Doing Emotion, Doing Policy; the emotional role of “grassroots” community activists in poverty policy-making

Anderson, Rosie (2013) Doing Emotion, Doing Policy; the emotional role of “grassroots” community activists in poverty policy-making. Working Paper. University of Birmingham, Birmingham.

Preview

PDF
WP96_Doing_emotion,_doing_policy_%2D_Anderson,_May_2013.pdf
538Kb

URL of Published Version: http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/Research/BelowtheRadarBtR/Emotionalroleofcommunityactivistsinpolicy/tabid/1005/Default.aspx

Abstract

This paper examines different understandings of the emotional role played by activist or ‘grass-roots’ participants for those involved in policy-making. Drawing on findings from an ethnographic study of an interrelated cluster of anti-poverty policy-making forums in Scotland it considers both what informants understand by ‘emotion’ and its role in policy-making from the point of view of informants themselves. In particular it focuses on discussions and observations from the inception phase of this research project in which the nature of emotion was considered and some of the explicit and tacit ‘rules’ about who may be ‘emotional’, when they may do that and how emotion is to be expressed socially. This paper looks at two key aspects of informants’ practice; the special expectations policy forum participants have of activists and community organisation representatives around behaviour and language associated with ‘the emotional’; and participants’ understandings of the relationship between emotion, authenticity and legitimate decision-making when making policy. It concludes by considering how this examination of grassroots emotionality could assist in conceptualising emotional practice and power in policy-making and suggesting some key challenges for both researchers and practitioners.

Type of Work:

Monograph (Working Paper)

School/Faculty:

Colleges (2008 onwards) > College of Social Sciences

Department:

Third Sector Research Centre

References:

Anderson, K. and Smith, S. J. (2001) ‘Editorial: Emotional Geographies’ Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26 (1): 7-10. doi:10.1111/1475-5661.00002.
Ellis, R. (1968) ‘The Fool in Shakespeare: A Study in Alienation’ Critical Quarterly 10 (3): 245-68. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8705.1968.tb01984.x.
Fischer, F. and Forester, J. (eds) (1993) ‘Introduction’ in The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. Durham, N.C: Duke University Press.
Goffman, E. (1986) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Northeastern University Press ed. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Goffman, E. (1990) ‘Performances’ in The presentation of self in everyday life pp.28-82, London: Penguin Books.
Hardill, I. and Mills, S. (forthcoming) ‘Enlivening evidence-based policy through embodiment and emotions’ Contemporary Social Science.
Hannerz, U. (2003) ‘Being There... and There... and There! Reflections on Multi-Site Ethnography’ Ethnography, 4 (2): 201-16. doi:10.1177/14661381030042003.
Hill, M. J. (2005) The Public Policy Process. 4th edition. Harlow, England; New York: Pearson Longman.
HM Government (2010) Civil Service Code.
Hochschild, A. R. (1979) ‘Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure’ American Journal of Sociology, 85 (3): 551-75. doi:10.2307/2778583.
Hochschild, A. R. (1983) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, California; London: University of California Press.
Jenkins, B. (1997) ‘Policy Analysis: Models and Approaches’ in M. Hill (ed.) Policy Process: A Reader, 2nd Edition. London: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Kubik, J. (2009) ‘Ethnography of Politics: Foundations, Applications, Prospects’ in E. Schatz (ed.) Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, pp. 25-52. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Lasswell, H. D. (1958) Politics: Who Gets What, When and How. Cleveland: Meridian Books.
Lerner, D. and Lasswell, H. D. (1951) The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope Method. Hoover Institute Studies. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Lindblom, C. (1959) ‘The science of ‘Muddling Through’’ Public Administration Review, 9 (2): 79-88.
Lyth, I. M. (1990) ‘Social Systems as a Defense Against Anxiety’ and ‘A Psychoanalytical Perspective on Social Institutions’ in E. Trist and H. Murray (ed.) The Social Engagement of Social Science Volume 1: The Socio-Psychological Perspective. London: Free Association Books.
Mosse, D. (2006) ‘Anti-social Anthropology? Objectivity, Objection, and the Ethnography of Public Policy and Professional Communities’ Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 12 (4): 935-56. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9655.2006.00371.x.
Ostrom, V. and Ostrom, E. (1971) ‘Public choice: A different approach to the study of public Administration’ Public Administration Review, 31 (2): 203-16.
Rustin, M. (2001) Reason and Unreason. London, New York: Continuum.
Turner, V. W. (1969) The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. The Lewis Henry Morgan Lectures. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Date:

01 May 2013

Series/Collection Name:

TSRC Working Paper Series

Keywords:

Participation, policy making, community activist, emotion, grass roots organisations.

Subjects:

H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)

Related URLs:

URL	URL Type
http://tsrc.ac.uk	Organisation

Funders:

Economic and Social Research Council, Office for Civil Society, Barrow Cadbury Trust

Third Sector Research Centre

ID Code:

1796

Export Reference As :	ASCII + BibTeX + Dublin Core + EndNote + HTML + METS + MODS + OpenURL Object + Reference Manager + Refer + RefWorks
Share this item :

Repository Staff Only: item control page