City-Regions: New Geographies of Uneven Development and Inequality

Etherington, David; Jones, Martin

doi:10.1080/00343400801968353

Cited by 88 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 75 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the general interest in inequality in Great Britain, there is relatively little evidence on patterns at a sub-national level (TAYLOR, 2006;DICKEY, 2007;ETHERINGTON and JONES 2009). The most comprehensive report on inequality in the UK, the report of the National Equality Panel, included some analysis of regional trends, but a lack of sub-national data prevented more detailed analysis (HILLS et al, 2010).…”

Section: Urban Inequality In Great Britainmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Geography of Wage Inequality in British Cities

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is widespread concern about the scale and implications of urban inequality in Great Britain, but little evidence on which cities are the most unequal and why. This paper investigates patterns of wage inequality in 60 British cities. It has two principal goals: (1) to describe which cities are most unequal and (2) to assess the important determinants of inequality. The results show a distinct geography of wage inequality, the most unequal cities tend to be affluent and located in parts of the Greater South East of England. A central determinant of these patterns is the geography of highly skilled workers. Because of this, the geography of urban wage inequality reflects the geography of affluence more generally.JEL codes: R13; R10; J3; R23

show abstract

Section: Urban Inequality In Great Britainmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Geography of Wage Inequality in British Cities

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples of this include the rise of city regions (c.f. Deas, 2014;Etherington and Jones, 2009;Harding, 2007;Harrison, 2010Harrison, , 2012Jonas and Ward, 2007) and institutional innovations such as combined authorities and elected mayors. The implementation of these changes has been selective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public entrepreneurship and the politics of regeneration in multi-level governance

Catney

Henneberry

2016

Environ Plann C Gov Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper uses a case study of urban regeneration policy in Sheffield, UK, to explore local public entrepreneurship in a system of multi-level governance. Recent analyses of public entrepreneurs have directed attention to the macro-political structural and institutional conditions that enable and constrain these actors, and to their individual characteristics and attributes. The stress has been on the national level and on individual action at the expense of the agency of local networks of entrepreneurs. In order to address this lacuna, we consider how local policy entrepreneurs work across governance levels and develop ideas, institutional structures and support in pursuit of their goals, using Kingdon's notion of policy streams as a vehicle for our analysis. We highlight the contingent and path-dependent nature of such entrepreneurship. In particular, we identify the temporal sequencing of agenda shifts and entrepreneurial actions as a crucial aspect of the policy process.Keywords Public entrepreneurship, multi-level policy, policy streams, policy windows IntroductionThe dominant narrative of central-local government relations in the UK has been the power of central government to make and remake the institutional landscape and, in so doing, to erode the institutional cohesiveness, policy competences and autonomy of local political institutions (c.f. Pratchett, 2004;Wilson, 2003). However, the past two decades have also seen the advance of multi-level governance (MLG) (Keating, 2014) and increased opportunities for 'authority migration' (Broschek, 2014) to institutional actors at supraand sub-national levels, allowing greater scope for the exercise of local autonomy. The UK's institutional regime is currently the subject of rapid restructuring. Examples of this include the rise of city regions (c.f. Deas, 2014;Etherington and Jones, 2009;Harding, 2007; Harrison, 2010Harrison, , 2012Jonas and Ward, 2007) and institutional innovations such as combined authorities and elected mayors. The implementation of these changes has been selective. The paper explores one explanation for this uneven distribution of powers: public entrepreneurship. While the concept challenges institutionalism's limited treatment of institutional change, accounts often fail properly to locate the actions of entrepreneurs within a context of MLG, restricting our understanding of how such a setting may enable or constrain agency. In a multi-level polity -or more specifically, in policy fields that incorporate institutional actors from many sites -numerous policy processes play out across different levels and are often misaligned. Within the UK, sub-national actors have been firmly subordinate to actors at higher levels and the former are reliant on the latter for resources to devise and implement policies. MLG is a potential alternative source of mobilization by sub-national actors (Marshall, 2005(Marshall, , 2006. Successful entrepreneurship thus depends on how well actors operate within and across governmental levels and the ways in ...

show abstract

“…Thus, whilst the rescaling of employment support to city-region level may well be necessary to effectively support harder-to-help participants, there is also a risk that such localisation may further embed, as well as legitimise politically, already existing patterns of spatial inequality due to the tendency for devolution to unrealistically reposition city-regions as autonomous areas abstracted from broader macro-level structural patterns down to which regressively containerised economic risk and responsibility can be dumped by central government (Etherington and Jones, 2009;Peck, 2002Peck, , 2012. Work on austerity cities in the US context (Peck, 2012) conveys powerfully the socio-spatially regressive path that such a route of unrealistic economic containerisation might create for English city-regions in the future.…”

Section: City-region Employment Support Ecosystems and The Lurching Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Work on austerity cities in the US context (Peck, 2012) conveys powerfully the socio-spatially regressive path that such a route of unrealistic economic containerisation might create for English city-regions in the future. Concerning in this regard in the English context is a notable inversion within central government framing of devolution from a logic of redistribution to one where poorer regions are instead portrayed increasingly as a millstone around the neck of more prosperous southern areas (Etherington and Jones, 2009).…”

Section: City-region Employment Support Ecosystems and The Lurching Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rescaling employment support accountability: From negative national neoliberalism to positively integrated city-region ecosystems

Whitworth

Carter

2017

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waves of successive Devolution Deals are transforming England's landscape of spatial governance and transferring new powers to city-regions, facilitating fundamental qualitative policy reconfigurations and opening up new opportunities as well as new risks for citizens and local areas. Focused on city-region's recently emerging roles around employment support policies the article advances in four ways what are currently conceptually and geographically underdeveloped literatures on employment support accountability levers. Firstly, the paper dissects weaknesses in the accountability framework of Great Britain's key national contracted-out employment support programme and identifies the potential for city-regions to respond to these weaknesses. Secondly, the article highlights the centrality of the nationally neglected network accountability lever in supporting these unemployed individuals and advances this discussion further by introducing to the literature for the first time a conceptual distinction between what we term 'positive' and 'negative' forms of these accountably levers that currently remain homogenised within the literature. Crucially, the argument sets out for the first time in the literature why analytically it is the positive version of network accountability that is the key -and currently missing at nationallevel -ingredient to the design of effective employment support for the priority group of 'harderto-help' unemployed people who have more complex and/or severe barriers to employment. Thirdly, the paper argues from a geographical perspective that it is city-regions that are uniquely positioned in the English context to create the type of positively networked integrated employment support 'ecosystem' that 'harder-to-help' individuals in particular require. Finally, the discussion situates these city-region schemes within their broader socio-economic and political context and connects with broader debates around the lurching development of neoliberalism. In doing so it argues that whilst these emerging city-region ecosystem models offer much progressive potential their relationship to the problematic neoliberal employment support paradigm remains uncertain given that they refine, embed and indeed buttress that same neoliberal employment policy paradigm rather than fundamentally challenging or stepping beyond it.

show abstract

City-Regions: New Geographies of Uneven Development and Inequality

Cited by 88 publications

References 75 publications

The Geography of Wage Inequality in British Cities

The Geography of Wage Inequality in British Cities

Public entrepreneurship and the politics of regeneration in multi-level governance

Rescaling employment support accountability: From negative national neoliberalism to positively integrated city-region ecosystems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About