About community cohesion
A guide to publications
Community cohesion can be seen as a development of the concept of multiculturalism, in which the emphasis on separateness and differences is counterbalanced by the creation of interaction and commonalities. The development of community cohesion is summarised below and illustrated through the key reports, reviews and guides published on the subject.
2001 - the concept emerged
2002 - LGA issued guidance on community cohesion
2003 - the Community Cohesion Panel was established
2004 - the Panel produced its final report
2005 - the Community Cohesion Unit produced a practitioners' toolkit
2006 - the Government set up the Commission on Integration and Cohesion
2007 - the Commission produced its final report 'Our Shared Future'
2008 - consolidating the agenda
Search all reports, reviews and guidance
2001
The concept of community cohesion emerged in the UK in 2001, following the disturbances in Bradford, Burnley and Oldham. The independent Community Cohesion Review Team, chaired by Ted Cantle, reported at the end of 2001, some six months or so after the riots. The 'Cantle Report' as it became known, provided a national overview of the state of race and community relations, following visits to a wide range of towns and cities, including both riot stricken areas and those that had not experienced any tensions.
The Cantle Report drew attention to polarised and segregated communities, in which people led 'parallel lives' and made some 67 recommendations. Whilst still highlighting the need to tackle inequalities, the recommendations were much more wide ranging and amounted to a new approach to race and diversity.
Community cohesion, report of the Independent Review Team, 2001 (The Cantle Report)
Three other reports emerged at roughly the same time and these dealt with the individual areas affected by the riots. These were:
- One Oldham, one future, David Ritchie, Oldham Panel, 2001 (The Ritchie Report)
- Burnley speaks, who listens? Report of the Burnley Task Force, Tony Clarke, 2001 (The Clarke Report)
- Community pride not prejudice - making diversity work in Bradford, Sir Herman Ouseley, 2001 (The Ouseley Report)
The Government immediately responded to all four reports. John Denham MP, a Home Office Minister, on behalf of a ministerial group, produced 'Building Cohesive Communities' (The Denham Report) which broadly accepted the general approach of the Cantle and other reports. The Government reserved judgement on some of the specific proposals but established a cross departmental ministerial group and a team of civil servants to consider the issues in greater detail.
2002
A number of agencies began to develop responses to the emerging community cohesion agenda, most notably the Local Government Agency (LGA), the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), The Home Office, The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) and the Inter Faith Network.
Their 'Guidance on Community Cohesion' was issued a year later in December 2002 and did much to take the agenda forward in practical terms. It also provided a four point formal definition of community cohesion, which has been widely adopted since that time.
Guidance on community cohesion, LGA et al, 2002
2003
Meanwhile, the Home Office had asked Ted Cantle to lead an implementation group. The Community Cohesion Panel was established and at various times involved about 200 people from a range of professional, community and other organisations, to develop more in depth guidance, much of which was theme based. They had a number of outputs, perhaps the most notable of which was the guidance in respect of Area Based Initiatives (ABIs). Regeneration schemes had been identified as a major source of tension between communities, largely due to the way in which different communities had been in competition with each other in respect of regeneration monies.
Two reports were published on the practice of regeneration:
- Community cohesion advice for those designing, developing and delivering area based initiatives (ABIs), The Home Office and ODPM, 2003
- Building community cohesion into area based initiatives, Community Cohesion Unit, The Home Office and Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004
In addition the Home Office, in liaison with the Panel, developed a performance framework for community cohesion. This was aimed at local authorities and their partners and was designed to try to establish some 'hard' and 'soft' indicators of the state of community cohesion in any given local area.
Building a picture of community cohesion, Home Office et al, 2003
By this time the Home Office had established a substantial Faith and Cohesion Unit who were able to take forward the agenda without external support. Resources were also beginning to be made available for a range of initiatives, particularly in respect of cross-cultural interaction. A 'Pathfinder Programme' was established in early 2003 and 14 authorities received government funding (another 14 were established without funding) and after six months their progress was reported:
Community cohesion pathfinder programme, The Home Office and VantagePoint, 2003
2004
Another important Panel output was in respect of advice to schools about their contribution to community cohesion. The Panel's Education Practitioner Group developed a set of standards which could be easily adopted by schools.
Community cohesion standards in schools, The Home Office Community Cohesion Unit, 2004
The Community Cohesion Panel produced its final report in July 2004, in which it commented on the progress made since the Cantle Report and indicated a number of areas in which, in their view, further development was required.
The Local Government Association also continued to be active in this area and produced updated guidance on all aspects of community cohesion in 2004.
Community cohesion - an action guide, LGA, 2004
2005
In the following year the LGA provided a sister publication to focus on leadership. It was targeted at Chief Executives and Leaders of Councils and advocated a corporate or 'whole council' approach.
Leading cohesive communities, LGA, 2005
Practice was also continuing to develop and the Community Cohesion Unit developed a more practically orientated guide which identified seven steps towards improving cohesion and was based on case studies.
Community cohesion, seven steps, a practitioner's toolkit, Community Cohesion Unit, 2005
Meanwhile, the first book devoted to community cohesion was written by Ted Cantle and published by Palgrave Macmillan in late 2005. This dealt with both the theory and practice of cohesion and brought together 'the journey to community cohesion' with the theoretical underpinning and included a substantial chapter on the emerging practice.
Community cohesion: a new framework for race and diversity, Ted Cantle, 2005
During this time, the Institute of Community Cohesion (iCoCo) was established to provide a new approach to race, diversity and multiculturalism. Meanwhile, the Government continued to promote the community cohesion agenda but decided to bring it together with their race equality strategy. The result was 'Improving Opportunity, Strengthening Society' published in early 2005.
Improving opportunity, strengthening society, The Home Office, 2005
2006
A year later, the Government followed this up and reported on the progress made, again both in terms of tackling inequality and promoting cohesion.
The Government set up the Commission on Integration and Cohesion in 2006, as an independent advisory body 'to explore how different communities and places in England are getting along, and what more might be done to bring people together - respecting differences, but developing a shared sense of belonging and purpose'. They issued a consultation document in September 2006 and an Interim Report in early 2007. The Interim Report drew attention to the 'increasing complexity of relations within and between communities' and advocated more shared experiences, emphasising the importance of the use of English as a shared language.
Our interim statement, Commission on Integration and Cohesion, February 2007
The Government also issued a White Paper with a chapter devoted to community cohesion. This signalled the Government's intent to make cohesion part of the performance framework for local government through the use of Local Area Agreements (LAAs) and the Corporate Assessment. It also indicated the Government's growing concern about extremism and terrorism following the bombings which had taken place a year earlier in London on July 7th 2005.
Strong and prosperous communities, Local Government White Paper, DCLG, October 2006
The Government extended the performance framework to schools through the Education and Inspections Act 2006, which imposed the 'duty to promote community cohesion' on schools and this came into effect from September 2007.
Guide to education and inspections act, DFES, 2006
2007
The London bombings in 2005 and later incidents and events caused the Government to begin to focus more on extremism in the Muslim community. This sometimes had the unfortunate effect of linking 'extremism' and 'terrorism' with the wider Muslim community, rather than the small minority who supported such views. To ensure that its efforts were focused on Muslim 'extremists', rather than with other groups such as the far right, the Government introduced the term 'violent extremism'. This replaced an earlier approach of 'preventing extremism together'. Whilst this new approach did promote broader shared values, it was used solely in connection with the Muslim community and local authorities and others were able to apply for additional resources to a specially constituted 'preventing violent extremism' fund.
Preventing violent extremism - winning hearts and minds, DCLG, April 2007
The Government also set out some possible interventions to tackling 'violent extremism' in a companion publication and this also set out the 'priority local authority area' who would be eligible for funding. The areas were determined by the size of the Muslim population in the local area.
Preventing violent extremism - pathfinder fund 2007/08 case studies, DCLG, April 2007
A review of equalities policy was conducted by a specially constituted panel chaired by Trevor Phillips in early 2007. The report was commissioned by the Prime Minister and suggested that 'Britain has more advanced and effective equality legislation than most other states'. However, it took the opportunity to review policy and practice in the run up to the bringing together of the then current equality Commissions - the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), Disability Rights Commission (DRC) and Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) under the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR).
Fairness and freedom: final report of the Equalities Review, Cabinet Office, HMSO, 2007
The Commission on Integration and Cohesion produced its final report 'Our Shared Future' in June 2007. This took a very wide view and did not focus on the current concern about 'extremist' activity. Rather, it attempted to see the cohesion debate as part of wider social changes, especially in terms of migration patterns and population dynamics. The Report made over 50 recommendations which were mainly of a practical nature. It also attempted to establish a new typology for cohesion, identifying different areas where the challenge of cohesion could be characterised as: 'changing less affluent rural areas'; stable less affluent areas with manufacturing decline'; 'stable less affluent urban areas (without manufacturing decline)'; 'changing less affluent urban areas'; and 'areas with tensions arising from a single issue'.
The Commission drew attention to the success of multiculturalism with 79% of people across the country agreeing that 'people from different backgrounds get on well together' and recommended more action to create genuine shared experiences and places. It emphasised that more needed to be done to build shared values, mutual respect and civic responsibilities, especially in an era of 'super-diversity'.
Amongst its principal recommendations, were proposals to set up an agency to manage the settlement of migrants, to reduce the amount of documents translated into minority languages (to ensure greater use of the English language) and to similarly reduce the support given to single identity funding.
Our shared future, final report of the Commission on Integration and Cohesion, DCLG, June 2007
The Commission also produced a series of other documents and evidence in support of its conclusions. The most interesting of these gave a good deal of practical examples and supporting material.
The Government also reported on the progress being made towards achieving equality in the key public services and in building community cohesion, in their annual update of the 'Improving Opportunity, Strengthening Society' strategy.
Improving opportunity, strengthening society - two years on, a progress report, DCLG, August 2007
The CRE conducted a formal investigation into regeneration practice, with particular regard to the race equality duty. The report's findings were disappointing with the CRE criticising the extent to which race equality issues in regeneration were understood and developed into practice and they also found that those responsible for regeneration schemes seemed to have paid little regard to previous advice in respect of community cohesion.
Regeneration and the race equality duty, CRE, Sept 2007
The latest - and last - report by the CRE, A lot done, a lot to do, our vision for an integrated Britain, CRE, Sept 2007 provides an overview of the race relations over the last 30 years or so (since the inception of the CRE in 1976) and sets out how much things have changed for the better. However, it also points to the remaining inequalities and argues for a more determined approach which can also tackle cohesion and integration at the same time.
2008
The early part of 2008 was dominated by the aftermath of the Commission on Integration and Cohesion's report, with the Government issuing its various responses, often in the form of new guidance rather than a change of direction.
In fact, the CIC report did a great deal to consolidate the cohesion agenda providing the confidence that, as a new framework, cohesion is here to stay and that it will continue to be built upon.
Other developments too, like the introduction of the 'duty to promote community cohesion' in schools, introduced at the end of 2007 and rolled out in 2008 with new guidance issued and the start of a new inspection regime; a new community cohesion and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) policy; and the new Local Area Agreement (LAA) framework for local authorities and their partners (with nearly 100 making cohesion their first priority) has also helped to consolidate the agenda.
Education continued to be a key focus for cohesion with the levels of ethnic and faith segregation in some parts of the country continuing to cause concern. The Runnymede Trust completed its two year investigation into the impact that faith schools have on community cohesion.
CLG continued to add to the guidance around cohesion throughout the year, including the Translation of Publications, contingency planning, tension monitoring and interfaith in 'Face to Face and Side by Side.'
As the year progressed, there was an increased interest in the role that community development and empowerment could play in promoting cohesion. In June, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation published research which looked in particular at the callanges to be addressed if government policies to promote community engagement are to be genuinely inclusive of newcomers as well as more established communities.
A key area of debate following the CIC report was about funding with the move away from a single identity group tot hose that encouraged greater integration in their activities. CLG launched a consultation in the summer of 2008 which prompted much discussion. The policy advocated by the CIC also seemed to be under threat when Southall Black Sisters won a case against Ealing Council which had denied them funding.
Migration continued to be a hot topic and the CLG Select Committee conducted an investigation into the relationship between migration snf community cohesion. iCoCo subbitted both written and oral evidence and the Select Commitee's final report outlined some of the challenges facing local authories in dealing with fast pace of change, including the lack of available data and clumsy funding mechanisms.
For many the dominant theme of the year was the Government's Preventing Violent Extremism agenda, better known as 'Prevent'. Even though this was launched in 2007, it was in 2008 that it appeared to dominate Government thinking on these issues. This stratagy was based around five key objectives: challenging the violentextremist ideology and supporting the institutions where they are active; supporting individuals who are being targeted and recruited to the cause of violent extremism; increasing the resilience of communites to violent extremism; addressing the grievances which ideologues are exploiting.
In April, CLG published its guide for local partners, aimed primarily at local authorities, police and eduation institutions. A further £12.5m was annouced, to be spent to counter violent extremism and identify and support thoise indivduals at risk across a range of key sectors, including prisons, among youth offenders, and through community and police led projects. This was augmented by guidance for specific parts of the education sector by DCSF and DIUS. Progress was highlighted in a summer report and then a further tranches of funding under the Pathfinder Scheme was annouced at the end of the year.
The end of the year saw a major change in housing with the creation of the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA).
2009
2009 began with a new set of guidance and initiatives form CLG which aimed to take forward the cohesion agenda. These initiatives showed a gradually evolving approach from Government which was aimed at embedding cohesion in delivery and practice. This was led by the Cohesion Delivery Framework and supported by the first attempt to set out what ‘meaningful interaction’ might mean in practice and how to promote positive relationships.
At the same time, CLG also produced guidance on building a local sense of belonging building on the work done to create Citizens’ Day to suggest how councils, voluntary groups and other organisations can encourage a sense of belonging as a means of delivering improved cohesion. This was being developed alongside the new power of general wellbeing placed on local authorities which many saw as a good way to mainstream cohesion into their work.
This coincided with the publication of the third annual progress report of Improving Opportunity, Strengthening Society. This was soon followed by the eagerly awaited publication of the Equality Bill which set out to harmonise existing anti-discrimination legislation and also introduce a new duty to promote social mobility for all public authorities. This also would replace the existing duty to promote good race relations with one to promote good relations, enforceable by the EHRC. Towards the end of the year, the EHRC published an iCoCo report on what this might mean conceptually and promised to follow this up with a guide to measurement in 2010.
The schools duty was being implemented in its first year and was to be inspected from September onwards. To this end, Ofsted produced its guidance for inspectors on schools’ duty to promote community cohesion. Housing continued to be a focus for cohesion with the HCA publishing its own approach to the issues towards the end of the year.
In the summer, the latest version of both the Citizenship Survey and Place Survey were published, providing much rich data on the national and local trends around community cohesion. The findings helped inform further CLG guidance which seemed to establish cohesion as part of mainstream service delivery. Local authorities continued to be the main focus for cohesion initiatives and CLG published guidance for mainstreaming or embedding community cohesion in other areas of service delivery and with other local organisations. There was also later in the year advice for frontline staff on delivering cohesion. The case for cohesion was supported by new research which looked at the economic benefits of building cohesion, reviewing evidence for crime, fear of crime, education, employment, health and economic investment.
In the autumn, the Equality and Human Rights Commission responded to the debate over single group funding with an important paper setting out the legal context fro funders and criticised the CIC conclusions and the way some were implementing them as being contrary to equalities legislation. It argued that such a radical interpretation of cohesion could actually work against equalities requirements and criticised the withdrawal of funding from community-based organisations delivering services targeted to particular groups in favour of funding generic services.
Housing continued to be a focus for cohesion work, with the Government publishing research on the connections between housing market renewal and community cohesion. The EHRC also attempted to bust some of the myths around immigration with reports on the experiences of migrants in and their impact upon social housing allocation and the labour market.
The Prevent agenda continued to be a focus for Government and a chief target of opposition from its critics, who felt that the programme risked stigmatising and further alienating Muslim communities. Both the Home Office and CLG updated their guidance and consolidated evidence of local programmes.
However, criticism increased as the year went on, with many local delivery partners being more willing to voice their opposition and suggest how the programme could be changed. An influential New Local Government Network report, Stronger Together, provided a forum for this and this seemed to be supported by an LGA overview of what local authorities had done under the Prevent banner. In the autumn, the CLG Select Committee announced an enquiry into the Prevent programme and this provided an opportunity for many critics to make their points to the MPs.
This criticism appeared to be having an impact upon Government thinking with speeches by both Shahid Malik and John Denham towards the end of the year indicating a more nuanced approach.
The challenge of the white working class and increasing tension and resentment, as well as research showing that white working class boys were now the least successful academically grew in prominence during the year. A major Runnymede Trust publication, Who Cares about the White Working Class?, set out some of the key issues. Concern translated into Government policy in October when John Denham, at an ICoCo seminar, announced a major new initiative called Connecting Communities. This targeted areas where the recession had impacted most and job losses were most acute. Many of these areas were traditional manufacturing areas and the programme aimed to investigate the issues for those communities and to see whether traditional cohesion work had perhaps missed some of these people. The programme was initially for one year but CLG indicated that it would be ongoing.
2010
2010 began with the inevitability of a General Election and thus attention tuned to developing Conservative Party thinking on community cohesion. The language seemed to be safe although early indications were that ideas were somewhat different from those followed by Labour. An important contribution from Dominic Grieve outlined emerging Conservative thinking and people continued to look for further evidence of what a change in Government might mean.
At the same time, Labour policy seemed to reinforce its Connecting Communities agenda with John Denham making a major speech on the Government’s approach to race equality which argued for a greater emphasis on social class rather than ethnicity.
