ever many criticisms have been waged at grounded theory. Glaser (1992) has written of the selective application of GT methodology into Qualitative Data Analysis research methodology results in a mixed method approach that actually blocks theory. Other criticisms include the ability to conduct complex analysis without comprehension of the pillars of grounded theory (Weitzman 2000; Bringer, Johnston, and Brackenridge 2004). While reflexivity has been under accounted for in many grounded theory studies, a position which researchers are now seeking to address (Gentles et al, 2014).

The vast majority of sociological projects which take grounded theory approach typically turns up concepts/ substantive theory rather than wider formal theory. To generate formal theory typically requires data collection in contrasting settings. Given the small scale of data set (in not having the corresponding Paris data) I expected and was content with generating concept outcomes, rather than formal theory.

I initially read through all nine texts, making memo’s of emergent themes of interest. These were:

• The legacy of the global financial crash;
• The construction of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ consumerism;
• In-borough inequality – with regards to income and resources;
• The competition for borough resources by particip