Search results

In October 2011 the Government brought in measures to reduce the revenue provided by the Feed in Tariff (FIT) system. This change came under a lot of opposition due to the potential affects that it would have upon the industry. The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential benefits of the FIT and the impact that the Governments Comprehensive Spending Review had upon the industry and its uptake by the householders.

For the study and to calculate the benefits of the FIT, a predictive modelling tool was built that could calculate the potential income and savings for a household. A photovoltaic (PV) installation was then monitored for over a year and the results of the predictive modelling tool were compared to actual results produced from the system to show how accurate the modelling tool was. The impacts of the Governments comprehensive spending review and the potential impacts in the industry were then calculated and discussed.

The FIT is still a good incentive for people investing in PV. However, the reduction in the FIT may impact the “Rent a Roof” system and this in turn will impact most heavily on lower income families. The research also concluded that the changes in the political agenda have had a major impact on the FIT for both the industry and the community. Thus, the solar FITs will continue to be an attractive incentive in place to pay for heating through renewable means and thus ensuring reducing the own carbon footprint. Concomitantly, well-developed ownership schemes need to be put in place.

The reduction in the FIT was the right move by the Government as it should prevent the increase in energy bill prices which will affect the people without PV at this point in time. It also has been set so that it is still generous enough to encourage the industry and stimulate installation as there is still profit but not in a way that should put people off. The UK may just have to take time to realise that the FITs are still a good deal after the very generous tariff that preceded them.

Since 1997, the Labour Government sought to respond to the dilemmas and consequences of the earlier New Public Management reforms, according to the two principles of joined‐up government and public service delivery. A key aspect of its reform programme has been the public service agreement (PSA) framework, a target‐based performance regime that acts as a vehicle for the majority of spending and policy decisions across government and on the ground. Analysing its implementation and success, the article suggests that, in theory, the PSA regime provides an important example of steering at a distance as a form of political leadership, wherein the role of the centre is to provide the strategic framework for policy delivery. However, there are several structural constraints that have impeded the effectiveness of the framework, such as the pervading Whitehall departmental culture, and the tensions between top‐down performance management and devolved autonomy on the ground.

The growth in popularity of the regional innovation system approach has, in part, been driven by the need for economies to respond to the after shocks of the global financial crisis. At the same time, the author sees the term anchor institutions are used increasingly to describe organisations that have an important presence in the local community and make some strategic contribution to the local economy. The purpose of this paper is to consider the needs of the micro and small business (MSB) ecosystem through the lens of the entrepreneurial university as a regional anchor institution.

Asheim et al. (2011) refers to regional innovation systems as, an emphasis on economic and social interaction between agents, spanning the public and private sectors to engender and diffuse innovation within regions embedded in wider national and global systems. According to Doloreux and Parto (2005) three dimensions underpin the use of the regional innovation systems concept, namely: the interactions between different actors in the innovation process, the role of institutions and the use of regional systems analysis to inform policy decisions. The author has drawn on contemporary literature on the entrepreneurial university, regional systems of innovation and institutions to explore some key qualities and problems around anchor Institutions, networks and national and local policy.

Following the Chancellor’s Comprehensive Spending Review in November 2015 and post the changes in the Department of Business Innovation and Skills remit the author wants to highlight the way universities can take a lead role as an anchor institution within their region. The author argues that this role should include providing a wider range of formal and informal support, knowledge and resource for MSBs, alongside the usual SME suspects (Hart and Anyadike-Danes, 2014; Witty, 2013; Wilson, 2012). Based on my analysis and involvement in the the work of the eight Entrepreneurial Universities of the Year Award winners – during the author’s time as President of ISBE – He suggested four different ways in which collaboration might be enhanced to ensure MSBs make maximum use of the advice and support on offer from universities playing this anchor role.

The results emerging from this work suggest a need for regional policy makers to embrace a innovation-supportive culture, which actually enables firms and systems to evolve over time would be far more effective than those proposed in the latest Comprehensive Spending Review. The outcomes of which will see some of the most robustly evaluated programmes, designed to support small firm growth, closed down and replaced by a commitment (by government) to secure a strong, growing economy, cutting of more red tape and extending small business rate relief for an extra year (Mole, 2015).

This chapter investigates the history, antecedents and drivers for the latest Fire and Rescue National Framework for England, published in 2018. It reviews the previous five national frameworks published since the first was introduced in 2004 and evaluates them against the model outline in Chapter 2. The authors suggest that that political expediency and speed of delivery have played a greater role in their development than improving services, increasing public safety and providing assurance to the public. It therefore highlights some key areas for improvement in both the national framework and in its implementation.

Examines the way the public sector and public management evolved in the UK over the last two decades of the twentieth century. Concentrates on the period between 1979 to 1997 when the UK had a succession of Conservative governments, when there was a kind of “arms race” of escalating rhetoric between the right and the left. Attempts to present a balanced account of what actually happened to the UK’s public sector in general. Concludes that public services are still a very large proportion of national life, and that they have not qualitatively altered the share of national resources they consume, the numbers of people they employ or the range of services they offer.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of public sector accounting in implementing neoliberal reforms.

The proposition that the adoption and development of accrual accounting in the public sector is a technical development intended to improve transparency and accountability is investigated. The paper compares the development and use of accrual accounting in public sector financial management reforms in the UK and New Zealand.

The findings in this paper suggest that in both countries, accrual accounting, as developed, also provides a means to reduce the government's role to that of procurer of services and enforcer of rules set by others, thus advancing a controversial privatisation and trade liberalisation agenda which is consistent with neo‐liberal principles.

The paper shows that in contrast to more usual claims about the need for accrual accounting to provide a “read across between the sectors” or that public interest motives assure the neutrality of accounting, seemingly technical accrual accounting developments seem to function as a political tool to aid a controversial political agenda. There is a need to look at the overall effect of public sector financial management reforms and the role of, and implications for, accounting standard‐setters.

The information in the paper applies to accounting the new political economics literature on agenda control and information based structures where control is achieved through information asymmetries.

In the recent government Comprehensive Spending Review there is a promise of a Green Paper on social care services for disabled and, especially, older people. The platform on which any new proposals will be built is likely to be heavily influenced by the Government's personalisation agenda for public services. It is timely, therefore, to reflect not only on the strengths but also on the potential pitfalls of a major stream, self‐directed support, for the personalisation agenda in adult social care. Anticipating and guarding against unintended consequences of policy are as important as championing the positive opportunities promoted by the policy.

Performance regimes attempt to bring policy development, service delivery and public assurance into a mutually supportive, coherent and joined-up approach. This chapter sets out a dynamic conceptual model that illustrates how the different parts of performance regimes are configured and how the individual parts interrelate with each other. It identifies the activities relevant to the three core domains of policy development, service delivery and public assurance and shows how they relate to situational and contextual factors, as well as the principle values and behaviour by which public service is conducted in the United Kingdom. This model forms the basis for the evaluations of the specific reforms in the following three chapters.