Territorial policy communities and devolution in the UK

Abstract

Devolution in the UK forms part of a wider process of spatial rescaling across Europe. Little work has been done on its effect on interest articulation. The literature on policy communities treats them as sectoral in scope. We propose the concept of 'territorial policy communities' to designate territorially bounded constellations of actors within and across policy sectors, emerging in response to the rescaling of government. Devolution may leave existing systems of interest articulation unchanged, leaving 'regions without regionalism'; it may confine some groups within territorial boundaries while allowing others the freedom to choose' between levels of government; or it might promote a general territorialization of interest representation and the emergence of territorial policy communities. The UK's four models of devolution help test the effects of stronger and weaker forms of devolution on the territorialization of groups.

Place branding from a multi-level perspective

“…Changes in actors ' spatial conceptualization and spatial frames of reference (cf. Keating and Loughlin, 2002 ) can be observed, for instance, in public discourse, in institutional practices and in personal narratives.…”

The role of ideas in policy transfer: the case of UK smoking bans since devolution

“…Therefore, the nature of the 'window of opportunity' differed and in each country the rejection of further tobacco controls (in this form at this time) was a realistic prospect. These findings are based on 50 interviews with interest group, civil service and elected representatives from 2004-6 (as part of a broader project -300 interviews examining developments in public policy in the UK since devolution - Keating, Cairney and Hepburn, 2008).…”

Debate: What is complex government and what can we do about it?

“…This is a feature of the interest group world, in which we identify a tendency for groups to follow the action (Mazey and Richardson, 2006), often maintaining multi-level lobbying strategies, either directly or as part of networks (although the willingness and ability of groups to do so varies markedly - Keating et al, 2009;Keating and Wilson, 2014;Cairney, 2009). …”