This paper explores the relationship between social and educational disadvantage, the spatial patterning of that relationship, and the potential for policy to intervene in that relationship through spatially-targeted initiatives. The paper focuses on the case of England, where the spatial patterning of disadvantage is marked, and where there is a long history of so-called area-based initiatives (ABIs). However, the theoretical and policy issues it raises have implications for all economically-developed countries, including those of Europe and North America. England can be understood as a socially polarised country, marked by significant inequalities (OECD, 2008). Because of a strong association between social background and educational outcomes, the English education system is likewise characterised by inequalities (Cassen & Kingdon, 2007). Moreover, all of these inequalities are spatially patterned. In particular, there are concentrations of poor social and educational outcomes in certain, predominantly urban, places (Palmer et al 2007). Successive governments have recognised this and have launched ABIs aimed at breaking the link between education, disadvantage and place. The evidence on the impacts of ABIs, both in England and in other European countries, suggests that they have had only limited effect on the social and educational disadvantages they have targeted (Rees et al., 2007). Typically, this has been explained by policy researchers as a consequence of the failure of ABIs to acknowledge the link between the manifestations of disadvantage in particular places, and the underlying patterns of social inequality out of which those manifestations arise. As a result, critics of ABIs have argued that the spatial targeting of interventions is simply a distraction from the real task of developing mainstream policies aimed at promoting great social and educational equity (Power & Gewirtz, 2001; Power et al., 2005; Rees et al., 2007). This paper, however, takes a different stance. It draws on recent thinking about the nature of space and place to argue that the local does not simply reproduce underlying social patterns, but mediates them so that they take on distinctive local characteristics (e.g. Massey, 2005; 2007). The paper explores the light this perspective sheds on historical ABIs, and the implications it has for the development of future ABIs.

The paper draws upon three methodological approaches: 1. a critical analysis of policy texts and research literature relating to ABIs in England and elsewhere; 2. a review of recent thinking about the nature of space, place and their inter-relationship; and 3. empirical studies of current ABIs in four urban areas in England. The empirical studies draw on a theory of change methodology (Connell & Kubisch, 1998). This uses interviews with leaders of initiatives and analysis of policy texts to explicate the assumptions underlying the initiative about the characteristics and dynamics of the local situation, the outcomes that are intended from the initiative, and the actions and changes that are expected to generate those outcomes.

The paper concludes that both historical ABIs and the critics of ABIs have failed to understand the proper relationship between the local and the global. Although the critics are right to emphasise the relationship between local manifestations of disadvantage and underlying patterns of social inequality, they make the mistake of ignoring the ways in which underlying patterns are mediated by the local. On the other hand, historical ABIs are guilty not only of overlooking wider social inequalities, but also of failing to analyse local mediating dynamics in sufficient depth. However, ‘new style’ ABIs are based on much more searching analyses of the local, and align powerful interventions, within and beyond education to tackle disadvantage. Such interventions have implications both for the need for local policy-making in many centralised nation states, and for a rethinking of the relationship between education and other aspects of public policy.