Rebalancing the Rhetoric: A Normative Analysis of Enforcement in Street Homelessness Policy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

76 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Street homelessness policies often provoke great intensity of feeling, especially when they include elements of force. This paper considers the moral case stakeholders present for and against enforcement in street homelessness policies via a series of philosophically-informed normative ‘lenses’, including paternalist, utilitarian, rights-based, contractualist, mutualist, and social justice perspectives. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research in six UK cities, it highlights the disparity between the condemnatory portrayals of enforcement dominant in academic and media discourses, and the more complex and/or ambivalent views held by practitioners and homeless people ‘on the ground’. It concludes that an analytical framework that pays systematic attention to this span of normative lenses can facilitate more constructive, even if still ‘difficult’, conversations about policy interventions in this exceptionally sensitive area.
Original languageEnglish
JournalUrban Studies
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 10 Dec 2019

Fingerprint

homelessness
rhetoric
social justice
qualitative research
conversation
stakeholder
discourse
present

Cite this

@article{2204354cfbdb488bbed2c76d9a11ec20,
title = "Rebalancing the Rhetoric: A Normative Analysis of Enforcement in Street Homelessness Policy",
abstract = "Street homelessness policies often provoke great intensity of feeling, especially when they include elements of force. This paper considers the moral case stakeholders present for and against enforcement in street homelessness policies via a series of philosophically-informed normative ‘lenses’, including paternalist, utilitarian, rights-based, contractualist, mutualist, and social justice perspectives. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research in six UK cities, it highlights the disparity between the condemnatory portrayals of enforcement dominant in academic and media discourses, and the more complex and/or ambivalent views held by practitioners and homeless people ‘on the ground’. It concludes that an analytical framework that pays systematic attention to this span of normative lenses can facilitate more constructive, even if still ‘difficult’, conversations about policy interventions in this exceptionally sensitive area.",
author = "Sarah Johnsen and Beth Watts and Suzanne Fitzpatrick",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
day = "10",
language = "English",
journal = "Urban Studies",
issn = "0042-0980",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rebalancing the Rhetoric: A Normative Analysis of Enforcement in Street Homelessness Policy

AU - Johnsen, Sarah

AU - Watts, Beth

AU - Fitzpatrick, Suzanne

PY - 2019/12/10

Y1 - 2019/12/10

N2 - Street homelessness policies often provoke great intensity of feeling, especially when they include elements of force. This paper considers the moral case stakeholders present for and against enforcement in street homelessness policies via a series of philosophically-informed normative ‘lenses’, including paternalist, utilitarian, rights-based, contractualist, mutualist, and social justice perspectives. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research in six UK cities, it highlights the disparity between the condemnatory portrayals of enforcement dominant in academic and media discourses, and the more complex and/or ambivalent views held by practitioners and homeless people ‘on the ground’. It concludes that an analytical framework that pays systematic attention to this span of normative lenses can facilitate more constructive, even if still ‘difficult’, conversations about policy interventions in this exceptionally sensitive area.

AB - Street homelessness policies often provoke great intensity of feeling, especially when they include elements of force. This paper considers the moral case stakeholders present for and against enforcement in street homelessness policies via a series of philosophically-informed normative ‘lenses’, including paternalist, utilitarian, rights-based, contractualist, mutualist, and social justice perspectives. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research in six UK cities, it highlights the disparity between the condemnatory portrayals of enforcement dominant in academic and media discourses, and the more complex and/or ambivalent views held by practitioners and homeless people ‘on the ground’. It concludes that an analytical framework that pays systematic attention to this span of normative lenses can facilitate more constructive, even if still ‘difficult’, conversations about policy interventions in this exceptionally sensitive area.

M3 - Article

JO - Urban Studies

JF - Urban Studies

SN - 0042-0980

ER -