Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies?
English policymaking has traditionally been centralised, assuming homogenous needs across regions and contributing to economic inequalities. The Levelling Up Agenda aims to address these disparities through a place-based approach using devolved Combined Authority (CA) organisations. Despite being th...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Regional Studies, Regional Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/21681376.2024.2419135 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850054547987234816 |
|---|---|
| author | Shivani Sickotra |
| author_facet | Shivani Sickotra |
| author_sort | Shivani Sickotra |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | English policymaking has traditionally been centralised, assuming homogenous needs across regions and contributing to economic inequalities. The Levelling Up Agenda aims to address these disparities through a place-based approach using devolved Combined Authority (CA) organisations. Despite being the first national strategy with an extensive place-based focus, it faces criticism as a potentially centralised political tool. Concerns also exist about whether Combined Authorities can deliver regional economic development as they have centrally controlled aspects. If regional planning approaches are identical, decentralisation through Combined Authorities would essentially be futile. This paper uses a novel quantitative method with Strategic Economic Plans to determine if regional planning inhibits a place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, contributing data-driven insights to the debate regarding the efficacy of Combined Authorities. Through exploratory text analysis, hierarchical and K-means clustering, findings indicate regions adopt place-sensitive planning with varying sector priorities. A northern-southern and an inland-coastal distinction emerge, with London as an outlier. This suggests Combined Authorities are fit for purpose at this quantitative clustering level and do consider their geographical context in planning despite a devolved yet centrally controlled oxymoronic landscape. Collaborations like an inland and a coastal CA network are recommended to potentially maximise place-based growth. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-fd0369e8feaf4b1e86da372eaa01bb18 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2168-1376 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Regional Studies, Regional Science |
| spelling | doaj-art-fd0369e8feaf4b1e86da372eaa01bb182025-08-20T02:52:12ZengTaylor & Francis GroupRegional Studies, Regional Science2168-13762024-12-0111172473710.1080/21681376.2024.2419135Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies?Shivani Sickotra0School of Education, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UKEnglish policymaking has traditionally been centralised, assuming homogenous needs across regions and contributing to economic inequalities. The Levelling Up Agenda aims to address these disparities through a place-based approach using devolved Combined Authority (CA) organisations. Despite being the first national strategy with an extensive place-based focus, it faces criticism as a potentially centralised political tool. Concerns also exist about whether Combined Authorities can deliver regional economic development as they have centrally controlled aspects. If regional planning approaches are identical, decentralisation through Combined Authorities would essentially be futile. This paper uses a novel quantitative method with Strategic Economic Plans to determine if regional planning inhibits a place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, contributing data-driven insights to the debate regarding the efficacy of Combined Authorities. Through exploratory text analysis, hierarchical and K-means clustering, findings indicate regions adopt place-sensitive planning with varying sector priorities. A northern-southern and an inland-coastal distinction emerge, with London as an outlier. This suggests Combined Authorities are fit for purpose at this quantitative clustering level and do consider their geographical context in planning despite a devolved yet centrally controlled oxymoronic landscape. Collaborations like an inland and a coastal CA network are recommended to potentially maximise place-based growth.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/21681376.2024.2419135Text analysiscluster analysisregional planningsoft planningcombined authoritylevelling up |
| spellingShingle | Shivani Sickotra Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? Regional Studies, Regional Science Text analysis cluster analysis regional planning soft planning combined authority levelling up |
| title | Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? |
| title_full | Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? |
| title_fullStr | Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? |
| title_short | Levelling up in a ‘decentralised’ England: place-based or ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies? |
| title_sort | levelling up in a decentralised england place based or one size fits all strategies |
| topic | Text analysis cluster analysis regional planning soft planning combined authority levelling up |
| url | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/21681376.2024.2419135 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shivanisickotra levellingupinadecentralisedenglandplacebasedoronesizefitsallstrategies |