Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.advisorGraham, Elspeth
dc.contributor.advisorFeng, Zhiqiang
dc.contributor.advisorBoyle, P. J.
dc.contributor.authorArchibald, Daryll G.
dc.coverage.spatialii, 318 p.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-19T14:40:57Z
dc.date.available2014-06-19T14:40:57Z
dc.date.issued2014-06-25
dc.identifieruk.bl.ethos.605819
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/4899
dc.description.abstractThis thesis investigates the implications of area-based regeneration for residents’ health and well-being. The last three decades have seen significant investment in area-based initiatives in the UK to regenerate declining areas. However, there is a dearth of robust evidence on the impact that area regeneration practices have on health and health inequalities. This is particularly so in the case of the Scottish Area Regeneration Partnership (SARP) Programmes initiated in the mid-1990s, the evaluation of which was beset by a lack of baseline data and poor data collection generally. This study therefore seeks to address the lack of evidence by employing a rigorous mixed methods approach to evaluate the SARP programmes. Firstly, a quasi-experimental analysis of data from the Scottish Longitudinal Study (SLS) is undertaken. Comparator areas were identified using propensity score matching and a series of models was fitted to examine whether health outcomes of residents and migrants differed between regeneration areas and comparator areas. This is followed by a qualitative study exploring experiences of regeneration, carried out to provide insight into the results of the quasi-experiment. The findings provide no evidence that the programme had a positive impact on the health and well-being of SARP area residents relative to comparator area residents, and moreover, suggest that the programme may even have had a negative impact. Nor do they support the often stated hypothesis that those who move out of regeneration areas have done so because they have benefited from the programme and been replaced with residents who are likely to be more deprived. In addition, interviews with regeneration professionals and residents found that smaller initiatives overlapped with the SARPs, making it difficult to isolate the impacts of the programme under study. The conclusion reflects on the implications of these findings for the evaluation of public policy programmes.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of St Andrews
dc.subjectArea regenerationen_US
dc.subjectHealth and well-beingen_US
dc.subjectHealth inequalitiesen_US
dc.subjectScotlanden_US
dc.subject.lccHT178.S3A8
dc.subject.lcshUrban renewal--Health aspects--Scotlanden_US
dc.titleDoes area regeneration improve residents' health and well-being?en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.sponsorEconomic and Social Research Council (ESRC)en_US
dc.contributor.sponsorNHS Fifeen_US
dc.contributor.sponsorFife Councilen_US
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen_US
dc.type.qualificationnamePhD Doctor of Philosophyen_US
dc.publisher.institutionThe University of St Andrewsen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record