potter’, Book Brunch (published 18 June 2013).
• 'Cooperative Problem-Solving: what it means in theory and practice', FYPD, University of Cambridge, 2013 (download article here). Polish version, 'Demokracja: lekcje kooperatywnego rozwiazywania problemow’, published in edukacja obywatelska w dziataniu, ed. by Kordasiewicz, A. & Sadura, P., (Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warsaw, 2013).
• Kuan's Wonderland (a novel). QTP: 2012.
• ‘Citizen Engagement and the Quest for Solidarity’, in After the Third Way: The Future of Social Democracy in Europe>, ed. by Olaf Cramme and Patrick Diamond (London, I.B. Tauris, 2012).
• ‘Democratic Participation and Learning Leadership’, published in Polish as ‘Szkola liderow’ in Partycypacja: przewodnik krytyki politycznej, ed. by Sadura, P. & Erbel, J. (Wydawnictwo Krytyki Politycznej, Warsaw, 2012).
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, Forum, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
• Komunitaryzm, (Polish translation of Communitarianism, by J Grygienc & A Szahaj), Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikolaja Kopernika, Torun 2011.
• ‘Through Thick & Thin: what does it really take for us to live together’, in Ethnicities, ed. by Dina Kiwan, Volume 11 Issue 3 September 2011.
• ‘The Big Con: reframing the state-society debate’, PPR Journal, Volume 18, Issue 1, March-May 2011.
• Against Power Inequalities: reflections on the struggle for inclusive communities, (original edition) Birkbeck, London University, 2010.
• ‘The Importance of Being a Citizen’, in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010).
• ‘Bringing up Citizens’ – review of Patrick Keeney’s Liberalism, Communitarianism & Education, in PROSPERO (Autumn issue, 2009).
• Review of White, S. and Leighton, D. (ed.) Building a Citizen Society: the emerging politics of republican democracy (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 2008) in RENEWAL (Vol. 17 No.2, Summer 2009).
• ‘Citizens’ Access to Power’, in County Beacon (the County Councils Network magazine) April 2008.
• ‘Power to the Citizen’, in VINE (the Voluntary Organisations’ Network North East newsletter) Summer 2008.
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• ‘The Hidden Barriers to Collaboration’ in The Collaborative State, ed. by Simon Parker and Niamh Gallagher, (London: Demos, 2007).
• ‘The Case for Progressive Solidarity’, in Identity, Ethnic Diversity & Community Cohesion, ed. by M. Wetherell, M. Lafleche & R. Berkeley, (London: Sage, 2007).
• ‘Communities in Control’, New Start (Volume 8, No. 345, 23 June 2006).
• ‘Civil Renewal & Diversity’, in Social Capital, Civil Renewal & Ethnic Diversity (Proceedings of a Runnymede Conference), 2005.
• ‘Live and Let Eat’, a review of Steven Lukes’ Liberals & Cannibals: The Implications of Diversity, in The Responsive Community, Spring/Summer 2004.
• Progressive Politics in the Global Age (ed.) (Cambridge: Polity, 2001).
• ‘What is the Third Way’, review of The Third Way and The Third Way and its Critics (by Anthony Giddens), for The Responsive Community. (Summer 2001).
• ‘The Community Roots of Citizenship’, in Citizens: Towards a Citizenship Culture, ed. by B. Crick (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2001).
• Review of Schools and Community: The Communitarian Agenda in Education (by James Arthur with Richard Bailey), for the Cambridge Journal of Education. (May 2000).
• 'Rediscovering British Communitarianism', The Responsive Community, (reprinted in the Co-op Commonweal) Spring, 1999.
• 'Time to take a stand: Communitarian Ideas and Third Way Politics', International Scope Review Vol 1, Issue 1, 1999.
• ‘Communitarian Ideas and Third Way Politics', Local Government Voice, July 1999.
• Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (Macmillan, 1998).
• Putting Citizens First, with John Stewart (Municipal Journal/SOLACE, 1997).
• Punishment, Excuses & Moral Development (ed.) (Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1996).
• 'Communitarianism and Citizens Empowerment', Local Government Policy Making, January 1996.
• 'Communitarianism and Humanism: The Need for a Citizens' Movement', The Ethical Record, February, 1996.
• 'Education and the Communitarian Movement', Journal for Pastoral Care in Education, September 1996.
• The Citizens Agenda (The White Horse Press 1995).
• 'Crime & Responsibility' in B. Almond (ed.) Introducing Applied Ethics (Blackwell's 1995).
• 'Enabling Structures' in D. Atkinson (ed.) Cities of Pride (Cassell 1995).
• 'Recognise Your Responsibilities', The Professional Manager, March 1995.
• 'The Real Communitarian Challenge', County News, May 1995.
• 'Towards a Communitarian Philosophy', Philosophy Today, May 1995.
• 'Communitarianism & the Co-operative Movement', The Co-op Commonweal, Issue 2 1995.
• 'Community Movement', Local Government Management, Autumn 1995.
• 'Take the Community Route to People Power', Local Government Chronicle (24/11/95).
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector (ed.) (Harlow: Longman, 1994).
• 'Empowerment: Too Big a Task?' The Professional Manager, March 1994.
• Citizenship Development: Towards an Organisational Model (LGMB 1994).
• Serving the Public: Customer Management in Local Government (Harlow: Longman 1993).
• 'Power to the People' Local Government Management Summer 1993.
• 'How Should We Live?' The Philosopher, October 1993.
• Responsibility & Personal Interactions: A Philosophical Study of the Criteria for Responsibility Ascriptions (Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)