Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2000, volume 18, pages 711 ^ 726
DOI:10.1068/c9953
Spatial dimensions and institutional uncertainties of planning and the `new regionalism' Philip Allmendinger, Mark Tewdwr-Jones
European Urban and Regional Research Centre, Department of Land Economy, University of Aberdeen, St Mary's, King's College, Aberdeen AB24 3UF, Scotland; e-mail:
[email protected],
[email protected] Received 11 November 1999; in revised form 17 April 2000
Abstract. Over the last two decades, there have been numerous advancements in theorising the significance of subnational territories within both the global economy and nation-states. Within the United Kingdom over the last few years, academic study has tended to concentrate on the `new regionalism' and the rescaling of political processes caused by the `hollowing out' of the nation-state and governmental devolution and decentralisation to the subnational level. Part of the reason for this push towards a renewed interest in regional governance and policy processes has been the autonomous institutional capacities of regions to harness regional economic development with planning processes. The new regionalism (a contentious label) has occurred throughout the United Kingdom, but has been implemented separately in each country, through the creation of Regional Development Agencies in the English regions, and new politically accountable elected forums in Wales and Scotland. In this paper, we provide one of the first attempts empirically to analyse the new institutional structures through a survey of agencies across Britainöin England, Scotland, and Walesöin order to provide a comparative assessment of evolving forms of regional governance. We illustrate a mixed reaction from public-policy stakeholders with concern over the ability of these new forums to develop a capacity to harness both economic development and planning policy processes. On a more conceptual level, the research indicates uncertainty over both the future spatial dimension of planning processes and the scale links between the new regional level and the existing national and local levels of governance.
1 Introduction Over the last two decades, there has been a renewed interest in theorising and understanding the subnational territorial level within an increasingly global economy. Initial interest was centred on reinvigorating the theory of agglomeration (Scott, 1983; 1986) and the local outcomes of global processes of restructuring through the localities literature (Cooke, 1989). Lately, attention has turned towards the `new regionalism' (Amin, 1999 (1) ; Keating, 1997; Lovering, 1997) and the rescaling of political processes (Jones and MacLeod, 1999; MacLeod and Goodwin, 1999) in an attempt to establish the autonomous institutional capacities of regions to organise for economic development (Amin and Thrift, 1992; Phelps and Tewdwr-Jones, 2000; 1995; Scott, 1998; Storper, 1997). The emergence of the subnational level has occurred partly as a result of changes outside of the United Kingdom, including the `hollowing out' of the nation-state (Ohmae, 1996), globalisation (Brenner, 1999), and changes in governance (Stoker, 1990), and to developments within the European Union. Policies directed towards creating a `Europe of the Regions' (Jonas and Ward, 1999) together with proposals on spatial planning and the EU Structural Funds (Batchler and Turok, 1997) and (1) We
are aware of the use of this label in academic writing, including the debate over whether there is anything ``discursive, imagined, `real' or otherwise'' (Deas and Ward, 1999) about the `new regionalism' (see Amin, 1999; Lovering, 1999; MacLeod, 1999). The label is used in this paper as one reflecting the current train of proposals being put forward at the regional level.
712
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
interterritorial cooperation at the regional level through the INTERREG IIC initiative and the European Spatial Development Perspective (European Commission, 1991; 1994; 1999), have all indirectly promoted the regional level. Within the United Kingdom, the push for regional governance has emanated from a variety of financial, political, institutional, spatial, and governmental factors [see Baker (1998) and Tewdwr-Jones and McNeill (2000) for overviews]. Changes to regional policy at the governmental institutional level have been a priority of the Labour government since its election to office in 1997. A swathe of constitutional reforms, including devolution to the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly of Wales, and the Northern Ireland Assembly, the introduction of Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), regional chambers, and the possibility of elected regional assemblies at a later date, have added an impetus to the more modest institutional changes introduced under the last Major government. The regional proposals are distinguished by a reliance on a range of institutions and agencies and institutional networking and partnership. The growing literature on the restructuring of global economies and their impact on the local level points to the importance of institutions and networks and an emphasis on social and institutional factors in regional growth and success (Amin and Thrift, 1995; Cooke and Morgan, 1998; Di Maggio, 1993; MacLeod, 1997). Such networks of institutions (2) can be characterised by high levels of contact, cooperation, information exchange and sharply defined structures of coalition and collective representation (Powell and Di Maggio, 1991) to produce institutional `thickness' or `capacity'. The success of a particular region, therefore, is not only dependent on the existence of advantageous physical assets or resources, but also arises ``through the emergence of socially and institutionally mediated forms of selective co-operation between actors'' (Raco, 1999, page 951). Such networks of institutions conform to the emerging structures of regional planning and policy that the Labour government's various packages seek to modify. However, as Amin and Thrift point out, ``It should be remembered that institutional thickness is not always a boon. It can produce resistance to change as well as an innovative outlook'' (1995, page 103). This outlook obviously depends on the individual characteristics of the region. Di Maggio (1993) classifies networks as either structural (spatially concentrated and resistant to change), strategic (less spatially concentrated and more open to change), or cognitive ^ aesthetic (not spatially concentrated and fluid). Regions, as understood here, are likely to fall into the first two of these categories as there is undoubtedly an element of spatial concentration by definition, although this does not exclude other forms of institutional networks from existing simultaneously. Consequently, it cannot be guaranteed that existing networks will automatically embrace new forms of regional packages, despite their general welcome. Of critical importance in the success of new regional planning and governance mechanisms in integrating with existing regional institutions and networks will be the attitude and dispositions of those currently involved in regional planning, economic development, and governance. It is this theme ö the horizontal alignment of existing institutional capacity and presence with new, vertically imposed, institutional regional structures within the `new regionalism' ö that forms the underlying subject of the research discussed within this paper. In this paper, we seek to explore attitudes towards the shift to a greater emphasis on regional governance and planning in England, Scotland, and Wales from the perspective (2) Networks
of economic-development institutions could include, for example, firms, financial institutions, local chambers of commerce, training agencies, trade associations, local authorities, development agencies, unions, universities, government agencies, business service organisations, and marketing boards.
Planning and the `new regionalism'
713
of those stakeholders currently involved in economic and land-use planning at a regional level in both the public and the private sectors. (3) Based on empirical research gathered from a preliminary survey of all local authorities in England, Scotland, and Wales, plus key nongovernmental organisations and regional stakeholders, we point to a mixed picture that could best be summed up as an open but sceptical attitude. 2 Key issues in the emergence of regional institutional structures The role of the planning policy process and its relationship with economic development within regional institutional restructuring has been directly affected by political and economic processes. There is, for the most part, a consensus that the new emphasis on regional planning and policy within the United Kingdom has been welcomed by a range of actors, including academics (such as Baker, 1998; Goodstadt and U'ren, 1999; Hayton, 1997; Mawson, 1997a; 1997b; Murdoch and Tewdwr-Jones, 1999; Roberts, 1996; Roberts and Lloyd, 1999); regional stakeholders (BCC, 1997; CBI, 1997; TEC National Council, 1997); and others (CPRE, 1994; ERA, 1998; Town and Country Planning Association, 1997; Royal Town Planning Institute, 1992). However, a number of questions remain unanswered. Such questions revolve around, for example, the ability of these proposed arrangements to integrate with existing institutional networks that evolved during the `fallow period' of regional planning (Baker, 1998). Although it is early days into the lives of the RDAs, the devolved parliament in Edinburgh, and the assembly in Cardiff, enough is known about their proposed and evolving relations with existing stakeholders to lead some to conclude that issues such as the future scale of governance and the spatial policy dimension of the state on the one hand (Jones and MacLeod, 1999; MacLeod and Goodwin, 1999) and institutional compatibility and coordination on the other (Baker et al, 1999; Murdoch and Tewdwr-Jones, 1999; Roberts and Lloyd, 1999), remain potential problems. Against the backdrop of fragmented local public and private bodies, the centralisation of power, the confusion caused by `institutional congestion' of ad hoc bottom-up arrangements currently in place, and the lack of direct accountability, some commentators have already gone as far as to call the changes in England a `missed opportunity' (Mawson, 1997a). Such caution may be wise, since the evolving forms of governance have released ``a real tide of imagination and optimism to plan the development path of this small nation'' (Hague, 1990, page 296). Although the new shift in institutional relations and policy processes has therefore been welcomed by a range of regional actors, there is nevertheless a possibility that the new arrangements for economic and land-use regional planning, specifically, and regional governance, generally, are embraced as a relative rather than an absolute advance. Furthermore, there remains heated debate as to whether the creation of new regional institutions alone are able to generate successful economic strategies for the English regions similar to the regional `success stories' in other parts of the European Union (Cooke and Morgan, 1993; Hudson et al, 1997; Lovering, 1999) without a deeper consideration of and sensitivity to ``path-dependent regional economic and political geographies'' (Jones and MacLeod, 1999). More fundamentally, questions emerge on the scale of this new regional level of governance and its relationship to the existing national and local levels of governance, including whether the regional level is the most appropriate spatial scale to `solve' wider policy concerns in the country (Jones, 1999). (3) At
the time the empirical research discussed within this paper was undertaken, the political situation over the establishment of the Northern Ireland Assembly had not been clarified. Accordingly, it was decided to exclude Northern Ireland from the research until formal proposals to establish the Assembly had been forthcoming.
714
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
The on-going changes to regional planning and governance, meanwhile, have been examined from a number of different perspectives with the emphasis being largely on England. However, one missing element in such analyses has been the fusion of existing and evolving regional institutions and procedures across the three countries of Britain. Of critical importance to the success of evolving forms of land use and economic planning and governance is the attitude and cooperation of existing institutional agencies (or ``stakeholders'' in New Labour parlance), networks, and policy partnerships that evolved during the 1980s and 1990s. As institutional and network theory demonstrate, there are important and powerful existing interests who have the ability to facilitate or thwart the new regional policy initiatives. Before considering some of these issues through empirical research, we briefly outline the landscape of regional planning and policymaking, since this serves as an important (and partly determining) factor in attitudes towards decentralisation and the new regional agenda. 3 Towards `new' regional planning and governance Regional planning in England, Scotland, and Wales suffered under the market-oriented ethos of the Thatcher years, as indeed did the whole public-sector policymaking process (Thornley, 1993). But it was the less direct changes that made regional planning increasingly difficult. The privatisation of public utilities such as telecommunications, electricity, and water, the establishment of numerous agencies on a semicommercial footing (such as health boards), the creation of new quangos charged with the provision of public services [such as Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs)], and the increased centralisation of power to Westminster, all led to a fragmentation of control and responsibility between different public and private bodies at the strategic level (Mawson, 1997a; 1997b). Nevertheless, the reaction to this perceived strategic policy vacuum was the emergence of `bottom-up' forms of regional coordination and planning öespecially for the purposes of economic development (Dicken and Tickell, 1992; Lynch, 1999). The emergence of these new forms of partnerships in some cases led to `institutional congestion' (Roberts and Lloyd, 1999) where there was a complex and inefficient division of responsibilities and functions. This was partly the motivation behind the growing demands for greater coordination of regional policy and planning (see CBI, 1997; BCC, 1997; TEC National Council, 1997). In opposition, the Labour Party had begun to explore possible forms for such regional planning and governance. This culminated in commitments to referenda on devolution in Scotland and Wales and a consultation document on the form of regional governance in England entitled ``A choice for England'' (Labour Party, 1995). The emphasis in the proposals was on economic development and planning but with a more accountable framework in the long term through the establishment of regional assemblies. In power, Labour has proceeded with this broad approach and has effectively combined the three dimensions of its regional proposals öplanning, governance, and economic developmentöinto tailored packages for the three separate countries. The distinctive social, economic and political backgrounds in each country, combined with elements such as electoral pragmatism in regional politics (Lynch, 1999), have necessitated distinctive approaches that place more or less emphasis on the three aforementioned dimensions. Scotland, in particular, has historically had a far greater demand for more responsibility for its affairs, including its own parliament. But with its own form of regional administration through the Scottish Office and its own economic development policy through Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the emphasis for Scotland has been on accountability, coordination, and distinctiveness. This was certainly the agenda of planners in Scotland who have been critical of the
Planning and the `new regionalism'
715
fragmented, centralised, and unaccountable approach to planning (Goodstadt and U'ren, 1999; Hayton, 1997; Tewdwr-Jones and Lloyd, 1997). As though greater coordination and distinctiveness could be achieved through alterations in policy guidance, the eventual government proposals for devolution in Scotland included powers to pass primary legislation (Scottish Office, 1997). Regional planning policy within Scotland remains, however, an uncertain issue. In Wales, the situation was slightly different. Historically, Wales has been far more integrated into the Union than Scotland and there was less demand for accountability (Kendle, 1997). Once again, similar to the position in Scotland, the Welsh Office had provided regional administration with limited accountability and the Welsh Development Agency (WDA) had provided an effective economic development policy (see, for example, Morgan, 1997; but compare with Lovering, 1999). Here, the package of regional measures was tailored towards providing accountability through an assembly with greater coordination of policy and the ability to alter policy guidance at the national level and within regional committees. (4) Significantly, the devolution proposals for Wales included simultaneously awarding enhanced institutional powers to the WDA through the creation of a Welsh `economic powerhouse', operating both at the all-Wales level and regionally within Wales (Welsh Office, 1997). (5) In England, Harvie (1991) has compared the lack of a coherent regional voice with the situation in both Scotland (Paterson, 1998) and Wales (Tewdwr-Jones and Phelps, 2000). The English regions, including London, started from a far less advanced position. The Government Offices for the Regions (GROs)öcentral government offices in the regions which were introduced in 1994öprovided a much needed form of regional administration and coordination, but were far more limited in their ability to enter into debate and partnership with the fragmented and congested landscape of institutions that were seeking to provide some form of land use and economic regional planning (Mawson and Spencer, 1997a; 1997b). They also lacked accountability (compared with the Scottish and Welsh Offices that possessed their own Cabinet Secretaries of State), though this was seen as less of a pressing issue than the need to provide greater economic regeneration powers and coordination of planning. Accordingly, the decentralisation package for England has been skewed towards an economic emphasis through the creation of RDAs (DETR, 1997) to `level the uneven playing field' for institutional presence to match the situation in both Scotland and Wales (TewdwrJones and Phelps, 2000), with only a passing nod at accountability through regional chambers and, possibly at a later stage, regional assemblies. However, one element that is common to all three countriesöthough, again, to greater and lesser degreesöis the need for emerging institutions and policies such as the RDAs to work alongside and cooperate with the plethora of existing formal and informal institutional networks. This task, to develop strategies through dialogue with existing regional interests, has been enshrined in government policy, both in the English regions (DETR, 1999) and in Scotland (Scottish Executive, 1999). Although the variety of agencies and networks that emerged in the vacuum of regional planning and policy were a pragmatic response to the need for coordination and promotion, ``These agencies performed an important role in facilitating national policy priorities (4) The
proposals to establish the National Assembly for Wales sought to address the democratic deficit existing in Wales and provided the people of Wales with `a voice' on policymaking (Welsh Office, 1997). Primary legislative controls remain with the UK government in Westminster. (5) Spatial planning at the regional level within Wales remains uncertain at the time of writing, with no commitment on the part of the National Assembly to implement regional planning, even though amalgamations of local authorities have voluntarily cooperated to prepare informal strategic regional planning statements over the last few years.
716
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
into a sub-national agenda whilst seeking to organise local authority activities and resource commitments'' (Roberts and Lloyd, 1999, page 517). The limited piece of research discussed below sought to ascertain the attitudes of key stakeholders in a variety of existing public and semipublic bodies in England, Scotland, and Wales towards the emerging institutional forms of regional planning and governance. The overall aim of the research was to gauge perspectives on the proposed arrangements, and to ascertain the likely responses of existing institutional networks with a view to assessing (1) the perceived horizontal relationships between the new regional level and other agencies of governance and (2) the perceived vertical relationships between the new regional level and other scales of governance within each of the three countries. This was illustrated with particular reference to spatial planning and economic development. The research took the form of a structured questionnaire sent out in August 1999 to local authorities at district, county, and unitary authority level, in addition to a variety of other interested bodies and quangos. The questionnaire was structured to correspond to seven key issues: the adequacy of existing regional planning arrangements; the effectiveness of existing regional planning guidance; new forms of governance and the impact on regional planning; accountability for regional policy coordination; improving regional policy; the possible fragmentation of national strategic policy coordination; and avoiding state fragmentation and a continued role for strategic policy coordination. The structured questions were accompanied by opportunities for respondents to record opinions after answering each question. In all, 65 English, 20 Scottish, and 13 Welsh local authorities responded, which, together with the 20 quasigovernmental organisations which responded, represented a response rate of around 30%. Owing to space restrictions, the analysis presented here relates only to the aggregate national, English, Scottish, and Welsh levels. These are reported in the tables that follow together with overviews of stated opinions (including reasons for answers), where they were provided. (6) 4 Evolving forms of regional governance and policymaking: some preliminary research results Our research first sought to gauge the attitude of respondents towards the existing institutional arrangements for regional governance and planning. 4.1 The adequacy of existing regional planning arrangements
The first question sought to ascertain whether respondents felt that current arrangements for regional planning were adequate. The answer was an overwhelming ``no'', with variations between the three nations (see table 1). Although the headline figure for adequacy of current arrangements shows general dissatisfaction amongst the respondents, it is interesting to note that this proportion was much lower in England than in either Wales or Scotland. Respondents were asked to develop their reasons for this. Although there was greater satisfaction with arrangements in England, there were some strong opinions from those dissatisfied with the arrangements. These included, as stated in responses on the questionnaire returns: (6) The aggregate data have some drawbacks including smoothing out differences. However, as the success of the regional policy and governmental arrangements depend upon attitudes from a variety of stakeholders, an aggregate view does provide an indication of the crude level of acceptance. Nevertheless, what it does not do is identify particularly powerful or influential interests and their attitudes. In short, it takes a pluralistic perspective. Bodies which were surveyed included local authorities, government offices, RDAs, TECs, and bodies such as the Royal Town Planning Institute and the Town and Country Planning Association.
Planning and the `new regionalism'
717
Table 1. The adequacy of existing regional planning arrangements. Responses to the question: ``Do you feel that current arrangements for regional planning in your area are adequate?'' (As a result of rounding, percentages may not add up to 100.) Adequate
Inadequate
Don't know
Total number
number
%
number
%
number
%
%
England Wales Scotland
26 3 4
33 18 19
52 14 17
65 82 81
2 0 0
3 0 0
80 17 21
100 100 100
Total
33
28
83
70
2
2
118
100
(1) current imbalances of power between smaller and larger local authorities; (2) a lack of resources and staff; (3) restrictive timescales to progress regional policy and procedural arrangements. In addition, a small minority felt that there was some confusion over the role of RDAs and regional assemblies. In Wales, general dissatisfaction with current arrangements emanated from the feeling that there was no formal regional (that is, subnational) planning mechanism, and in Scotland there were a variety of reasons for a lack of satisfaction. A minority of respondents felt that joint structure ^ plan arrangements were unsatisfactory because of competition between different authorities with conflicting priorities which were not adequately resolved either locally or nationally. It was considered that this could be achieved by a more effective national planning framework. Some authorities also felt that such a framework need not cover the whole of Scotland, but could focus on different regions within itöfor example, the central belt. 4.2 The effectiveness of existing regional planning guidance
In contrast to the general dissatisfaction with regional planning arrangements there was broad contentment with current regional planning guidance in England and Scotland, though this was less clear in Wales. In all, 45% of respondents in England and 52% of those in Scotland felt that current arrangements were either very effective or effective (table 2). In Wales, however, the figure was only 18%. And although 1% of respondents in England and no respondents in Scotland considered existing regional planning arrangements to be ineffective, the figure for Wales was 29%. However, this should not necessarily be seen as an endorsement of existing arrangements in England and Scotland. 52wcl % and 48% of respondents, respectively, considered existing regional planning guidance to be ``marginally effective''. This led many respondents to comment on how existing arrangements could be improved. In England there was broad support Table 2. The effectiveness of existing regional planning guidance. Responses to the question: ``How effective are existing forms of regional planning guidance?'' (As a result of rounding, percentages may not add up to 100.) Effective
Marginally effective
Ineffective
Don't know
Total number
number
%
number
%
number
%
number
%
%
England Wales Scotland
36 3 11
45 18 52
42 9 10
52 53 48
1 5 0
1 29 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
80 17 21
100 100 100
Total
50
42
61
52
6
5
1
1
118
100
718
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
for a greater integration of planning arrangements between public and quasi-public bodies and suggestions that regional planning guidance could help ensure this. Furthermore, the relationship between regional planning guidance and the objectives of structure, local, and unitary development plans was felt to be an area where effectiveness could be improved. Notwithstanding, a number of respondents felt that although these matters should improve the effectiveness of guidance, the proposed new arrangements for regional planning and governance through regional assemblies and RDAs would provide help in achieving them. In Scotland, the feeling again pointed towards either a national plan or a stronger strategic vision. The sentiments of English respondents concerning the need to integrate disparate public and quasi-public bodies' planning and investment decisions was also prominent. Also of equal importance was the desire to tie in public investment decisions to a strategic plan. Although the most dissatisfied with existing regional planning arrangements (mainly because of the lack of them), the Welsh respondents were also the least forthcoming about how this could be addressed. Possible alternatives included the need to clarify and enhance the status of planning guidance in Wales through the transfer of responsibility in the preparation of guidance to either the Welsh Assembly or the WDA. It is, perhaps, significant here that the WDA should be viewed as the principal alternative actor in the provision of regional planning mechanisms, despite both the prominence of the newly established national assembly and the WDA's lack of statutory powers over the provision of spatial planning policy. 4.3 New forms of governance and the impact on regional planning
Devolution to the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly, and the English regional assemblies and development agencies raise the possibility of improving regional planning. However, in England, only 22.7% of respondents felt that RDAs would lead to a more integrated approach to regional policy through the strategic overview provided and emphasis on planning, transport, and economic development strategies (see table 3). One area which the respondents suggested that the RDAs could improve was in generally raising the profile of regions and providing a stronger voice for regional matters. Other views raised included the possibility that RDAs could improve democratic accountability in regional planning matters, although as quangos it was uncertain what respondents had in mind by referring to this. The majority of respondents did not consider that RDAs would actually improve regional planning and guidance. A variety of reasons were offered in support of this, including the feeling that RDAs would be likely to follow their own agendas. A more Table 3. Optimism expressed towards new devolved institutions in strengthening regional policy formulation öfor England, via the creation of Regional Development Agencies; for Wales, via the creation of the National Assembly; for Scotland, via the creation of the Scottish Parliament. Responses to the question: ``Do you think the Regional Development Agencies/National Assembly for Wales/Scottish Parliament will improve the mechanisms for regional policy formulation?'' (As a result of rounding, percentages may not add up to 100.) Likely improvement
Likely to be no improvement
Don't know
Total
number
%
number
%
number
number
England Wales Scotland
50 8 16
63 47 75
23 5 4
29 29 20
7 4 1
9 24 5
80 17 21
100 100 100
Total
74
63
32
27
12
10
118
100
%
%
Planning and the `new regionalism'
719
common view was that economic development and spatial planning are too distinct to be integrated, even through the strategies of the RDAs. (7) Other respondents criticised the RDAs' lack of accountability, their commercial örather than publicöorientation, and their lack of funding. The feeling from Scottish-based respondents was more positive towards the ability of the Scottish Parliament to improve regional planning and policy guidance. In all, 75% of respondents felt that the Parliament would improve the situation, and only 20% felt that it would not (5% did not answer). This more positive perspective can be partly explained by the low perception of the current situation. Although there were a variety of reasons for the feeling of improvement, the predominant optimistic attitude was that the Scottish Parliament would avoid the current dominance of parochial politics, focus more on strategic matters, and integrate land-use planning and economic matters. On the less enthusiastic side, a minority opinion thought that the Scottish Parliament would centralise regional policy guidance which would lead to a loss rather than an enhancement of accountability. Similar to the English situation highlighted above, there was also a general feeling that the Scottish Parliament would help to raise the profile of regional planning in Scotland. 47% of Welsh respondents felt that the Welsh Assembly would improve current regional planning arrangements, not only in terms of providing more of a regional focus through its elected members but also by making the WDA more accountable. However, there was a large minority who felt that the WDA would resist this, given its tradition of centralist and autonomous working. Furthermore, it was considered that tying the WDA more closely to the Welsh Assembly would not guarantee that spatial planning and economic development would become more integrated. 4.4 Accountability and the role of the public
The idea of making new regional planning arrangements more accountable through the various forms of regional governance was also explored (see table 4). In England, 94% of respondents felt that RDAs should be accountable to elected regional assemblies, and 100% of respondents in Wales felt that the WDA should be accountable to the Welsh Assembly. The situation in Scotland is slightly different in that the Scottish Executive is Table 4. Perceptions towards the scope for increased accountability of regional economic development institutions in England and Wales to democratically elected regional assemblies/government. Responses to the question: (in England) ``Do you think the creation of the Regional Development Agencies will enhance or reduce accountability in the English regions?''; (in Wales) ``Do you think the Welsh Development Agency's accountability will be enhanced or reduced under the National Assembly for Wales?'' (As a result of rounding, percentages may not add up to 100.) Don't know Enhanced Reduced accountability accountability
Total
number
%
number
%
number
%
number
%
England Wales
75 16
94 94
3 0
4 0
2 1
3 6
80 17
100 100
Total
91
94
3
3
3
3
97
100
(7) This
was a somewhat surprising opinion to emerge from the survey results since it could be argued that (1) planning and economic development functions had already been fused to some degree in the 1980s and 1990s through the urban regeneration policies, and (2) at the time of the questionnaire, completion work was already well underway in preparing and issuing the compatible RDA strategies and revised regional planning guidance within each region.
720
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
accountable to the Scottish Parliament; the Scottish dimension was therefore excluded from this question. Here, the question referred to accountability to the wider public and 76% of respondents felt that current public involvement amounts to little more than tokenism. In England, the corresponding figure was 78%; in Wales, it was 75%. 4.5 Improving regional policy
Apart from the on-going changes to regional planning and governance the respondents were also asked to identify ways in which they thought the preparation of regional planning policy could be improved. The majority of English respondents (53%) made no response to this question, although 29% stressed the need for greater accountability even though it was recognised that public interest in regional planning matters was generally very low. Suggestions of how to increase accountability included the greater involvement of local elected members and local planning officers, and the possible use of citizen's panels for the mediation of conflicts. Similar to England, respondents in Wales also stressed the need for greater public consultation and involvement. The forms of greater consultation that were discussed included the possibility of elected regional assemblies, both in England (supported by 86% of respondents) and in Wales (supported by 61% of respondents). If such assemblies were created, 92% of English respondents and 85% of Welsh respondents would support the transfer of regional policy formulation to these institutions. The advantages of such regional assemblies, as specified by the respondents, would be in the greater accountability that they could provide to the preparation of guidance (including a `sense of ownership'), and greater legitimacy for the guidance itself. In addition, a number of respondents also mentioned the role of assemblies in providing policy cohesion. Nevertheless, there was also some feeling in Wales that assemblies would add a further layer of bureaucracy, be of little or no benefit to regional planning (24% of respondents), and provide confusion in the mind of the public with regards to local authority responsibilities. 4.6 Possible fragmentation of national strategic policy coordination
Another possible outcome of evolving forms of regional governance is the fragmentation of national (state) strategic policy formulation and coordination through the emergence of a variety of new actors and mechanisms. The government has recently announced the publication of a joint `concordat' between England, Scotland, and Wales that covers a number of issues, including relations with the European Union and inward investment `bidding' (HM Government, 1999), intended to stop the development of divergent processes on specific policies in each of the three countries. There was no clear view from the respondents as to whether they thought that this would actually occur in practice (see table 5). Generally, almost the same number of English and Welsh respondents were of the opinion that fragmentation would or would not occur as a result of devolution and decentralisation. However, in Scotland, a higher proportion of respondents (57%) thought that national strategic policy fragmentation would occur; some of these respondents remarked that they viewed devolution as the path towards this goal. Respondents were also asked whether state policy fragmentation would be an issue to be concerned about. In contrast to the results of the previous question, if such a fragmentation were to occur then only in England (64%) was it considered to be an issue of concernöwhile in Scotland and Wales, only a minority (24% and 25%, respectively) were concerned. In Scotland, additional questions were asked regarding the possibility of a divergence in legislation from England and Wales, and 43% felt that this would occur, with the most common reason being the ability of the Scottish
Planning and the `new regionalism'
721
Table 5. The scope for further fragmentation of the present national approach to strategic policy formulation. Responses to the question: ``In the light of the creation of the National Assembly for Wales, the Scottish Parliament, the Regional Development Agencies and regional assemblies, do you think there is a danger that the UK government's approach to national strategic policy coordination will be fragmented further?'' (As a result of rounding, percentages may not add up to 100.) Agree
Disagree
Don't know
Total number
number
%
number
%
number
%
%
England Wales Scotland
38 8 12
48 47 57
42 9 6
52 53 29
0 0 3
0 0 14
80 17 21
100 100 100
Total
58
49
57
48
3
3
118
100
Parliament to be an expression of existing differences. Only a minority felt that there would be no change because of the continued dominance of Westminster, and one respondent even felt that there would be a convergence of policy. The Scottish survey also asked about the changes that respondents would like to see brought about by the Parliament. Although views diverged sharply it is possible to group responses into broad categories. The first group could be labelled as desiring a `radical review of the planning policy system'. However, the actual direction of such a review is unclear. The second broad group referred to the need to make changes to the arrangements between national, regional, and local spatial planning, calling for an increased emphasis on national guidance (providing a more detailed framework for existing local planning) and a reemphasised regional dimension. Respondents within this group suggested that such a renewed relationship should include a more open and accountable approach to national policy formulation. This dominant view is rather puzzling, given that the new powers awarded to the regional level of governance are intended to assist in the decentralisation of policymaking from national government rather than bolster the activities of the UK government. The reason for this view could be an overwhelming feeling of uncertainty over the new powers awarded to the regional tier; at worst, it might even suggest an inability to define solutions and policies at this new regional level without central `guidance' which would only circumvent the principle of decentralisation. Finally, a third group called for what could be termed greater integration of policy areas including land use, transport, and economic development. 4.7 Avoiding state fragmentation and a continued role for strategic policy coordination
Although there was a mixed feeling towards the possibility of a more fragmented national approach to policy formulation, the survey sought to explore how any fragmentation could be avoided. Although there were a number of respondents who felt that fragmentation was not necessarily something to be avoided (particularly in Scotland), the government generally (be it Westminster, Edinburgh, or Cardiff ) was perceived as the foil to such a trajectory. Respondents stated that this could be achieved through coordinated and clear central guidance. In the event that this was insufficient, some local authority respondents suggested a strengthening of the reserve powers of the relevant Secretary of State, although this would address subnational rather than national fragmentation. The possibility of a supranational body to ensure greater policy coordination was also raised even though the EU would, in part, provide such a role.
722
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
5 Conclusions In this paper, we have added to our emerging understanding of `new regionalism', spatial planning dimensions, and the scale of governance. Of particular interest to us is the evolving balance between, and attitudes towards, devolution and the possible fragmentation of strategic planning. In addition, the research also provides some opportunity to reflect upon the theory of institutional capacity building and networks. In particular, it adds some depth to Di Maggio's three categories of structural, strategic, and cognitive ^ aesthetic networks by identifying spatial scales for the boundaries between structural and strategic network behaviour. The structural network is based at a spatially concentrated level and is resistant to change, whereas the strategic network is to be found at a less spatially concentrated level, though it is more open to change than the strategic network. As regions in England, for example, were open to change they would correspond to Di Maggio's strategic network level. Both Wales and Scotland were also open to change which points to a less spatially concentrated concept of region than in the English regions. Turning to the attitudes towards regional planning and governance, the main message from the survey was that existing regional stakeholders broadly support the various packages. Greater coordination and cohesion can be arranged through existing voluntary institutional arrangements and networks. However, it was broadly felt that a more top-down perspective from the UK government would ensure that conflict resolution arrangements could be formalised and enforced. Nevertheless, there was no consensus that the proposed arrangements would provide the approach that was desired. This was particularly so in England, where existing arrangements were felt to be crudely `adequate', although this was alongside a perception that RDAs would provide little in the way of increased accountability. Neither was there a clear feeling that RDAs would provide a greater strategic vision than current arrangements. This feeling was less strong in Scotland where it was considered that the Scottish Parliament would provide both accountability and a greater strategic overview. In Wales, the National Assembly was felt to be too weak to control the WDA. It would seem that the lack of accountability in comparison to the Scottish package of change does not have the support of institutional actors. Nevertheless, once the new arrangements are fully operational the `catch up' experience of other federal governmental arrangements may become significant. Changes in one area may lead to demands for change in others and the `democratic deficit' in England and Wales could be made more comparable with the situation north of the border through the establishment of regional assemblies in England and the transfer of legislative responsibilities to Cardiff. On a more conceptual level, there are several issues arising from the research that are worthy of further discussion. Most notably, in considering the vertical relationships between the enhanced regional level and other scales of governance, it might be viewed with some concern that regional actor respondents are actually calling for more topdown direction in imposing a stronger, more effective, and institutionally coherent regional tier of governance. In England and Wales, respondents viewed the UK government as an interventionist force that could be relied upon both to resolve horizontal institutional conflict and to set in place structures and policies to fill a perceived vacuum. In Wales in particular, on the subject of the enhancement of regional planning, the majority of respondents saw the economic development institution (the WDA), rather than the National Assembly, to be the actor responsible both for providing a stronger national and regional voice and for creating institutional dialogues and cohesiveness between spatial planning and economic development policies. By comparison, English respondents were concerned that the RDAs in the English regions would be far too concerned about their own narrow sectional interests to be
Planning and the `new regionalism'
723
responsible for creating dialogues and cohesiveness across other policy areas. Economic development matters and spatial planning issues were viewed as two policy areas that would prove difficult to integrate through institutional fusion alone. It should be added that the scepticism towards this institutional and subject fusion was not proven, and may seem rather contentious in the context of market-oriented policies towards urban regeneration which were established at the local level throughout the 1980s and 1990s and which certainly did coordinate both planning and economic development issues. Since the survey was undertaken, and RDAs have become functional and produced regional economic strategies, concern over the inability to fuse planning and economic development issues may now seem misplaced. There was also some surprise that respondents considered that the issue of improving regional policy and governance could be achieved by a reliance on local levels of governance, including greater public accountability. It may be suggested that this and some of the other curious responses considered here say a great deal more about the perceptions of the respondents towards their own expertise and abilities to fulfil a regional role without relying on either the local or the national levels of governance. These perspectives could also reflect the relative lack of experience of the respondents in regional governance at the present time, and possible scepticism towards the necessity for a regional tier, since the majority of respondents in each of the three countries were local authority representatives. The message from regional stakeholders could therefore best be described as mixed. Although existing institutional networks certainly do not militate against the new and emerging arrangements for regional planning and governance neither do they overwhelmingly endorse them. This is probably the best that could be expected at such an early stage and does, at least, hint at a less confrontational attitude towards change than that which prevailed during the 1980s. There are two issues resulting from this research that now warrant further attention. First, the scalar vertical relationships require unravellingöbetween the regional and the national levels, and between the regional and the local levels of governanceösince there could be confusion over functional responsibility, the scalar `capturing' of policy agendas, and professional expertise. Second, the differences between institutional fusion to generate institutional capacity through agency organisation, compatibility, and cohesion may not necessarily accord with policy fusion or implementation agendas. Both these issues, and others, will need to be closely assessed as the regional tier of governance in the United Kingdom becomes a political reality. Acknowledgements. Our thanks to Liz Cordy who worked as our research assistant during the summer of 1999. The project was funded by a University of Aberdeen Faculty Research Grant. References Amin A, 1999, ``An institutional perspective on regional economic development'' International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 23 365 ^ 378 Amin A,Thrift N, 1992,``Neo-Marshallian nodes in global networks'' International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 16 571 ^ 587 Amin A, Thrift N, 1995, ``Globalisation, institutional `thickness' and the local economy'', in Managing Cities: The New Urban Context Eds P Healey, S Cameron, S Davoudi, S Graham, A Mandani-Pour (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 91 ^ 108 Baker M, 1998, ``Planning for the English regions: a review of the Secretary of State's Regional Planning Guidance'' Planning Practice and Research 13 153 ^ 169 Baker M, Deas I, Wong C, 1999, ``Obscure ritual or administrative luxury? Integrating strategic planning and regional development'' Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 26 763 ^ 782 Batchler J, Turok I (Eds), 1997 The Coherence of EU Regional Policy (Jessica Kingsley, London) BCC, 1997 Regional Policy (British Chambers of Commerce, London)
724
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
Brenner N, 1999, ``Globalisation as reterritorialisation: the re-scaling of urban governance in the European Union'' Urban Studies 36 431 ^ 451 CBI, 1997 Regions for Business: Improving Policy Design and Delivery (Confederation of British Industry, London) Cooke P (Ed.), 1989 Localities (Unwin Hyman, London) Cooke P, Morgan K, 1993, ``The network paradigm: new departures in corporate and regional development'' Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 11 543 ^ 564 Cooke P, Morgan K, 1998 The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions and Innovation (Oxford University Press, Oxford) CPRE, 1994, ``Greening the regions: a review and assessment of current practice'', Council for the Protection of Rural England, Warwick House, 25 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 0PP Deas I, Ward K G, 1999, ``From the `new localism' to the `new regionalism'? The implications of Regional Development Agencies for city ^ regional relations'' Political Geography 19 273 ^ 292 DETR, 1997 Building Partnerships for Prosperity: Sustainable Growth, Competitiveness and Employment in the English Regions Cm 3814, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (The Stationery Office, London) DETR, 1999, ``Regional Development Agencies: general information'', Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, available at www.local-regions.detr.gov.uk/rda/info/ index.htm Dicken P, Tickell A, 1992, ``Competitors or collaborators? The structure and relationships of inward investment in northern England'' Regional Studies 26 99 ^ 106 Di Maggio P, 1993, ``On metropolitan dominance: New York in the urban network'', in Capital of the American Century: The National and International Influence of New York City Ed. M Shelter (Russell Sage Foundation, New York) pp 95 ^ 114 ERA, 1998, ``Regional working in England: a policy statement and survey of the English Regional Associations''; available at www.somerset.gov.uk/era/policy.htm European Commission, 1991 Europe 2000 (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg) European Commission, 1994 Europe 2000+ (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg) European Commission, 1999 European Spatial Development Perspective (Office for Official Publications of the European Union, Luxembourg) Goodstadt V, U'ren G, 1999, ``Which way now for Scottish planning?'' Planning 22 January, page 11 Hague C , 1990, ``Scotland: back to the future for planning'', in Radical Planning Initiatives: New Directions for Urban Planning in the 1990s Eds J Montgomery, A Thornley (Gower, Aldershot, Hants) pp 287 ^ 299 Harvie C, 1991, ``English regionalism: the dog that never barked'', in National Identities Ed. B Crick (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 48 ^ 61 Hayton K, 1997 Town and Country Planning July/August, pages 17 ^ 23 HM Government, 1999, ``Devolution: memorandum of understanding and supplementary agreements between the United Kingdom Government, Scottish Ministers and the Cabinet of the National Assembly for Wales'', Cm 4444 (The Stationery Office, London) Hudson R, Dunford M, Hamilton D, Kotter R, 1997, ``Developing regional strategies for economic success: lessons from Europe's economically successful regions'' European Urban and Regional Studies 4 365 ^ 373 Jonas A, Ward K G, 1999, ``Towards new urban and regional policy frameworks for Europe: competitive regionalism `bottom up' and `top down' '', paper presented to the Sixth International Conference of the Regional Studies Association, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain; copy available from Regional Studies Association, PO Box 2058, Seaford BN25 4QU Jones M, 1999, ``The regional state and economic regulation: regional regeneration or political mobilisation?'', paper presented to the Sixth International Conference of the Regional Studies Association, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain; copy available from Regional Studies Association, PO Box 2058, Seaford BN25 4QU Jones M, MacLeod G, 1999, ``Towards a regional renaissance? Reconfiguring and rescaling England's economic governance'' Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series 24 295 ^ 314 Keating M, 1997, ``The invention of regions: political restructuring and territorial government in Western Europe'' Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 15 383 ^ 398
Planning and the `new regionalism'
725
Kendle J, 1997 Federal Britain: A History (Routledge, London) Labour Party, 1995, ``A choice for England'', consultation paper, The Labour Party, Millbank Tower, Millbank, London SW1P 4GT Lovering J, 1997 Misleading and Misreading the Welsh Economy: The New Regionalism (University of Wales Press, Cardiff) Lovering J, 1999, ``Theory led by policy: the inadequacies of the `new regionalism' (illustrated from the case of Wales)'' International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 23 379 ^ 395 Lynch P, 1999, ``New Labour and the English Regional Development Agencies: devolution as evolution'' Regional Studies 31(1) 73 ^ 89 MacLeod G, 1997, `` `Institutional thickness' and industrial governance in lowland Scotland'' Area 29 299 ^ 311 MacLeod G, 1999, ``Institutions, social capital, the state, and regulation: a sympathetic critique of the `new regionalism' '', paper presented to the Sixth International Conference of the Regional Studies Association, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain; copy available from Regional Studies Association, PO Box 2058, Seaford BN25 4QU MacLeod G, Goodwin M, 1999, ``Space, scale and strategy: rethinking urban and regional governance'' Progress in Human Geography 23 503 ^ 527 Mawson J, 1997a, ``New Labour and the English Regions. A missed opportunity?'' Local Economy November, pages 194 ^ 203 Mawson J, 1997b, ``The English regional debate: towards regional governance or government?'', in British Regionalism and Devolution: The Challenges of State Reform and European Integration Eds J Bradbury, J Mawson (Jessica Kingsley, London) pp 180 ^ 211 Mawson J, Spencer K, 1997a, ``The government offices for the English regions: towards regional governance'' Policy and Politics 25 71 ^ 84 Mawson J, Spencer K, 1997b, ``The origins and operations of the government offices for the Regions'', in British Regionalism and Devolution: The Challenges of State Reform and European Integration Eds J Bradbury, J Mawson (Jessica Kingsley, London) pp 158 ^ 179 Morgan K, 1997, ``The regional animateur: taking stock of the Welsh Development Agency'' Regional and Federal Studies 7(2) 70 ^ 94 Murdoch J, Tewdwr-Jones M, 1999, ``Planning and the English regions: conflict and convergence amongst the institutions of regional governance'' Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 17 715 ^ 729 Ohmae K, 1996 The End of the Nation State (Harper Collins, London) Paterson, 1998, ``Scottish home rule: radical break or pragmatic adjustment?'', in Remaking the Union Devolution and British Politics in the 1990s Eds H Elcock, M Keating (Frank Cass, London) pp 78 ^ 91 Phelps N A, Tewdwr-Jones M, 2000, ``Scratching the surface of collaborative and associative governance: identifying the diversity of social action in institutional capacity building'' Environment and Planning A 32 111 ^ 130 Powell W, Di Maggio P (Eds), 1991 The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL) Raco M, 1999, ``Assessing `institutional thickness' in the local context: a comparison of Cardiff and Sheffield'' Environment and Planning A 30 975 ^ 996 Roberts P, 1996, ``Regional planning guidance in England and Wales: back to the future?'' Town Planning Review 67(1) 97 ^ 109 Roberts P, Lloyd M G, 1999, ``Institutional aspects of regional planning, management and development: models and lessons from the English experience'' Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 26 517 ^ 531 Royal Town Planning Institute, 1992 The Regional Planning Process (Royal Town Planning Institute, London) Scott A J, 1983, ``Industrial organisation and logic of intra-metropolitan location I: theoretical considerations'' Economic Geography 59 233 ^ 250 Scott A J, 1986, ``Industrial organisation and location: division of labour, the firm and spatial processes'' Economic Geography 62 215 ^ 231 Scott A J, 1998 Regions and the World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production, Competition and Political Order (Oxford University Press, Oxford) Scottish Executive, 1999 The Report of The Commission on Local Government and The Scottish Parliament Scottish Executive, Edinburgh Scottish Office, 1997 Scotland's Parliament Cm 3658 (The Stationery Office, Edinburgh)
726
P Allmendinger, M Tewdwr-Jones
Stoker G, 1990, ``Regulation theory, local government and transition from Fordism'', in Challenges to Local Government Eds D King, J Pierre (Sage, London) pp 242 ^ 264 Storper M, 1997 The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy (Guilford Press, New York) TEC National Council, 1997 Regional Development Principles TEC National Council, Centre Point, 103 New Oxford Street, London WC1A 1DR Tewdwr-Jones M, Lloyd M G, 1997, ``Unfinished business'' Town and Country Planning November, pages 302 ^ 304 Tewdwr-Jones M, McNeill D, 2000, ``The politics of city ^ region planning and governance: reconciling the national, regional and urban in the competing voices of institutional restructuring'' European Urban and Regional Studies 7 119 ^ 134 Tewdwr-Jones M, Phelps N A, 2000, ``Levelling the uneven playing field: inward investment, interregional rivalry and the planning system'' Regional Studies forthcoming Town and Country Planning Association, 1997 Regional Development Agencies: Ensuring Sustainable Regional Planning and Development Town and Country Planning Association, 17 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AS Thornley A, 1993 Urban Planning Under Thatcherism: The Challenge of the Market 2nd edition (Routledge, London) Welsh Office, 1997 A Voice for Wales Cm 3718 (The Stationery Office, London)
ß 2000 a Pion publication printed in Great Britain
