Advertisement

Introduction

  • Sarah Marie HallEmail author
Chapter
  • 103 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life book series (PSFL)

Abstract

‘Austerity’ is now a term and an experience that many people in the UK are more familiar with than before. Where once applied to times gone by, entrenched in social memories of post-war conditions, it has become a commonplace identifier for contemporary UK society and economy. In its most stripped-down form, austerity refers to a specific set of actions and policies by the state: the reduction of spending on public expenditure with the precise aim of reducing governmental budget deficit. However, and importantly, it has a dual meaning. ‘Austerity’ is also a term to describe a condition of severe simplicity and self-restraint. These two meanings of austerity play out in everyday life, cutting across one another as much as they do across and between spaces, times and relationships. This first chapter outlines the changing policy and academic landscape of austerity in the UK, and starts crafting together a feminist theory of everyday life, before describing the ethnography on which the book is based and sketching out the contents of the following chapters.

Bibliography

  1. Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life. Croydon: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bott, E. (1957). Family and Social Network: Roles, Norms, and External Relationships in Ordinary Urban Families. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Bridge, G. (1997). Towards a Situated Universalism: On Strategic Rationality and “Local Theory”. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15, 633–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butterworth, J., & Burton, J. (2013). Equality, Human Rights and the Public Service Spending Cuts: Do UK Welfare Cuts Violate the Equal Right to Social Security? Equal Rights Review, 11, 26–45.Google Scholar
  6. Charles, N. (2000). Feminism, the State and Social Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  7. Davies, C. A. (2008). Reflexive Ethnography: A Guide to Researching Selves and Others. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, J. (2000). Born and Bred: Idioms of Kinship and New Reproductive Technologies in England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Elwood, S., & Lawson, V. (2013). Whose Crisis? Spatial Imaginaries of Class, Poverty, and Vulnerability. Environment and Planning A, 45, 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, C. (1995). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. England, K. V. L. (1994). Getting Personal: Reflexivity Positionality and Feminist Research. The Professional Geographer, 46, 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Etherington, D., & Jones, M. (2017) Devolution, Austerity and Inclusive Growth in Greater Manchester: Assessing Impacts and Developing Alternatives. Hendon: CEEDR, Middlesex University. Retrieved July 13, 2018, from www.mdx.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/368373/Greater-Manchester-Report.pdf.
  14. Hall, S. M. (2009). “Private Life” and “Work Life”: Difficulties and Dilemmas When Making and Maintaining Friendships with Ethnographic Participants. Area, 41, 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall, S. M. (2014). Ethics of Ethnography with Families: A Geographical Perspective. Environment and Planning A, 46(9), 2175–2194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall, S. M. (2015). Everyday Ethics of Consumption in the Austere City. Geography Compass, 9(3), 140–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall, S. M. (2017). Personal, Relational and Intimate Geographies of Austerity: Ethical and Empirical Considerations. Area, 49(3), 303–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hall, S. M., McIntosh, K., Neitzert, E., Pottinger, L., Sandhu, K., Stephenson, M.-A., Reed, H., & Taylor, L. (2017). Intersecting Inequalities: The Impact of Austerity on Black and Minority Ethnic Women in the UK. London: Runnymede and Women’s Budget Group. Retrieved from www.intersecting-inequalities.com.
  19. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Hanisch, C. (1970). The Personal Is Political. In S. Firestone & Koedt (Eds.), Notes from the Second Year (pp. 76–78). New York: Published by Editors.Google Scholar
  21. Harrison, E. (2013). Bouncing Back? Recession, Resilience and Everyday Lives. Critical Social Policy, 33(1), 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Held, V. (1993). Feminist Morality: Transforming Culture, Society and Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hemmings, S., Silva, E., & Thompson, K. (2002). Accounting for the Everyday. In T. Bennett & D. Watson (Eds.), Understanding Everyday Life (pp. 271–315). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Herbert, S. (2000). For Ethnography. Progress in Human Geography, 24, 550–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hinton, E., & Goodman, M. (2010). Sustainable Consumption: Developments, Considerations and New Directions. In M. R. Redclift & G. Woodgate (Eds.), The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology (pp. 245–261). London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  26. Hitchen, E. (2016). Living and Feeling the Austere. New Formations, 87, 102–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. HM Treasury. (2015). Summer Budget 2015. Retrieved July 13, 2015, from http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/summer-budget-2015/summer-budget-2015.
  28. Jackson, A. (Ed.). (1987). Anthropology at Home. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Jenkins, R. (1984). Bringing It All Back Home: An Anthropologist in Belfast. In C. Bell & H. Roberts (Eds.), Social Researching: Politics, Problems, Practice (pp. 147–164). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  30. JRF. (2015). The Cost of the Cuts: The Impact on Local Government and Poorer Communities. Retrieved July 17, 2015, from http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/CostofCuts-Full.pdf.
  31. Jupp, E. (2013b). “I Feel More at Home Here than in My Own Community”: Approaching the Emotional Geographies of Neighbourhood Policy. Critical Social Policy, 33, 532–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Katz, C. (1996). Towards Minor Theory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 14, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lefebvre, H. (1991). Critique of Everyday Life Volume I [1947]. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  34. Lumsden, K. (2009). “Don’t Ask a Woman to Do Another Woman’s Job”: Gendered Interactions and the Emotional Ethnographer. Sociology, 43(3), 497–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Massey, D. (2004). Geographies of Responsibility. Geografiska Annaler B, 86(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oakley, A. (1981). Interviewing Women: A Contradiction in Terms. In H. Roberts (Ed.), Doing Feminist Research (pp. 30–61). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Pearson, R., & Elson, D. (2015). Transcending the Impact of the Financial Crisis in the United Kingdom: Towards Plan F—A Feminist Economic Strategy. Feminist Review, 109, 8–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reed-Danahay, D. (2009). Anthropologists, Education, and Autoethnography. Reviews in Anthropology, 38(1), 28–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rhodes, D. (2017). North of England Hit Hardest by Government Cuts. BBC News. Retrieved July 13, 2018, from www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-42049922.
  40. Roberts, H. (Ed.). (1981). Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Round, J., Williams, C. C., & Rodgers, P. (2008). Everyday Tactic of Spaces of Power: The Role of Informal Economies in Post-Soviet Ukraine. Social & Cultural Geography, 9, 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scott, S. (2009). Making Sense of Everyday Life. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  43. Stacey, J. (1988). Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography? Women’s Studies International Forum, 11(1), 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stacey, J. (1990). Brave New Families: Stories of Domestic Upheaval in Late-Twentieth-Century America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  45. Tronto, J. (1993). Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Twigg, J. (2006). The Body in Health and Social Care. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Valentine, G. (2008a). The Ties that Bind: Towards Geographies of Intimacy. Geography Compass, 2(6), 2097–2110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Valentine, G., Jayne, M., & Gould, M. (2012). Do as I Say, Not as I Do: The Affective Space of Family Life and the Generational Transmission of Drinking Cultures. Environment and Planning A, 44(4), 776–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Women’s Budget Group. (2018). A “Jam Tomorrow” Budget’: Women’s Budget Group Response to Autumn Budget 2018. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://wbg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/WBG-2018-Autumn-Budget-full-analysis.pdf.
  50. Young, M., & Willmott, P. (1957). Family and Kinship in East London. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  51. Zelizer, V. (2005). The Purchase of Intimacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations