Keith Burge, Director at the Institute of Economic Development outlines the recommendations made to help under-performing towns and cities overcome their challenges…
The Institute of Economic Development (IED), Association of Town and City Management, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and Royal Town Planning Institute came together to explore the notion of developing a practitioner-led approach to the challenges faced by our under-performing towns and cities.
Launched in May 2015, the ‘Brighter Futures for our Towns and Cities’ report sets out 16 recommendations which are designed to apply to all towns and cities above 100,000 population and with above national average levels of unemployment for each of the past 3 years. It should be noted that these recommendations have emerged from the work of the Commission (principally practitioner workshops), and do not necessarily represent the official views or policy of each of the partner organisations.
The Recommendations
Relevant towns and cities should each produce a development plan (and be given the resources to do so). This would set out what kind of place each town/city wants to be and how this vision would be achieved, including a list of priority projects/initiatives. Clear links would need to be established between activities outlined in each plan and the most pressing issues faced in that particular town/city.
Where physical developments are proposed, these ought to be bold and innovative, capable of attracting people to live, work, study, shop and play. In-fill schemes and superficial improvements to existing buildings and public spaces may not be sufficient to grab the attention of all target audiences.
Where achievement of the vision requires devolution of powers/responsibilities, this should be detailed in specific terms i.e. what powers/responsibilities, why they are best devolved and what added value this will achieve. Economic development should be made a statutory function within each local authority and resourced accordingly.
In spite of repeated overhauls, the system of providing education and developing skills is failing both young people and employers. All Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) should be given full responsibility for funding skills development in their area, informed by the work of Education
Business Partnerships and complemented by independent and appropriately resourced careers support services (supporting both young people and adults).
Regardless of what happens with HS2, other transport infrastructure and ICT infrastructure projects ought to be explored that have the prospect of bringing benefits to under-performing towns and cities. Better connections between these places and with more successful local economies will help businesses seeking new markets and people seeking jobs.
The system of Business Rates needs to be overhauled in the interests of both fairness and efficiency. In doing so, there is the potential for under-performing town and city centres to be more competitive and retain/attract more business activity (and associated jobs).
The issue of poor leadership needs to be tackled head on through the creation of full time elected posts (the word ‘Mayor’ is still regarded as toxic in some quarters). Job descriptions should focus on economic development, regeneration, housing, commercial property, planning and transport.
These leaders should head new partnerships of the private, public and third sector that will help to ensure the appropriateness, deliverability and effectiveness of development plans.
Higher education provision in these towns and cities should be supported locally and nationally, whilst recognising that universities are independent organisations. Mechanisms to incentivise students to study there (e.g. tuition fees support) and the bending of national funding (both direct and through research grants) could support universities in under-performing towns and cities. Universities themselves must play an active role in addressing local performance issues, and see their success as partly dependent upon it.
All higher education provision in under-performing towns/cities should be resourced to provide start-up business accommodation and customised business support for graduates, staff and local communities.
The siting of new hospitals and other large scale healthcare provision should consider economic impacts and how they can be maximised for under-performing towns and cities.
All London-based government departments should be made to justify why they (or component parts) cannot be relocated outside the capital, as part of an independent review of civil service activities in London. LEPs ought to be better resourced and demonstrate the best of practice amongst their peers (e.g. in respect of board structure and appointments). Within their current Investment Plans they should be required to set out specific proposals for under-performing towns and cities as their contribution to town/city development plans.
The above should be overseen by a beefed up LEP Network which should also have a co-ordinating role to ensure that LEP decisions make sense across LEP boundaries and not just within them.
Area-based regeneration has its role to play but needs to focus on long term solutions not short term fixes and be appropriately resourced. There should be a particular focus on linking people to opportunities as a sustainable pathway out of deprivation.
Keith Burge
Director
Institute of Economic Development (IED)
