I don't really disagree with this (other than the annoying trademark winking smiley) - it's one thing to try to measure
objectively the economic and social problems affecting places and communities, but
when this process goes on indefinitely without a persuasive analysis of the causes, and without leading to structural solutions or credible visions of change, it ossifies into a sort of grimly detached ethnography, and appears to describe essential properties of places and people rather than the complex effects of everything they've been through. There's a lot of work - grassroots, community, creative - aimed at telling different stories and producing different forms of community resistance
. Feel free to tell us more about what's happening where you are. 
Sorry about the "winking smiley", it does seem to irritate a certain number of people.
A few points (IMHO of course, no science ce involved)
1. I don't agree that economic and social problems affecting places and communities have been measured objectively. Instead, Governments (of either party) have "designed" criteria which suit their philosophy.
2. Agreed, the label of "deprived area" becomes engrained, which, was rather my point, but, without the big words (which I had to look up).
3. It probably will not sit well on here, but, the most significant efforts at "economic development" have happened during periods of Conservative Government (that may be co-incidence). So, in my immediate area, we had the Nissan Development (Thatcher) and more recently an extensive "Advanced Manufacturing Park" development (started under Cameron and still ongoing). It remains to be seen if the latter will produce long-term (ie beyond the construction phase) results.
4. Blair's "Sure Start" did potentially target a "problem area" (ie poor educational attainment levels, and low expectation), but, didn't last long enough to produce meaningful results (a negative for the Conservatives).
5. There have been "grass roots" efforts to develop Community type developments (eg Sports facilities, Adult education (both vocational and non-vocational), often funded by EU grants (no stopped of course, go figure why it was a leave voting area, I can't). However, the efforts which attract most media attention are of the "Food Bank" type, which, may be necessary, even essential, but, do not promote an attractive picture of the area.
Are they 'vying' to be that. Most would prefer not to be, but governments should prioritise resources to those areas most in need, so they have to play that card.
Edit: Wot she said ^^^
If we are talking of attracting "Government" initiatives, then, that is exactly what happens, it is necessary to paint the "most deserving" picture possible.
IMHO, generally, not always, Grants etc are not made on the basis of need or most deserving, but, rather on the basis of likely "return". Hence, the area in which I live has attracted little "help", on one side, Politicians know they will be voted in regardless, on the other side, they know they will not be voted in no matter what they do. Recently, there has been a minor crumbling of this position. But, historically, it is a case of spend where it will possibly improve your chances.
