Exploring the trajectory of English regionalism In July 2007 the Government published its ‘Review of sub-national economic development & regeneration’ (SNR) This paper explores the rationale underpinning the proposals outlined in the SNR & assesses their implications for the future of English regionalism Research Qs: What are the perceived 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?

Existing regional architecture Since the 1990s the regional tier has been ‘beefed up’ ‘Integrated’ Government Regional Offices Regional Development Agencies & unelected assemblies Regional Executive Agencies & Quangos Improving stakeholder representation 2004 failed referendum on elected regional government halted the Government’s regional experiment Status of the regions rivalled - City regions, New Localism, Northern Way HM Treasury announced review of sub-national government in 2006 Budget

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

Government aspirations Respond to globalisation - ‘new regionalist’ perspective still a driver for change Reduce economic disparities Devolve further responsibilities to sub-national tiers Address the democratic deficit Simplify structures Streamline decision making

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

Conclusions 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