1 / 5

Sarah Ayres & Ian Stafford School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, UK

Sarah Ayres & Ian Stafford School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, UK. The View from Whitehall Regional Studies Association Working Group, 19 th June 2008 http://www.bristol.ac.uk/sps/regionalism/default.shtml. Introduction.

Ava
Download Presentation

Sarah Ayres & Ian Stafford School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, UK

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sarah Ayres & Ian Stafford School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, UK The View from Whitehall Regional Studies Association Working Group, 19th June 2008 http://www.bristol.ac.uk/sps/regionalism/default.shtml

  2. Introduction • In July 2007 the Government published its ‘Review of Sub-national economic development & regeneration’ (SNR) • Drawing on interviews with senior Whitehall officials, this paper explores the rationale underpinning the proposals outlined in the SNR & assesses their implications • Research Qs: • What are the shortcomings of the existing regional architecture? • What motivations underpin the Government’s decision to reform regional structures? • What are the implications of the SNR for regional institutions & policies?

  3. Shortcomings of existing regional architecture • Central government agenda continues to dominate regional working • Problems with targetry • Confusion over roles & responsibilities • Assemblies viewed as ineffective • Too many regional strategies • Misalignment RSS & RES • Gap between administrative & economic boundaries • No real success in meeting target to reduce economic disparities • Poor regional evidence base

  4. Sub-national review proposals • RDAs to be responsible for preparing a single ‘regional strategy’ • Assemblies to be abolished by 2010 • Local authorities (LAs) to be given new roles to promote economic development & scrutinise RDAs • Stronger accountability of RDAs to central & local government - Introduction of Regional Ministers • RDAs to delegate funding to LAs & sub-regional partnerships wherever possible • Emphasis on Multi Area Agreements • Simplification of targetry • Drives to link activities of quangos to regional strategies

  5. Implications • Partnerships & goodwill could be threatened • No guarantee that LAs will work together - variable capacities • Whitehall wants prioritisation but can LAs deliver? • Variable spatial scales could enhance complexity • Will RDAs let go of funds & delivery? • Little mention of GOs • Strong emphasis on productivity - social & environmental concerns potentially threatened • Implementation of reforms (purposefully?) woolly • Reforms significant but Whitehall commitment to decentralisation yet to be proved

More Related