Connected growth: Developing a framework to drive inclusive growth across a city-region

Abstract

This ‘in perspective’ piece addresses the (re-)positioning of civil society within new structures of city-region governance within Greater Manchester. This follows on from the processes of devolution, which have given the Greater Manchester City-Region a number of new powers. UK devolution, to date, has been largely focused upon engendering agglomerated economic growth at the city-region scale. Within Greater Manchester City-Region, devolution for economic development has sat alongside the devolution of health and social care (unlike any other city-region in the UK) as well. Based on stakeholder mapping and semi-structured interviews with key actors operating across the Greater Manchester City-Region, the paper illustrates how this has created a number of significant tensions and opportunities for civil society actors, as they have sought to contest a shifting governance framework. The paper, therefore, calls for future research to carefully consider how civil society groups are grappling with devolution; both contesting and responding to devolution. This is timely given the shifting policy and political discourse towards the need to deliver more socially inclusive city-regions.

Urban growth strategies in rural regions: building The North Wales Growth Deal

“…In addressing this and offering new knowledge, future research in this rural vein can contribute to the emerging literature on inclusive growth via city-region-building (Beel, Jones, Jones, & Escadale, 2017;Bevan Foundation and Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2017;Lee, 2019;Vickers, Spear, Brennan, & Syrett, 2017). This is seeking out a new economic model, and for the likes of the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) (2016, 2017), with regards to social and economic policy, reducing inequality and deprivation can itself drive growth.…”

Regenerative city-regions: a new conceptual framework

“…More critically, Etherington and Jones (2009) have questioned the usefulness of the city-region as an administrative level. They showed that the competitiveness model increases uneven development, and certain levels of inequality can even hinder growth (a conclusion also reached by Beel, Jones, Jones, & Escadale, 2017;andPastor, 2015a, 2015b). In a study of English devolution, Etherington and Jones (2016, p. 386) argue that the current framework of the deals agreed between city-regions and the UK government will only exacerbate the 'deeply historical problem of uneven growth', leaving disadvantaged groups voiceless.…”

“…His study confirms that although effects can sometimes be limited, enhancing public involvement in (re-) forming city-regions could heighten democratic practices and shape the path towards a 'comprehensively progressive' region. Looking at Greater Manchester, Beel et al (2017) made the case for civil society actors to be strongly represented in city-regional governance structures. These stakeholders' expertise and innovative approaches have better chances at filtering down economic development to places and people previously left out.…”

Heterodox Theories of Strategizing Territory

“…Концепция и политика инклюзивного роста/развития ставят главной целью не увеличение валового регионального продукта (т. е. количества произведенных в регионе товаров, услуг и работ), а повышение качества жизни всех групп населения, которое измеряется не только уровнем реально располагаемых доходов, но и возможностями трудоустройства, безопасностью, комфортностью среды проживания, возможностями самовыражения, активностью культурной жизни, удобством инфраструктуры, толерантностью, эмоциональным климатом территории. Кроме того, инклюзивное развитие предполагает сглаживание чрезмерных диспропорций между различными муниципальными образованиями, что отражено в идее связанного роста агломераций и регионов (Beel, Jones, Rees, Escadale, 2017).…”