Government funding does not always co-opt community-led housing groups

Evidence

Such concerns regarding co-optation are only partly confirmed by research. Studies found that granted projects had room for maneuver: while some had to change their vision to secure grants (Archer et al. 2021), others found ways to use government funds without changing their ethos or aims (Mullins and Sacranie, 2014). Importantly, the Localism agenda led CLH to increased prominence, albeit temporarily (Mullins and Sacranie 2014:5). Since 2010, UK governments provided support through direct and indirect channels, including advice and grants. In 2016 the government announced a £163m grant to be allocated to community projects, but less than 15% of the fund were allocated (Heath, 2019). — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 33

Categorization

• ADDENDUM: Relates to my sacrifice piece’s theme of state-channeling of grassroots movements — the question of whether institutional support corrupts or empowers a movement’s founding ethos.
• corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 33