Conference aim

Conference report

Programme

Workshop programme
Including
Full papers

Information

Eura

See paper in pdf

Welfare Policies and the Residents in Distressed Neighbourhoods. The Danish Example.

Paper presented at the Danish Building and Urban Research/EURA Conference: Area-based initiatives in contemporary urban policy – innovations in city governance, 17–19 May 2001, Gammel Dok, Copenhagen.
An earlier version of the paper was presented at the NSBB-forskerseminar, 28 – 29 September 2000, Vilvorde, Denmark.

Author: Anders Munk. Researcher, MA (soc.), Ph.D.
SOCIALFORSKNINGSINSTITUTTET
The National Danish Institute of Social Research.
Herluf Trolles Gade 11, DK - 1052 Copenhagen K.
Tel: +45 33 48 09 29. E-mail: anm@sfi.dk

Abstract

The intentions of the Urban Committee comprehensive program from 1994 – 1998 has been to reverse the negative developments and to improve the quality of life of the residents and attachment by creating social activities and networks. The development and the role of the space specific welfare policy in dis-stressing stressed neighbourhoods are discussed within the framework of local partnership and the residents experience of living in a distressed neighbourhood.

Welfare measures in neighbourhoods are a new method/tool for inclusion of marginalized groups that give some promise to the dis-stessing distressed neighbourhoods. The new partnerships may create new problems to the neighbourhoods. Also the low resident attachment gives dubious promise to arrest neighbourhood stress.

From urban renewal to comprehensive measures in distressed neighbourhoods

In a historical view public measures in distressed neighbourhoods have changed and this change is connected with a shift in the type of problems in many Western European countries and the US. Traditional problems in the inner cities were connected with overcrowding and illness related to bad housing standards and social problems. The focus has shifted from physical slum clearance approaches to area-based improvement policies designed to arrest social problems caused by concentrations of poverty, drug abuse etc. in the newer built social housing suburbs in Western Europe (Cars, 1991; Gale, 1990).

In many countries it has been recognised that a regeneration of the physical environment is not an adequate tool to solve social problems - a more comprehensive approach is necessary (Cars, 1991, Christiansen et al., 1993). The recognition of a connection between economic, physical and social dynamics has had an effect on the design of the measures (e.g. Skifter Andersen, 1995). The increased concentration of social problems in social housing neighbourhoods from the 60’ies – 80’ies has also been a political incentive to launch more comprehensive programs to combat distressed neighbourhoods. Indeed European countries like e.g. UK, Netherlands, France and Denmark as well as OECD countries have launched special programs to address area-based social exclusion (European Foundation, 1998; Parkinson, 1999).

The Danish national strategy to combat area-based problems

In the Danish case the area-based problems are caused by concentration of socially marginalised groups in certain urban neighbourhoods and in specific social housing estates. Crime, abuse, vandalism etc. are the major reasons why public measures are initiated to arrest the negative tendencies (Hummelgaard et al., 1997, Byudvalget, no. 1, 1994).

The Urban Committee program is the first comprehensive attempt to arrest social downgrading of distressed neighbourhoods. The program incorporated a legislative level on the practice of the repatriation law concernings refugees and foreign citizens (mainly from 3. World countries). On the inter-municipal level the action plan was directed towards an equalisation of the extra expenses incurred by the distressed neighbourhoods and integration activities for ethnic minorities and refugees. Also a regional housing tribunal for the inter-municipal distribution of refugees and ethnic minorities in the Copenhagen region was organised, but first realised in 1999 (January). Additionally a special grant to municipalities with distressed neighbourhoods was initiated in 1995. On the level of childcare and especially the school area, the program aimed at dispersing non-Danish speaking pupils between schools¹ (Byudvalget, 1995, Skifter Andersen, 1999).

1) The involved parties redefined this so that half of the projects were instead directed towards quality improvement of the education for bilingual children.

At the neighbourhood level the program included:

– Rent rebates to improve competition on the local housing market

– Grants to physical renovation of estates to improve the living environment

– Co-operation between the municipality, housing company, residents board and voluntary organisations

– Mobilising and building of social network

– Grants to initiate social and cultural activities and employ professional resident advisors.

– Integration of ethnic minorities

– Activities for youngsters

– Crime prevention

The list indicates that the Urban Committee action plan mainly aimed at the social and organisational fronts. This is, however, far from reality if one considers the resource allocation in the operation period 1994 – 1997 of the Urban Committee.² (Pedersen, 1999; Skifter Andersen 2000). Social initiatives in the period only constitute app. 6 per cent or DKK 580 million out of the Urban Committees total cost.

2) The second phase of the Urban Commission initiatives continue from 1998 – 2003.

The participating local areas (municipality and local housing organisation) made their own definition of a distressed neighbourhood. Their broad definition included estates with physical problems, environmental problems, high rent problems and social problems in varying constellations and various degrees. While this represent a context interpretation on the meaning distressed it also led to a dispersal of the measures.³

3) The evaluation focused on estates with the highest rates of unemployment, highest share on welfare benefits and highest share of etnic minorities.

The general conclusion in the evaluation of the Urban Commission measures in the period 1994 – 97 was, that in the operating period the measures actually halted the downgrading of the neighbourhoods: The segregation caused by the "strong" residents moving out and "weak" moving into the neighbourhoods was halted and the employment rate for the residents emproved. Though it is difficult exactly to pin this development to the public measures while it could as well be connected to a) the rising prizes on the housing marked – making it more difficult for the young (lower) middleclass to be homeowners and b) with and the economic upswing that had a general positive effect on the employment (Skifter Andersen, 1999).

Welfare policy and partnerships in distressed neighbourhoods

The overall purpose of the social part of the Urban Commission programme has been to improve the living conditions, make room for social interaction and thereby promote formation of social networks by implemented by imlementing initiatives directly in the specific the distressed neighbourhoods.

The tool for combating social exclusion could be summed up as a local network strategy, comprising 3 surporting elements:

1. Partnership between the local housing organisation, local authority/municipality, voluntary organisations and residents. This organisational set-up, which was a precondition for grant appliance, was intended to mobilise the local resources.
2. Funding of new social and labor market introductory activities for the residents to improve the quality of life by strengthening the social network and attachment to the estate.
3. Employing social workers in the depressed neighbourhoods. Their job is to co-ordinate the social activities, to "bridge" the parties involved and help the residents to organise and perform social activities. Sources: Skifter Andersen, 2000 and Munk, 1999)

The paper discusses whether the strategy signifies a shift in welfare policy as well as its promises to dis-stressing the stressed neighbourhoods. This is discussed from a system perspectives: The opinions of the professional participants and form a life world perspective: The residents experience and attachment to the neighbourhoods.

The keyword for the organisational set-up within the Urban Commission programme has been local partnership (although the term has not been used). While the local collaboration set-up was a qualification criterion to obtain state support for half of the operational cost. This implied commitment from the municipality to finance half of the costs for the social activities in the neighbourhoods.

This in fact follows the EU policy on social exclusion of disadvantaged groups and areas from the beginning of the 90’ies. The focus on partnership reflects the recognition that traditional social policies both sector and on social groups combating social exclusion "must be supplemented by a more integrated and multidimensional approach, reflecting the complex causes of social exclusion." (Geddes 1998, p. 22)

This is not really a new strategy since inter-agency collaboration and local participation of non-governmental organisation has been implemented or in many EU-countries. In Denmark inter-agency, private organisation and user was officially a part of community development programme (The social development programme = SUM) in Denmark from the late 1980’s. This and other social programs encouraged involvement of voluntary organisations in the production of social services in local communities including local cultural and activity centres (Hegland and Hulgård 1998). The local element is not a new element in the sphere of social policy. These social inclusion remedies were though grounded on an experimental basis (Adamsen and Fisker, 1986) and were not widely used before the initiatives of the Urban Committee. This also applies to the establishing of local networks and collaboration between local institutions and voluntary organisations.

Barriers in the partnership approach

The evaluation of Urban Committee measures reveals a struggle of the "true" understanding of problems and measures. Disagreements in the steering-group (typical representative are: The local housing association, representatives for the residents and the municipality) imply that the initiatives and projects were implemented from a broad denominator, which meant that the initiatives for the "weak groups" received low priority.

These struggles are not unique for the Danish case but according to Pierre Bourdieu the different understanding of the problems also present a barrier to solving the problems in e.g. France (Bourdieu et al, 1999).

Additionally the relatively short application time implied that collaboration between the involved parties and the involvement of the residents in many instances was minimal. The subsequent negotiation revealed disagreements that have blocked the efficiency of the collaboration. The fact that many neighbourhoods did not get the amount they had applied for and then had to redefine the measures did not make the collaboration easier (Vestergaard, 1998).

One of the main barriers of the inter-agency network/partnership is that they each carry a certain perception of the residents in the distressed neighbourhoods.

Table 1. Organisational interpretations of the residents in distressed neighbourhoods

"Institutions"	Interpretations of residents
Municipal social department	Clients
Local housing company	Tenants
Local institutions	Users (parents, children, youngsters)
Schools	Pupils
Police	Crime reporters/Criminals
Resident initiator (social worker)	Groups of resident
…	…

Table made for the paper

Table 1 illustrate some of the actors involved in the work of the Urban Commission and their understanding of residents involved in solving social problems in the distressed neighbourhood⁴. The table indicates that a common understanding of the residents has not been accomplished although the Urban Committee aimed at a comprehensive understanding and implementation of measures. Though the table focuses on the "black and white" situation, the situation may vary according to how well the partnership woks.

4) The arguments are based on my participation in the evaluation of the Urban Commission initiatives. That is visits and interviews and talks with residents, members of resident boards, social workers, municipal and government officials and others.

The social department of the municipality focus is on individual social problems according to the social laws. Still, many municipalities do not work specifically with the problems in the neighbourhood as a whole. Although the crime prevention programme at community level includes the police, social authorities and the school, the neighbourhood (housing company and residents) are generally not involved. This is partly due to the self-interpretation of the housing companies since they perceive their role as housing providers (housing services not social services). The housing associations are now aware of the social dimensions of being a landlord and some now employ social co-ordinators at the central level.

In the case of the resident initiators, focus was turned away from their general tool of social work – the counselling while their main job is to co-ordinate and function as "bridge builders" between the municipality, housing company, voluntary organisations and residents. The local institutions (e.g. for children and youngsters), the local school and the police do not "see" the residents from a community perspective. In sum the table illustrates the problems with the "new" comprehensive measures in distressed neighbourhood: The fragmentation of problems due to the system approach of the actors.

To some extent the inclusion of weak groups⁵ was a success as the resident survey show that half of the participants came from this group (Munk, 1999). Even so the social workers reported the problem of reaching the weakest groups. The problem may stem from the network approach, which presupposes an active commitment of the "strong" residents to involve the "weak" residents in social activities. This kind of commitment has earlier proved disagreeable by the stronger residents who believe that it is a task for the professional social workers (Kjær Jensen et al., 1987). Also the capability of the weak to join activities that require social capital may be insuperable to some residents. This may be the reason why in general the activities focused on activities with the widest common denominator e.g. parties and sports.

5) Weak groups are defined as residents outside the laborumarket exlusive age pensioners.

The locality as a welfare policy tool

The comprehensiveness of the measures is not only a political signal about a high priority being given to distressed neighbourhoods. It is also an attempt to a) re-orientate the social measures of the welfare state toward the marginalized groups. In addition the measures represent b) an attempt to involve civil society in social work, i.e. development of sustainable networks and c) attract voluntary organisations to become active in distressed neighbourhoods.

This could be interpreted as the ideological rebirth or dream of rebuilding the Gemeinschaft (Tönnies, 1963), which is characterised by "tight networks" (Schiefloe, 1990) of territories and "gemeinschaftlige" relations. That is social relation giving rise to a base of collective experience and a control of social functions – in a modern world where the meaning of the local tends to disappear. It also counteracts current developments in local communities where according to Antony Giddens local places are penetrated fundamentally and formed of social influences far from themselves. In relation to our daily routines the local space is fragmented, emptied of meaning and substance (Giddens, 1990).

New activities for residents

New activities are offered within the neighbourhood to prevent loneliness and to give residents more possibilities for participation and responsibility. The activity offers have been small repair shops, improved playgrounds and drop-in clubs and activities for children and teenagers, daytime clubs and education of ethnic women and small children together with other network promoting-activities.

The resident survey shows that both people in- and outside the labour market participate in the activities. But the evaluation also show that "weak" residents and the young residents (18 – 25 years) are the most difficult to involve and keep active, while it is the middle group (the unemployed, early retired etc.) that participate. The share of active residents has not been lifted to a higher level, but according to the residents 60 per cent already participated in some kind of neighbourhood activity.

The measures for children and young people had high priority. This includes playgrounds and drop-in activities, sport activities etc. and according to the residents’ boards with a good result in two thirds of the projects. (Munk, 1999; Uggerhøj and Nielsen, 1998 and Vestergaard et al., 1999)

Employment of social initiators

The role of the social initiators/social workers employed by the Urban Committee is to strengthen the social life and network (not private advisors for the residents). They contribute to the general preventative measures of the welfare state and co-ordinate the activities. Finally their function gives them a key role in the collaboration between the municipal administration and institutions in the area and voluntary organisations.

100 out of 250 neighbourhoods have received support to employ a professional resident advisor and an activity grant. In some integration activities a project manager was employed. The activities and projects have received full or partial support. In those cases where full economic support was not given the overall plan for the neighbourhood had to be renegotiated in the steering group. In many cases these renegotiations revealed differences of opinion about problems and priority of measures and also about the role of the resident advisor, which prolonged the actual implementation. The disagreement was played out between the municipality who thought they got a new social worker and the local housing organisation that wanted to define their function and priorities. Different resident groups also wanted influence on the priorities and some wanted individual counselling. In most cases the actors found a solution and the social initiator focused on the collective perspective and worked with groups of residents. In certain cases disagreement ruined the collaborative climate. (Uggerhøj, 1996; Vestergaard et al. 1997 and Vestergaard et al. 1999).

The evaluation shows that the resident initiators work is widely approved and should continue. The municipalities are the most positive while 98 per cent of the total of 54 from the municipality questionnaire estimate that the collaboration is good and has improved in the period of the Urban Commission. Two thirds of the resident boards are positive, while one-third thinks that changes must be made⁶.

6) This question is not further investigated, but a qualified guess could be that they were allowed to perform personal counselling.

The rebirth of community has been an important ideological point in the Urban Committee program, but the question of whether it is the housing association (the residents) or the municipality that must involve the weak groups in the social activities has in general posed a problem. The strength and mobilisation of the community network for the benefit of the "poor" did not really succeed. Characteristic for the measures is rather that they signify a professionalisation of the social work, partly by employment of resident initiators and partly due to resident activities are administratively controlled by a steering-group or project co-ordinator. Indeed in some cases Urban Committee activities out competed incumbent resident activities (Uggerhøj 1996).

Resident participation and attachment to the neighbourhood

While the resident advisors estimate that resident participation is low the resident survey shows that 60 per cent of the residents participate in different cultural activities (participation in meetings, cultural arrangements, parties etc.) in the neighbourhood. The resident survey shows that participation did not change and there is no difference between neighbourhoods with activity support and resident advisor granted from the Danish Urban Committee compared with neighbourhoods without this support (though part of the program).

Attachment to neighbourhoods is often measured in surveys by levels of satisfaction, friendships and desire to move (Pacione, 1984, Hummon, 1992). However, neighbourhood attachment is a complex concept that holds several dimensions: a) biographical attachment, that families live in the same neighbourhood and feelings and share emotions about the place, b) social relations may be incorporated or be the basis for attachment, c) temporal aspects may, including the residents placement on the life-cycle also change in status e.g. from employed to unemployed, may also influence the attachment to the place (based on Low and Altman, 1992).

The resident survey show that almost 90 per cent of the residents are satisfied living in the distressed neighbourhoods (Munk, 1999 and unpublished figures)⁷. This result is similar to another Danish survey made social housing in a major municipality. Additionally the results indicate that satisfaction is linked to participation in resident meetings, duration of residence, size of the estate and reason to move into the estate influence the resident satisfaction. This survey shows that higher degrees of participation, duration of living in the neighbourhood and small size estates give more satisfaction (Jensen et al. 1999). A study in two estates in London, UK shows similar results, but also some differences. The study in London showed that the residents had warm sentiments towards their neighbours and immediate surroundings, but they identified in other parts of the neighbourhood (Cattel and Evans, 1999).

7) While the scope of the evaluation was to measure the effect of the Urban Commission the extensiveness on satisfaction and attachment is limited.

The survey in distressed neighbourhoods shows that only few experience anything to be wrong with the social environment, since app. 90 per cent say they greet each other, are friendly towards each other and 44 per cent visit each other. The resident survey shows that two third of the residents have one friend or more (50 per cent have more than one) within the neighbourhood. 87 per cent of the friendships have the character that one can visit each other without being invited. It seems fairly easy to make friendships in the neighbourhood while 44 per cent established a friendship within a three-year period (Munk, 1999 and unpublished figures). The new research results indicate too that in spite of the social problems the social climate is "alive and well", thereby they resembles older neighbourhood studies that show that "tight" neighbour relations are common in working class neighbourhoods (Young and Wilmott, 1962; Pacione, 1984).

The mayor problem seems to relate to the residents’ attachment to the neighbourhood. In general little more than half of the resident feel (much or some) attachment to the neighbourhood. 20 per cent think that they gained more attachment in the Urban Committee period. There is considerable uncertainty whether this is directly linked to the injected measures or just is a result of living in the neighbourhood for a period of 3 years. In spite of a net improvement of attachment, 40 per cent of the residents desire to move right away (Munk, 1999). This indicates that variables of satisfaction as indicators of the condition of the neighbourhood are not in themselves indicators of the attachment of the residents. Research into the use of neighbourhood satisfaction variables indicates that measuring satisfaction is not only difficult but holds severe problems (Kearns, Atkinson and Parkes, 2000).

Conclusion

The main conclusion with regard to the effect of the Urban Committee measures is that they have succeeded to halt the negative development. The best results have occurred in estates where the comprehensive strategy has been used to its fullest extend, (the combination of physical renovation, rent rebate and social initiative improvements). Improvements are identifiable in a number of areas: Living environment, crime, social problems, resident participation in activities, moving frequency etc.

The Urban Committee program is recognition of the inadequacy of the general Welfare state regulations when social problems are concentrated in certain neighbourhoods. The evaluations shows that it was not possible to fully arrest area- based exclusion, but, even so, the negative tendencies were halted in this period. Though it is methodologically impossible to prove whether is was the measures or the economic upswing in the period that did the job.

The application of local partnerships is in fact not effectuated as a deregulation of the Welfare state. The civil society’s possession of welfare duties is not on the political agenda. The combination of housing and social measures - that is the complementation of physical, economic, organisational and social measures in the distressed housing areas is "new" in combating distressed neighbourhoods. Also the outcome of the programme is that the locality/the neighbourhood now functions as a tool that can combine different Welfare state sectors with the civil society. This is not a completely new intervention, but the extension and use of formalised partnerships has established this method as a platform for the social work in neighbourhoods.

The local network strategy is a way of involving both private and public sphere in the welfare production and a shift from public responsibility - "it is the fault of society, therefore the state must solve it" - to a more differentiated understanding of solving societal problems that include collaboration between government and non-government organisations. The institutionalisation of collaboration between local housing associations, tenants boards, municipalities and voluntary organisations is one of the significant results – although the functioning varies.⁸

8) The municipality is by the new social law (1999) obligated to involvement of voluntary organisations etc.

The partnership itself holds the question "whose problem is it?" and this will be accentuated when the government measures stops. In this context partnerships may be a barrier to the solution if the partners have different agendas that cannot be joined in a common understanding with the residents.

The cultural approach with is emphasis on resident activities may prove to be a too limited approach to empower the civil society. While this builds on improving the local community through activities, the resident survey indicates that residents already live the life they want.

The resident participation in social activities was not really influenced by the measures - this indicates that the majority already participate in activities they want to. The residents attachment to the distressed neighbourhood seems to pose a major obstacle to arrest of the problems in so far this means that the high moving rates will continue. While high moving rates create discontinuity in the activities and community development.

Finally the "top-down" enforced local community/partnership is a double-edged sword where the reinforcement of the local forces with focus on the neighbourhood problems very easy glides into stigmatisation and clientisation of the whole neighbourhood.

Empirical data of the evaluation

The social part of the Urban Committee evaluation utilised a number of postal questionnaires to municipalities and key-persons. A representative resident survey was also conducted. The following is a short presentation of the sub-studies in the social report (Munk, 1999):

Resident advisors

All in all 108 resident advisors were employed to facilitate the Urban Committee action plan (they were financed by the housing associations). The questionnaire was posted in September 1997 and with 119 participating resident advisors (some "old" resident advisors also participated). The response was 91 per cent.

Resident’s boards

The chairmen of the resident’s boards in all 478 participating associations that received support from the Urban Committee received a questionnaire in November 1997. 74 per cent responded.

The municipalities

The chief executive in 91 municipalities received a questionnaire. 60 per cent responded.

The resident survey

The aim of the resident survey has been to study certain combinations of problems and measures to discover the "best" combination effect on the resident’s opinion on their neighbourhood. In the paper average figures has been used. This is not without problems because the survey is not representative for all the neighbourhoods involved. In total 2,000 persons in 40 different neighbourhood were randomly chosen in a way that they form a representative section of all the residents. All in all 1,344 face-to-face survey interviews were conducted and 70 per cent responded. Subsequently the data processing showed that many neighbourhoods had not started their physical renovation projects. The result of this delay is that only 29 neighbourhood or 986 residents are included in the survey study.

Literature

(*) = English summary

Adamsen, L. and Fisker, J. (1986): Socialt forsøgsarbejde i boligområder. En tværgående analyse af 20 udvalgte forsøgsprojekter i Danmark (Experimental Social Work in Neighbourhoods – 20 examples in Denmark). Institute of Local Government Studies – Denmark. AKF Forlag. Copenhagen.

Bjerregård Bach, H. (1997): Virksomhederne og arbejdsformidlingens tilbud. Evaluering af arbejdsmarkedsreformen II. The Danish National Institute of Social Research, report 97:19. Copenhagen.

Bourdieu, P. et al. (1999): The Weight of the World. Social Suffering in Contemporary Society. Polity Press. Cambridge, UK.

Byudvalget no. 1 (1994, juni): Rapport fra Byudvalget, nr. 1. (Report no. 1 form the Urban Committee). Indenrigsministeriet et al. Statens Information. København.

Byudvalget no. 2 (juni 1994): Rapport fra Byudvalget, nr. 2. (Report no. 2 form the Urban Committee). Indenrigsministeriet et al. Statens Information. København.

Byudvalget (1995): Status for Byudvalget. Rapport fra opfølgningsgruppen til regeringens Byudvalg om afslutning af 1. etape af Byudvalgets arbejde. (Statusreport from The Urban Committe, 1. phase). Statens Information. København

Cars, G. (1991): Introduction – Comparisons and counterparts In R. Alterman and G. Cars (eds) Neighbourhood Regeneration: An International Evaluation. Mansell Publishing. London.

Cattel, V. and Evans, M. (1999): Neighbourhood images in East London: Social capital and social networks on two East London estates. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. YPS.

Christiansen, U. et al. (1993): Bedre bebyggelser bedre liv ? ( Better Estates – Better Lives?) SBI- Town Planning 65. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm.

European Foundation (1998): Partnerships, Participation, Investment, Innovation. Meeting the Challenge of Distressed Urban Areas. A joint conference of OECD and the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and working Conditions, Dublin, 17 – 19 June. Conference Report. European Foundation. Dublin.

Gale D. E. (1990) conseptual Issues in Neighbourhood Decline and Revitalisation In N. Carmon, Neighbourhood Policy and Programmes: past and present. Macmillan. London.

Geddes, M. (1998): Local partnership : a successfull strategy for social cohesion? : European research report. - Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1998.

Giddens, A. (1990): The Consequences of Modernity. Standford University Pres. Stanford.

Hummelgaard, H. et al. (1997): Udsatte boligområder i Danmark (Distressed housing estates in Denmark). Institute of Local Government Studies – Denmark. AKF Forlag. København. (*)

Jensen, L. et al. (1999): Beboerdemokrati og forvaltning i den almene boligsektor (Danish social housing democracy. Ideals and practise). SBI-report 322. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm. (*)

Hummon, M. D. (1992): Community Attachment: Local Sentiment and Sence of Place, in I. Altman and M. S. Low (eds.): Place Attachment. Plenum Press, New York.

Kearns, A., Atkinson, R. and Parkes, A. (2000) A Geography of Misery or an Epidemic of Contentment? Understanding Neighbourhood (Dis)Satisfaction in Britain. Paper presented at ENHR, Gävle, Sweden, June 26-30^th , 2000.

Altman I. and Low (1992): Place Attachment: A Conceptual Inquiry in I. Altman and M. S. Low (eds.): Place Attachment. Plenum Press, New York.

Munk, A. (1999): Den boligsociale indsats (Social measures in disstressed housing estates). SFI-report 99:19/ SBI-report 305. Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut. Hørsholm. (*)

Pacione, M. (1984): Local Areas in the City, in D. T. Herbert and R. J. Johnston: Geography and the Urban Environment. Progress in Research and Applications, Volume VI. John Wiley & Sons. Chichester.

Parkinson, M. (1998): Combatting Social Exclusion: Lessons from area based programmes in Europe. The Policy Press. Bristol.

Pedersen, D. O. (1999): Omprioritering i almene boligafdelinger. Evaluering af et Byudvalgsinitiativ (Refinancing of social housing estates - assesment of an Urban Committee Initiative). SBI-report 309. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm. (*)

Prahl, A. and Olsen C. B. (1997): Lokalsamfundet som samarbejdspartner. Sammenhænge mellem decentralisering og lokalsamfundsudvikling i de nordiske lande (Local community as a working partner). Nordisk Ministerråd/Nordic Minister Council. Copenhagen.

Skifter Andersen, H. (2000): Can deprived housing areas be revitalized? Theoretical considerations and Danish experiences. Paper presented at the ENHR conference, 26 – 30 June 2000 in Gävle, Sweden.

Skifter Andersen, H. (1995): Explanations of Decay and Renewal in Housing Market: What can Europe learn from American research? Netherland Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 65 - 83.

Skifter Andersen, H. (1999): Byudvalgets indsats 1993-98. Sammenfattende evaluering (The Urban Committee Measures 1993 – 98. Summarising report) . SBI-report 320. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm. (*)

Tönnies, F. (1963): Community and Society. Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Harper and Row. New York.

Uggerhøj, L. (1996): Lokal organisering af social integration. En undersøgelse af boligsocial indsats (Local Organisation of Social Integration). A Study of Social Measures in Urban Committee Neighbourhoods). The Danish Centre for Research in Social Work. Copenhagen.

Uggerhøj, L. and T. Wright Nielsen (1998): Samarbejde og strategier. En undersøgelse af boligsocial indsats (Collaboration and strategies. A Study in Social Measures in Urban Committee Neighbourhoods). The Danish Centre for Research in Social Work. Copenhagen.

Vestergaard, H. (1998): Troubled housing estates in Denmark in A. Madanipour; G. Cars and J. Allen (eds): Social Exclusion in European Cities. Processes, Experiences and Responses. Regional Policy and Development Series 23. Jessey Kingsley Publishers Ltd. London.

Vestergaard, H et al. (1997): De 8 modelområder. Evaluering af et Byudvalgsinitiativ (Evaluation of the Modelprogram of the Urban Committee). The National Danish Institute of Social Research and Danish Building Researh Institute (Evaluation of the model neighbourhood of the Urban Committee). SBI-report 288. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm (*)

Vestergaard, H et al. (1999): Byudvalgets boligsociale aktiviteter – 20 eksempler (20 examples of the Urban Committee social activities). The National Danish Institute of Social Research and The Danish Building Researh Institute. SFI-report 99:13/SBI – report 311. Danish Building Researh Institute. Hørsholm. (*)